Application lost in the mail?

My advice for someone who has tried a couple of times in one particular topic or area is to try a totally different area. In some categories it is hard for an applicant or new editor to understand the nuances of placement, and maybe you need to try an area where the types of sites are different.

There are plenty of non-commercial, non-spammy areas with a pretty clear distinction of what kinds of sites belong. You don't have to be an expert, but you do need to have some interest or you'll be bored - editing should be fun. Here's some ideas:

- Did you go to college? Try your alma mater in http://dmoz.org/Reference/Education/Colleges_and_Universities/

- Do you like to read? Is your favorite author represented in http://dmoz.org/Arts/Literature/Authors/ ?

- Do you like TV or Movies? Are your favorites listed in http://dmoz.org/Arts/Television/Programs/ or http://dmoz.org/Arts/Movies/Titles/

- Are you a music fan? Perhaps you'd like http://dmoz.org/Arts/Music/Bands_and_Artists/

- Do you enjoy playing board games, or card games or video games? Try http://dmoz.org/Games/

- Do you have a hobby like birding, collecting, or crafts? Try http://dmoz.org/Recreation/

- Do you have a pet? Maybe http://dmoz.org/Recreation/Pets/ would be fun.

- Do you like going to Zoos and Museums? Try http://dmoz.org/Science/Institutions/

- Do you play golf, do martial arts, or ski? Do you like watching football, soccer, or basketball? Try http://dmoz.org/Sports/

- Are you religious or spiritual? Maybe http://dmoz.org/Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/ would be interesting.

The trick is to find something that will interest you so much that you will enjoy reviewing the sites. I used to spend up to a half hour reviewing sites in my first category because I was so interested and spent a lot of time reading the information on the sites. Hope the ideas are helpful to someone.

Regional categories

Thank you once again for your advice donanalb and lissa.

The reason that I eventually chose the Saitama prefecture category is because it is where I live and I think it will be a good place to start to contribute to the ODP.

Once I have become accustomed to the tasks involved in editing then I will apply to edit some additional Japanese categories.

I think it will be a rewarding area to start and I will find out many things about my community that I did not know before.

Rejected again!

Well, once more I was rejected.

I can see no reason (and for the thitd time, each in different categories none was given) why I was rejected on this last occasion.

Many editors edit categories that include their own sites yet I deliberately chose a category in which my sites could never be legitimately included. I fully declared my sites to ensure that I could not be accused of self-interest; even when I have seen posts from editors on other forums openly stating that "You bet I edit my own category; I wouldn't trust some other jerk editing a category where I have sites"!

I spent a lot of time researching the 3 URLs I submitted. I wrote sensible descriptions and carefully avoided using 'promotional' descriptions, even though I have seen entries by other editors with descriptions as informative as "One page of links to sites about Homer" (I thought the ODP discouraged the listing of link pages?) and other sites described as "Take a look at the PEAR database abstraction layer, one of the coolest PHP widgets out there" (which is by any standards not only a very promotional but also a suspectedly subjective description!) or (as in the case of the entry for BuyCabinets.com) "Guarantees the absolute lowest prices on Kraftmaid cabinetry anywhere, even lower than the discount home centers and lumber yards" (their marketing and sales department could not have done better!).

I chose a category in an area of the ODP that seems to have almost no editors. I chose a category (Saitama Japan) that few others are likely to be interested in editing and which I am well positioned and experienced to edit (I look out of my window just now and see guess what? Saitama, Japan!). I actually chose that category because I wanted to 'do my bit' for the local community, however small that 'bit' might be.

The ODP is supposed to be democratic - it is not and to say that it is is an insult to the millions who have died in the world fighting through the ages for democracy. Democracies are open and in a democracy the individual has the right of appeal. The ODP not only denies the basic democratic tenet of appeal but chooses to shroud its decision to reject in an ambiguous e-mail quoting ambiguous principles.

In a democracy the fate of individuals is decided by the vote of the group. In a democratic court justice is decided by a jury. Even here in Japan, where there is no concept of jury, decisions are made by a panel of 3 judges. The ODP, it seems, runs simply on the whiim of individuals, albeit a large number of them.

I don't believe that anyone ever said the ODP was a democracy.

As for the poor descriptions you noted, hey, things slip through sometimes. Thanks for pointing those ones out to us.

If you got a rejection email, then it should have given standard reasons for rejection. The lack of specific comments at the bottom would just mean that one or more of the standard possible reasons applies in your case. Have a look at your application (if you saved a copy of it before you sent it) and look at the items in the rejection email. Note: I haven't seen your applications, just giving some general comments.

signing out

Well, as I said in a previous post the ODP sets the rules and we have to play by them.

The problem as I mentioned in my last post is that the rules are ambiguous and at best highly subjective.

The ODP is a great resource, but, it needs an overhaul in its attitudes and procedures if it is to grow with the Internet as opposed to withering in the shade of that growth.

My understanding of the ODP's objectrives when selecting new editors, is to select those who will add most long-term value to the directory while doing it the least damage while learning. The ODP of course expects editors to be literate and able to express themselves concisely and with accuracy.

The reason for the ODP's promiscuous use of the default rejection e-mail is apparently because there are too many applicants to provide individual responses. It must take an editor several minutes to properly review an application and would only take 30 seconds to provide a clearer indication of the reason(s) for rejection. I personally suspect that some (certainly not all) editors don't review applications and simply reject them. Maybe they prefer to maintain control of their category and don't want the hassle of sub-category editors to manage.

There is no question that irrespective of the whims of individual editors the ODP as an entity needs to recruit more editors. More editors = more bandwidth and diversity = more sites get listed more accurately more quickly = an even better resource with less reason for complaints.

I suggest that the ODP needs to make the initial stages more automated so as to make the final review less prone to abuse. For example, require every applicant to first complete an online IQ and literacy test. Depending upon where the bar is set, 80% or more of the applicants can be rejected at that point and at least know why.

The remaining 20% can then complete the URL submission test and be reviewed using a 3 vote system (i.e. 3 editors review each application and vote to accept or reject it). The tripling of editor effort to review the applications should not be a problem because the introduction of the automated first step would reduce the number of reviewed applications by 80% (or maybe more).

Of course this is logical and many will prefer to keep the existing system with all its flaws. How many of those, I wonder, would pass the first stage I propose above?

Anyway, those comments certainly do not apply to donaldb, lissa and motsa. Thank you for at least allowing free speech in this forum.

Goodbye.


Chris Bowd

I personally suspect that some (certainly not all) editors don't review applications and simply reject them. Maybe they prefer to maintain control of their category and don't want the hassle of sub-category editors to manage.

Click to expand...

Your suspicion is unfounded, as it is based on an incorrect assumption about how the ODP works. Applications are not reviewed by editors of nearby categories; they are reviewed by Meta or Catmod editors, who have permissions over either the entire directory or a very large branch. I can assure you that no Meta or Catmod "prefers to maintain control" over a category -- if there could even be such a thing as control by one editor over 4 million sites and more than half a million categories (just visiting 1 category per second, not stopping to read it or do anything to it, much less sleep or eat, would take about a week). Otherwise, they would never have been given those permissions.

My advice to you is the same as motsa's. Look at your application, and look at the standard reasons for rejection given in the letter. Check them off one by one. You should find something that applies. (Note: this is general advice; I haven't seen your specific applications.)

chrisbowd said:

Well, once more I was rejected.

Click to expand...

You act shocked? I'd just give it up if I was you and do what I am gonna do. I spend alot time searching in DMOZ and where there is an active editor its awesome but so much of the directory isnt worth 2 cents because theres to many directories unattended. So they wont let us be editors you can help still by using the directory and finding redirects, link farms, changed urls, entry page sites and reporting them in the proper forum.