Forum Moderators: open
Dave
I agree with Dmorison and would add the old saying ..."if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen". I don't mean that in any other way than, if you don't want to interact - remove the facility.
Victor did a great job with the Dave_Hawley case and I am sure it was time consuming and we are all acutely aware that it is voluntary - equally without putting Victor down ... he did volunteer. It is often a thankless task.
They no longer seem to careClearly Victor does and he 'walked the talk'.
When we read retorical statements from some Dmoz editors that I'm sure would make other Dmoz editors blush or scream. we still read them as from Dmoz - The Open Door Project.
Dmoz has many faces and many contradicting statements which reflect no unity, it has work to do, fingers to remove, socks to pull up and an act to get together:)
If a spammer sees they have been rejected, they'll submit again, and again, and again, and not necessarily to the same category.
[qoute]It would seem (apologies if I am misreading) he thought he was trying to get a site moved to a new category, but the ODP saw it as a request for an additional listing of a mirror site of the original -- thus aiming for a third listing of the same content (which is already listed twice in the ODP).[/quote]
Sorry, but my post has been misunderstood. Yes I was *initially* trying to get our site moved to a different category. I tried about 3 or more times (spread over a year or so), using the means specified by DMOZ. I don't see how this could be confused with a request for a additional listing as they are 2 different methods. After a year or more, it became very clear my category change request was not going to happen. I still to this date have no idea why.
Since then I have been trying to have our site listed in the additional category with or new URL. This I have tried many times over the years with no success or a reason why.
Now, while it would *appear* my site has been listed in a category chosen by the third party submission. It is in fact NOT! Doing a search for our company name shows us as having another listing in the Computers: Education: Software category. If however you go into that category we are nowehere to be seen!
RE: editors respond differently
This is the whole crux of the problem. Some editors (at least the one that edits my preferred category) do not respond at all. The paid staff do not respond either!
Bottom line here is. I have NEVER been given any advise, clue or even a hint as to why! despite my following the channels DMOZ themsleves suggest.
Dave
If a spammer sees they have been rejected, they'll submit again, and again, and again, and not necessarily to the same category.
Well if an editor suspects spam just leave the submission open. You can clear it from your internal queue of course, but just leave the spammer with the impression that his site is still pending review, which is of course the current DMOZ status quo anyway.
[edited by: dmorison at 8:05 am (utc) on July 16, 2003]
2/ Give some TLC to the submission form.
Absolutely! I think part of the high failure rate has been the overstressed and overaged hardware. This week's upgrades should help that. And some priority on the other issues should reduce a lot of confusion.
It doesn't just cause problems for submitters -- some failures in the form leave the submission in the ODP limbo queue, and editors have to nudge the submission into the right place. So a fully working submission form would help everyone.
3/ Allow submitters to assocoiate a password with their submission so that they can quickly view the status of their submission in the queue; and if rejected the brief reasons for rejection.
The fear here is that this would simply encourage even more spammers to resubmit elsewhere once they get a rejection -- there'd soon be automated software to do that.
Many, many cats are drowning in spammy no-hoper submissions right now. These cats are the more commercial ones -- exactly the ones that many people at WebmasterWorld would want to move along faster. To do anything that encourages more spam would do a disservice to a lot of people.
But if we leave submissions in the unreviwed queue so they don't get resubmitted, we get hammered on WebmasterWorld (it's happened often enough) for there being over 1,000,000 unreviewed sites -- so, therefore, the ODP is a hopeless basket case!
It's a no-win, all-whine situation!
Conflicting retorts from dmoz editors with differing views cloud many valid issues.
Since then I have been trying to have our site listed in the additional category with or new URL. This I have tried many times over the years with no success or a reason why
You are not going to get a mirror site listed. The site is listed. The mirror isn't. That's in line with the ODP guidelines.
Re getting the cat changed: I'm not the expert here, so continue over at resource-zone. But my guess would be that you believe there is a case for the site to move to another category, while the editor believes it belongs where it is.
These sorts of diagreement can be frustrating (as you are experiencing!) but there isn't always a single correct answer. You site does cater for VBA, which is where you are listed, so that is not a wrong listing.
Have you made a case that the OPD would be a better place if you site moved over to Excel?
firstly thank you for taking the time to reply.
You are not going to get a mirror site listed. The site is listed. The mirror isn't. That's in line with the ODP guidelines.
Agree fully. This is why I fist pursued the ODP guidelines and applied many times for a category change. After the no event of this, I was not game enough to get this listing deleted, then apply for a new listing in the most appropriate category. I'm sure you understand why :o)
Re getting the cat changed: I'm not the expert here, so continue over at resource-zone. But my guess would be that you believe there is a case for the site to move to another category, while the editor believes it belongs where it is.
Perhaps so, but a simple one line email would let me know this.
You site does cater for VBA, which is where you are listed, so that is not a wrong listing.
No, quite correct. However, DMOZ clearly states sites should be placed in the most appropriate category. "Excel" is the most appropriate category. I will be honest and say that I honestly cannot recall if it was me, or the editor that had it put in the VBA category. This however shouldn't be a reason for my adventures to date with DMOZ.
Have you made a case that the OPD would be a better place if you site moved over to Excel?
Yes, quite a few times to both the editor and the paid staff.
I have my question still sitting over at Resource-zone waiting for a reply to my latest post. I'm not holding my breath though :o)
If you e-mail an editor with helpful suggestions, e.g. pointing out links that no longer work or content that has changed to something else, then your e-mail is highly likely to be acted on very rapidly, even if you don't get a reply. If it doesn't happen by editor feedback, perhaps because the editor doesn't login very frequently, there is a specific thread in the Abuse forum at Resource Zone for highlighting URLs with changed content or that are no longer available. If you're bothered that a category you are interested in is in a poor state of repair then a summary of the key URLs and what is wrong with them at RZ will lead to a rapid review. Don't just sit here and complain, go over to RZ and help do something about it! :)
If you e-mail an editor asking for your site to be reviewed then it is unlikely to be acted on and unlikely to receive a reply. Once your submission is in the pool of unreviewed sites, you just need to wait patiently like everyone else.
cornwall:
Sorry for sounding dogmatic :( - the thing is that all the editors have to conform to the editing guidelines, which cover all the issues frequently debated here. I can simply assure you that these issues are regularly debated and reviewed internally and the most helpful thing we can do is educate submitters about the way the system works. The principle of the ODP is to provide a high quality directory of sites for our users, hence we don't take every editor application first time and we don't bow to the wishes of the submitter if they are not in the interests of the user. However, we do try to be as helpful as possible, hence the significant number of experienced editors posting and answering questions both here and at RZ. You and I both aspire to the same thing - a high quality directory - however, just like the perfect search engine that Google aspires to, absolute perfection is impossible to achieve whilst also coping with corrupting influences such as spam. Google's recent anti-spam efforts significantly damaged their normal results. From time to time, the ODP's efforts to eliminate potentially abusive editors leads to potentially good editors being rejected first time. Similarly for example, experience with affiliate travel sites now means that it takes a relatively long time to evaluate a travel site for listing because of the lengthy process involved in assessing that content is unique and that there is no hidden affiliate program. If all submissions were guidelines-compliant with none trying to beat the system then clearing the unreviewed queues wouldn't take very long. :)
Submitters believe that editors should care about their submissions.
Most editors believe they should care about the quality of their categories for the users of the directory.
The two have nothing to do with one another. Indeed, on time-and-motion basis, the idea of turning off submissions could well lead to an effective improvement in the directory.
Some of the limited time editors are able to devote to the ODP - and that at present is spent removing inappropriate submissions - would be redirected to filling their categories with relevant sites.
Do I care about your submission in and of itself? No.
Do I care about a site that would be a great addition to my category? Yes.
Common theme here is not 'care' it is 'time'. Much is said about the lack of time to deal with certain issues, reply to certain messages, act on certain requests.
Time is all part of quality and caring, those pushed for time should step down - if you cannot give 100% don't give any ... that doesn't relate to time, but dedication.
Discussions have raged for years over how to deal with submission status requests, and the same arguments come up again and again. As it is, the present system is probably the best if you take everyone's interests into account.
I do agree that the submission form was kinda sucky, in that it sometimes didn't work. Hopefully the upgrade will sort this out.
As for coming across sites which are merely doorways, mirrors and other spam-like pests, each category has a link called 'Update URL'. Click on that, type in the URL of the site which is breaking the guidelines, and then in the reason say what it's doing wrong. Then, when an editor comes along, he/she can look at the request and fix it appropriately. Update requests do stand out against normal submissions, even though they are in the same queue, so they are likely to be processed more quickly.
If that fails, or you want to submit a whole batch of URLs that are listed but inappropriate, an email to the category editor, or even an editor lower down the tree is likely to get you somewhere. If you can't stand the wait, there's even a thread at Resource Zone in the Abuse Reporting forum - we've even made it sticky for you.
In fact, one of the features that is possibly on the cards is a 'Report Bad URL' link in every category, so that you can help us clear the junk out.
Just because you are not an editor does not mean you can't help. If that were the case, we probably wouldn't accept submissions either.
We could make a loose analogy with press releases.
If I write a press release, it is to me the most important one in the world. I want it run on the front page of the New York Times, above the fold.
But they may chose run it it deep in the Metro section, or not at all. They have a whole newspaper to balance.
If I offer them money to run it, they'd tell me that's paid advertising. And here the analogy breaks down. DMOZ does not accept advertising.
Other directories do and, if that proves to be a better model, then the ODP will become irrelevant in the long run. But, I suspect from the level of passion that the OPD generates, it has got its model pretty much right.
Just because you are not an editor does not mean you can't help. If that were the case, we probably wouldn't accept submissions either.
It all sounds good, but when the theory gets to practice it all gets shredded in the dmoz machine.
I can't help seeing a 'them and us' from the editors (not all). It's almost like an inner circle and one changes from being a webmaster to a master of the web, forgetting the daily frustration of SEO - until your badge goes back in the cupboard .... until it is your turn again.
Many comments from editors are not helping the Dmoz image. I'm sure there is a lot of conviction behind the well meaning responses but they are not coming over too well:)
Just because you are not an editor does not mean you can't help
Sorry, but this statement rings somewhat hollow from my experiences.
The words "resource zone is the place..." keeps cropping up, I guess only time will tell if this is the case for me. I do however find it very strange that if "resource zone is the place..." why it was only by chance of finding this site that I was told about "resource zone"? Are there plans to make this forum known to the public? If so, when and where?
Dave
In highly-spammed areas (e.g. "web" anything), we don't get to jump in first, you know...
Edited for meaning...
I can't help seeing a 'them and us' from the editors (not all). It's almost like an inner circle and one changes from being a webmaster to a master of the web, forgetting the daily frustration of SEO - until your badge goes back in the cupboard .... until it is your turn again.I may not be making myself clear, 'from being a webmaster.... forgetting the daily frustration of SEO ....' I tried to say that editors also are submitters and that editors do have sites - when they put on the traditional green visor, things change. :)
trillianjedi
>>Or a very very high quality directory
Personally, i find the "Or" to be the most important word in this sentence. Skip next paragraph if not dmoz-affiliated.
It seems that the volunteer element of all this has some sideeffects whenever discussing such topics. Of course, there are simply very good and very devoted editors at dmoz - for some categories. People that spend time and effort pursuing the very high goal, and hence also people who dislike seeing "their" unpaid efforts critizised. Imho, it is rare that people participating in such discussions can be blamed for anything, as they are usually the "kind of" (i didn't use it first!) people who also take their unpaid voluntary responsibilities seriously. Hence, "their" is rarely "their efforts as individuals", rather, "their" is referring to some editors who are probably never part of such discussions (which can happen for a multitude of reasons).
Disclaimer aside; The editors are not the most important thing to users. The submitters are not the most important thing to users. The categories are.
Running a full-blown niche directory myself (on the sixth year of operation), i can easily relate to a lot of the points that (suspected) dmoz editors have posted in this thread. Ie., the email concerns are very real (you just don't want to send out much email although you really get a lot incoming), submitters don't always know what they are doing, you don't always understand them, etc. With my background i have a very good understanding of a few select categories, so that i can really evaluate if it's good work. I also have a very legitimate interest in not becoming an editor.
The point is: Quality and quantity are not always the same. The "largest human-edited directory" is not necessarily the same as the "best human-edited directory".
I do see categories that are very well-managed, updated and relevant. I also see categories that are utterly useless (just to be polite). The quality-span is really very large, even within my limited area of knowledge. There are really categories for which "no longer seem to care" seems appropriate. Some of these are without editors, which would explain something. But:
If there is no editor on a subject, why even have it there? Links do become obsolete and the web develops constantly. This happens without editor influence. And the categories are what users see. As a user, i really don't care if the "widget" editor is really good when i am searching for "gadgets" and the gadget editor has gone fishing permanently.
Users see the good cats. They also see the bad cats. If there is a lack of editors, and if not all editors are perfect, the user will see some uncontrollable variations in quality. Some will - depending largely on interests - get the impression that it is "a very old neglected list", which, in fact, it can be. Somewhere.
/claus
Q1 How is it better for the community that an editor who can only contribute a little be encouraged to contribute nothing at all?
Q2 What's 100% mean? 40 hours a week? 5 hours a month? What?
Pushed for time editors don't block the category, thus preventing new recruits or other editors from doing work there. I just don't see the point of your statement.
As to prospective volunteers being rejected, the most common reasons for declining a volunteer's services are.
- Spelling and grammatical errors. People who don't or can't pay attention to detail in a job application are hardly likely to do so when in the job.
- Applying for too large a category. No matter what expertise a prospective editor has in his/her field, they still have to learn their editing craft. A small category of up to around 50 listings in a non-spammy area is a safe sand pit.
- Candidate urls that are unsuitable for the category requested. If a prospective editor doesn't understand what the category is about or ODP's guidelines on what is listable and what isn't, how will they be able to edit?
- Abuse.
Unsurprisingly, that's what the standard rejection letter says.
Now none of the above is news; all of it is well documented and it's all been repeated ad nauseam both here and elsewhere.
So why am I bothering to recycle this stuff? Because I can't edit until the new servers are up and I don't fancy filling out my tax return.
stick with this, it's more interesting than a tax return ... unless you are an accountant :)
"those pushed for time should step down - if you cannot give 100% don't give any ..."
Q1 How is it better for the community that an editor who can only contribute a little be encouraged to contribute nothing at all?Q2 What's 100% mean? 40 hours a week? 5 hours a month? What?
Pushed for time editors don't block the category, thus preventing new recruits or other editors from doing work there. I just don't see the point of your statement.
Q1 - see below.
Q2 - 100% is 100% if you have 30 mins to spare in your chosen voluntary path - put 100% in. Skimming over the cream, reading between the lines and acting on mood-swings isn't doing anybody and good.
Others are keyword stuffed which in turn often goes hand in hand with other abuses of our TOC.
I can process several of the former in the same time it takes to process one of the latter - which oftimes end up being declined anyway. I like to make productive use of my time and I make no apologies for 'skimming the cream' - it tends to be the higher quality websites which will add value to the directory. That's a good thing isn't it?
Some people think of submitted websites as being in a queue. They aren't; they're in a heap which can be sorted in several ways to ease the editor's lot. Why on earth should the aggressive (I'm being very polite here) submitters be given the same priority as the cooperative ones?
Rereading this, I make it all sound vety black and white. Real life is grey of course.
I have requested moderation of this forum using the Google forums model (found at [webmasterworld.com...] ).
Where the system turns grey and cloudy is when, let's say an individual has worked hard to reach the ODP criteria, he as spent his life learning from fora and feels that he has a clean, spam free site... perfectly honed to dmoz.
But Eddie the Ed gets it, feels it is neither black nor white and shoves in the 'later' mountain on pending submissions.
What happens when Eddie the Ed, is now Eddie the webmaster for Honest Ed's Comfortable Beds?
Eddie needs to realize that depending on an ODP listing isn't the best business model.
We might be getting off topic with this one - also Eddie is the editor :)
The point being that Eddie is a voluntary editor for ODP, an individual who has studied everything that ODP has produced, he's taken all the advice and feels he has got it right. (jim's black & white area)
However, Eddie doesn't see pure black or white so places it in one of his other shades of grey piles ... his part-time contribution comes to an end and Ed's desk is occupied by another editor. He may see pure black and white but Ed has placed it elsewhere.
Would the new editor look in all the grey areas or are they now firmly shoved under the carpet?
(As before, I am speaking only for myself.)
If I were Eddie's "replacement", each site awaiting review would be visited again before I took an action of my own. Eddie may have left editor notes on some submissions expressing his concerns and explaining why he had not processed them. I would take those into account, but the decision would be mine to list, move, or delete. Most likely there would be few to no submissions which he had reviewed and commented upon, but chose to leave in unreviewed.
An editor's possible actions for a submission are:
* list it
* (senior editor) move and list the submission into a more appropriate category
* (senior or junior editor) move the submission to the unreviewed of a more appropriate category
* comment on the submission and leave in unreviewed
* do nothing with the submission and review another one
* delete it
Part of listing a submission is insuring the Title and Description are guidelines-compliant. No submission may be deleted without supplying a reason. A submission may be listed moved without an editor comment.
Let's get back to the concept of an editor's "replacement". The word implies Eddie owned the category where he was named. No editor owns any category. Every editor with editing priveleges in the category where Eddie's name appears has as much right to edit there as Eddie himself. In practice, Eddie would be the most likely editor where he was named. (Note that some categories have more than one named editor.) However, he would never be the exclusive editor.
-- Rich
