There are both honest and corrupt webmasters and seo out there. Because so many site suggestions are submitted by them, it would be very helpful to enlist the help of the honest part of that industry in doing things in a way that would benefit both them and the Directory.
Site status requests are not helpful to either the Directory or the site owner, other than satisfying curiosity. It doesn't change the status nor gets it special attention. What it does do is waste time.
However, there are webmasters who do "get it", and who send the suggestion with a proper ODP title/description because they've either asked for advice or read the same Guidelines we use and understand how to comply.
When I see something like that, I look at the name of the submitter and remember it, and I'll look for it again, because it saves me time. That person is going to see their suggestions considered more quickly I think, because it stands out and requires less time to deal with.
There's nothing wrong with an editor giving strictly editing advice. Anything that's in our Guidelines is purposely open and available to the public, so it's on the table for discussion, but when you cross a certain line that involves status reports (which, in my opinion, is really divulging inside information about a specific site), or sharing internal forum information, or actually listing the site being discussed, then you may have crossed a line that would be considered editor abuse.
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/
So, if you talk about general editing things, you're fine, but if you start getting into discussing a specific site in private (which isn't allowed here), then the editor needs to be very cautious in what he says, for his own protection. Especially, if the conversation starts getting into how a site owner can make a type of site we don't list, listable (that's a bad line to cross).
An experienced editor, like arubin, knows where the lines are, but, it's a slippery slope for a new editor and best avoided.
