DMOZ/ODP needs more editors, but do they really want them?

Perhaps the best course of action for ODP is to remove the 'suggest URL' option entirely?

Click to expand...

On any given moment, an amazingly high percentage if editors might agree with that view.

Then common sense prevails.

justobserving said:

I may still attempt to volunteer as an editor... It is worth noting that, among the replies to this thread I see 5 users listed as 'Editor,' one listed as 'Meta' and one listed as 'Meta, Administrator' - yet, not one reply contained anything I could construe as an encouragement to me to volunteer.

So the question in my original thread title remains unanswered...

Don (opinion now valued at roughly 0.75 cents )

Click to expand...

And I suppose that my trying to peek your interest in your own hometown was too subtle, also. And you can consider your question answered. The ODP does need and reallly wants new editors. However, we don't beg and only you can determine if you really want to edit, and if you want to edit for the right reasons.

wrathchild and dogbows - I did consider your comments, as well as bobrat's "If you can't find three sites for a category, then better apply for another category." suggestion, and re-read them several times before posting that message.

As you now state that they were indeed words of encouragement, then I must say that yes, they were far too subtle to be taken that way.

I really do not want this to turn into a war of words, but, dogbows... I must point out the not-so-subtle tone of your postings (which, perhaps, caused me to miss your subtle encouragement):

I guess it just depends on whether you really want to edit for the good of the directory and it's end users, or for the good of submitters. I choose the former.
... if you want to edit for the right reasons.

Click to expand...

My initial incentive for clicking on the 'become an Editor' link was a desire to help, by volunteering my time, reduce the backlog of submitted sites awaiting review. As has now been made clear, many editors consider this is a tedious, time-consuming and frequently futile task.

As to who receives the benefits of this, the directory and its end users or the submitter?

I would certainly think that reviewing a submission and either

or
would constitute being "for the good of the directory." For that matter, it may also be considered to be "for the good of the submitter."

I do appreciate the time everyone has taken to posts comments on this subject, and for keeping it civil.

Don

P.S. wrathchild, thanks for the staff@dmoz.org email address.

>If say a very good website has something that doesnt meet ODP guidelines does that mean the website should be rejected or thrown to the bottom of the pile?

OK, another submitter completely unclear on the concept. This simply is not a problem that can conceivably occur.

We don't have guidelines that tell us to reject "very good websites". We have guidelines that help us figure out what constitutes a good website. If a site doesn't have unique content, then it's not listable. And how can an editor help a submitter with that?

"Pardon me sir, but did you notice that your entire website is plagiarized from either amazon.com or hotelnow.com?"
"Why, no, I hadn't noticed that. I really thought I had created a true original, unparallelled in known space! But thank you, I shall fix that immediately. Would you be happier if I plagiarized from giftworld.com instead?"
"No."
"Would you be able to tell if I had plagiarized from ringtones.com?"
"No."
"Ah. my new site will feature all original ringtones."

No, that's not just a stupid idea, it's perverse. And any editor with time to do that conversation 3000 times a day is collecting way too much lint in his navel.

No, the proper approach is to waste less time on imitative websites, and spend more time reviewing the original.

If you have unique content, you don't need an editor's help. If you don't have unique content, you couldn't profit by an editor's help. Again, no, editing is not a universal skill, and editing time is far better spent editing, not trying to teach remedial creativity or basic web navigation design to people who call themselves professional web content creators and web designers!

justobserving, because the ODP user interface gives such very good TECHNICAL support for one particular way of finding websites, it is especially important that at all times and in every way we give the strongest possible SOCIAL support for other methods: otherwise our link collection would soon become very distorted by that inadequate methodology.

We need editors who will go out of their way to use many different means -- personal knowledge, hand-spidering, searching, printed sources, oral collections -- to get a balanced and comprehensive view of the web.

The corrollary follows: our technical focus at this point should NOT be on emphasizing submittals, or improving the submittal process (already so efficient) but on achieving better balance through technological enhancement of other approaches. So calls for better processing of SUBMITTALS don't fall on deaf ears: they fall on ears listening intently to a different drummer (faint, far away, precious and significant). These aren't constructive criticisms: these are deeply flawed ideas based on a total misunderstanding of the whole concept of the project. Nor are they harmless: they inculcate an attitude that, acted on, will cause the directory to be less useful to its users!

All this logically follows from the ODP goals and the publicly visible part of the guidelines (as has been noted above, the process of handling unreviewed sites is visible to anyone; and it is easy to see how it could cause editors to lose sight of the real goal.)

It follows inexorably, then, that editors must condemn this pernicious attitude wherever it appears -- internal forums, public places, churches and synagogues; and anyone who makes such a proposal should expect it to be not just rejected but vigorously repudiated.

I'm not sure this is vigorous enough a repudiation: but I'm aiming for clarity this time.

I'm not sure how the topic drifted over to the handholding of submitters and the submission of their websites to the ODP, when the first mention of this was actually all about the handholding of people asking for listing status in this forum, and not following the rules of this forum for posting such a request.

Multiple people misread the post, waaaay back in this thread, it seems.



Bobrat said, in Item 2:

E.g. If a request is not posted according to the guidelines, what should we do, spend time writing long hand holding help to get it posted correctly, reply with the standard cold response, or just delete the post?

Wish I had found this thread before my initial posting: questions for the editors found in the General ODP Issues forum. Unfortunately, the last post to this thread was over 2 months ago, so it is buried several pages deep (plus, this Becoming an Editor forum seemed a much more logical place for me to look for my topic).

... calls for better processing of SUBMITTALS don't fall on deaf ears ...
... based on a total misunderstanding of the whole concept ...

Click to expand...

This is definitely the key to many of the issues here. Almost everything presented to the average ODP visitor indicates that this directory is built by "editors" reviewing submissions. Back when the ODP began (I have no idea when that was) I am sure this was far more accurate than it is today.

The term "editor," as used in common language, refers to "one who edits another's work." The first thing that comes to my mind is a newspaper editor - the reporter goes out and finds stories, and then submits the stories to his editor for review. The editor is not (generally) out hitting the pavement and interviewing the public. Likewise, a photo editor reviews and accepts or declines the work submitted by the photographer.

I suspect much of the ranting and raving - particularly in the Submission Status and General forums - could be greatly reduced simply by changing the title from "editor" to "contributor." Of course, that should be followed by a proper explanation on the "Suggest URL" form.

This might even go a long way toward recruiting quality editors / contributors. The general thinking now (I have gathered from this and other threads) is that the editors spend a great deal of time and effort trying to weed through poor or spam-laden submissions.

Emphasizing the contributor aspect could break two windows with one stone...

Don

handholding of people asking for listing status in this forum

Click to expand...

Glad you realized what I was saying.

The idea of handholding submissions to ODP, and helping tham fix their sites is such an astounding concept, that I am for once without words, and had to recover from the shock.

I hope everyone realizes that if such a concept were implemented the FAQ would be changed to read:

How long until my site will be reviewed?

The time between submission and an editorial review ranges anywhere from two years to over fifteen years. Please be patient.

The term "editor," as used in common language, refers to "one who edits another's work." The first thing that comes to my mind is a newspaper editor - the reporter goes out and finds stories, and then submits the stories to his editor for review. The editor is not (generally) out hitting the pavement and interviewing the public.

Click to expand...

Great analogy. When I was a reporter/editor/columnist for a major daily newspaper in the US, we were strongly discouraged from spending any more time than absolutely necessary talking to or dealing with public relations people, whom we disparagingly called "flacks"

The reason: they didn't care a nit about the newspaper (although they talked a good talk), they only cared about how much ink they could get for their clients, and would prostitute themselves in a nanosecond for a mention.

Now, substitute the word submitter for public relations people and ODP for daily newspaper, and the situation is exactly the same.

Even now, as a columnist for a monthly computer magazine, I have one e-mail address that gets filled to overflowing almost nightly with totally useless flackery -- vain puff pieces designed to explain in the best possible light why I should stop serving my readers and start serving thier masters.

It is the same thing here. I just do a bulk delete on my magazine inbox after speed-reading the subject lines. Unfortunately, with ODP, I have to actually look at the offending spam just in case some truly innocent merchant by the name of Fred Viagra opened a business and created a website titled "Catering with Viagra"

Atlanta Realtor said:

Quote: E.g If a request is not posted according to the guidelines, what should we do, spend time writing long hand holding help to get it posted correctly, reply with the standard cold response, or just delete the post.

Well not to flame anyone but I do know of another editor that does do that. If there is a problem with the site they will send the site owner an email and ask them to make changes according to guidelines.

I feel if you agree to become an editor you should be willing to help. If a site has a problem that can be addressed then yes send that person an email and ask to to make the chages to meet guidelines. I think that is the problem the editors are over burden with submits and dont take the time to try and help correct the problems they may see. Its just like real estate..sometimes we get so busy with clients we forget that we do have to hand hold some people to get them to the closing table. We do this because it is our job. Anytime you accept a position to do some type of work it then becomes a job and you are bound to perform that job to the best of your abilities.

If this means you must email someone to help them then so be it but IMHO it is wrong to just blow it off and move on to the next submit because you have so many to get to and put that website at the bottom of the pile or decline it because you dont have time to work with the website/webmaster or owner. There is an old saying " You cant Fix it if you dont know whats broke" Not everyone understands or even knows what the guidelines are for the directory. Plus it also depends on who is reviewing the site. I know of sites that were decline one day and approved the following.

I also own a mortgage banking company and its compares to underwriters. Since their word is golden no matter what the guidelines are.. I have seen underwriters decline files today that meet guidelines and approve them a week later. Maybe that day they were in a bad mood or maybe they had to much of a work load and one thing just didnt look right so they moved on to the next file or whatever. Point is when you accept this kind of position you must make every effort to try and help those that submit get accepted. IMHO

Click to expand...

Very well said and I absolutely agree that the current editors should spend the time to e-mail the submitter and inform them of their errors. Otherwise they (the submitter) are just going to continue to submit, as they do, and keep the back-log backed up.

[quote name='dogbows][COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][B]So are you saying that you would not find it interesting to edit a variety of sites in your home town or city? That is what I find most rewarding as an editor. In the beginning I thought I would only be interested in editing in the category that relates to what I do. But guess what? I have no desire to edit there anymore. Most of the site owners that I list do not even know that the Open Directory Project even exists. So there is seldom a site submission to the category that I edit. However, I receive great pleasure in finding sites for my locality and listing them. I guess it just depends on whether you really want to edit for the good of the directory and it's end users, or for the good of submitters. I choose the former.[/B'][/COLOR][/quote]
Again, I agree. Although I've never edited at ODP, I have recently submitted an application to edit my own home town as opposed to an area I have stronger interest in, such as computers/Internet, programming and Unix.

Not only will this help the ODP, but also my home town.

Very well said and I absolutely agree that the current editors should spend the time to e-mail the submitter and inform them of their errors. Otherwise they (the submitter) are just going to continue to submit, as they do, and keep the back-log backed up.

Click to expand...

In all of my edits I have only had one submission that was done correctly, and that I was able to add to the directory with no fuss. If they are worth-while sites, they get edited and added. There is no way I am going to waste my time emailing webmasters that do not bother reading the submission guidelines. The problem is that said webmasters want to get their marketing, SEO, Realestate, shopping, affiliate, whatever non-unique website into the directory and that is what it boils down to.

Unique content that is of value to users of the directory is the deciding factor. No amount of emailing submitters is going to change them or that. It is just like this thread. Questions have been answered and the answers are ignored because they are not to the liking of some submitters.

I don't mean this in a harsh way and good luck on your application. Editing can be fun and you may find you really enjoy it.

Why not allow URL submissions for one week out of a month? If that was done, you could possibly clear some of the backlog (if you so desired).

In addition, you could declare a 6 month hiatus on busy categories such as Shopping, refusing to allow new applications until the backlog has cleared.

Would that work?

I know submissions are only a minor part of the picture, but if you did want to clear things up, that would be one way.

Regards,

Martin

william13 said:

In all of my edits I have only had one submission that was done correctly, and that I was able to add to the directory with no fuss. If they are worth-while sites, they get edited and added. There is no way I am going to waste my time emailing webmasters that do not bother reading the submission guidelines. The problem is that said webmasters want to get their marketing, SEO, Realestate, shopping, affiliate, whatever non-unique website into the directory and that is what it boils down to.

Unique content that is of value to users of the directory is the deciding factor. No amount of emailing submitters is going to change them or that. It is just like this thread. Questions have been answered and the answers are ignored because they are not to the liking of some submitters.

I don't mean this in a harsh way and good luck on your application. Editing can be fun and you may find you really enjoy it.

Click to expand...

Well I can tell you there are webmasters out there for real estate websites that dont know as much as I do..lol and I can tell you I am not webmaster. I know very little compared to a lot of web savvy people. These people prey on real estate agents and charge them 200 to 500 dollars a month to be their webmaster. These webmasters know just enough html or enough to use frontpage or dreamweaver to design and be able to place a site on the internet. so how can you expect them to submit correctly when they are just out to make a fast buck You are right though!! Most people when submitting DONT READ THE GUIDELINES. We all know that when a website gets submitted its to help get a what is believe to be important backlink for ranking in google..but I dont believe that a link from dmoz now holds a lot of weight with google now. My website is a great example of that. I have really good rankings and no dmoz backlink.

Realtors as a whole dont know a lot about the internet and they trust these so called internet pros that call themselves webmasters and real estate web designers.. My point being is that most of these webmasters know very little about the internet so how can you expect them to submit correctly and the realtors that hire them know as little as they do. This is not your fault but it is a problem within our industry. A lot of times the webmasters will tell these realtors ..ok here are a list of directories go out and submit your site to them...when most of these realtors dont even know what ODP is.

You say unique content is very important to being added to the directory Well if this is the case then why are there template websites in the directory that have well over 30 to 40 % of the same content. I wont name any names but there are Large real estate web design companies out there who give realtors the same content loaded websites and most of them are located in the ODP. Is it because of the size of the company so they get special treatment or are there double standards. The content ranges from buying tips to selling tips, how to prepare a house to sell, moving tips, plus a lot more duplicate content but those are the most common. So is it really a directory full of unique content..maybe in some categories but not real estate. Most services that are purchased by realtors to add content to their websites are duplicate content so how can the those websites in ODP be considered unique.

The real estate industry is a different nut. Everyone and their brother markets that industry to sell them something. Most of the stuff that is sold to real estate websites is to add content and do you really think these vendors change that content to sell to each realtor...NO. Do the realtors who are very very busy change that content..NO. Do most of the realtors add that content in hopes of giving something valuable to their consumers...NO..its to increase page count from the advise of their webmaster to help get higher rankings. So I would conclude that other categories in ODP may be unique but the real estate categories can not be one of those.

I am not trying to be argumentative but I feel these are important to the integrity of the directory and those editors who edit them.

wrathchild said:

1. Editor goes to website
2. Editor looks around website
3. Editor writes description of website, touching on what it is about and what features the visitor is likely to find there
4. Editor publishes site

You can't get any more streamlined than that. Oh, you were speaking about submissions.

1. Editor sees site in unreviewed pile
2. Editor goes to website
3. Editor looks around website
4. Editor adjusts or rewrites description of website, touching on what it is about and what features the visitor is likely to find there
5. Editor publishes site

Since the whole idea is to have a human review every single listing, you are not going to get it any more efficient.

Although, unfortunately, they're usually more like

1. Editor sees site in unreviewed pile
2. Editor finds site is patently off-topic for the current category and moves it to a more appropriate category

or

2. Editor removes mirrors, affiliate sites, and other unlistable junk
3. Repeat step 2 more times than one should have to

Click to expand...

If it's that easy, why does it take so long to get a site published?

Russell said:

If it's that easy, why does it take so long to get a site published?

Click to expand...

Very easy.
The amount of junk people are suggesting to us.
If all suggestions are for quality sites with titles and descriptions according to our guidelines it would be an easy and fast job. Unluckely there are some major categories which atract a lot of junk. Sometimes over 90% of suggestions in these categories will be rejected, but we still have to spend time reviewing them.

Well I can tell you there are webmasters out there for real estate websites that dont know as much as I do..lol and I can tell you I am not webmaster. I know very little compared to a lot of web savvy people. These people prey on real estate agents and charge them 200 to 500 dollars a month to be their webmaster. These webmasters know just enough html or enough to use frontpage or dreamweaver to design and be able to place a site on the internet. so how can you expect them to submit correctly when they are just out to make a fast buck

Click to expand...

Yep. It is disheartening seeing how these people are being taken for such money and what they are getting amounts to about fifteen minutes of work and a cheap templated non-unique cookie-cutter site that is basically worthless and it is a real shame. My personal take on this though is that if a realtor wants to gain the advantages of the internet then they should study it and learn about it, especially about directories and search engines. If they wish to hire someone to do that for them they need to check them out thoroughly and the truly good ones are not cheap and even they get messed up.

You are right about many things in this post and it is a problem. We do what we can. We try to clean sites listed that don't meet the guidelines. It is all a part of operating a directory. It gives a clear indication as to why those submissions are not really much of a priority. We do edit submissions if the site is good, that is annoying and slows us down but it is also part of being an editor. My point was that trying to help these people is not something we can do. We don't have the time and they won't listen anyway. They never do. In fact, from reading many rants on SEO forums it is clear that people just do not have an understanding of many things and never listen.

Why not allow URL submissions for one week out of a month? If that was done, you could possibly clear some of the backlog (if you so desired).

In addition, you could declare a 6 month hiatus on busy categories such as Shopping, refusing to allow new applications until the backlog has cleared.

Would that work?

Click to expand...

There will always be a backlog of submissions and that isn't the priority of this directory. We do what we can. We have beat down submissions before only to have them grow right back. Limiting submissions to just certain time periods would just hurt legitimate submitters and wouldn't help us. Submissions are not the main priority.


Teaching people about the internet or how directories work is not even in our job description. That is like asking a postal worker to explain to every customer how the paper is made for the envelopes, the glue is made for the stamps, how the stamps are printed, how the machines are built to sort the mail, how the etc., etc., etc., ad. infinitum.


Your points are good for discussion but I really think this thread has been discussed out. At least for me it has.
Good luck on all of your applications. Have a nice day everybody.

>> If it's that easy, why does it take so long to get a site published? <<

I would say that many editors often spend at least 10 to 15 minutes per site, looking into the content, deciding on a title and description, checking various other things, comparing against the guidelines, and then processing the entry (be that any one of: deleting, moving somewhere else, publishing, or filing back into the queue to deal with later). In many cases over an hour may be spent on a site, and it still might not be published after that.

Wow. Sounds efficient.