Editor Application

Hi to anyone who cares about the ODP.

My username is sawadee and I recently applied to become a ODP editor for the category of:

Regional: Asia: Thailand: Provinces: Chon Buri: Pattaya : Travel and Tourism (30)

Now this category as you can see only has 30 listings, well under the 100 that is advised is a good category to apply for. Also I noticed that this category has not been updated since June 6 2007 and therefore appears to have no editor.

So I duly applied for this category as I know a lot about the subject and it is obviously in need of a new editor. I then received an email some 4 weeks later advising me that my application had been turned down, however the reviewer did add the following comments;


==================
Reviewer Comments:

Hi there, Your application was close to meeting the standard required, so you are encouraged to reapply after addressing the following points. Note that each application is reviewed independently. **Suggested sites must be working, should not already be listed, and should belong in the specific category you apply for. In general we list the root, or main URL, rather than a deeplink or subdomain. The site at http://pattaya.sawadee.com/ is a sub-domain of http://sawadee.com/. This site appears to be simply an affiliate marketing site for http://www.r24db.com/ and would not be listed. **One of the principal roles of an editor is to find and add good new sites to the directory, so your application should provide sites which are not yet listed, and which belong in the specific category you apply for. **Titles and descriptions should follow the editing guidelines at http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/describing.html, including describing what can be found on the site, without the use of marketing language. **Editors are expected to use correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation, as well as following ODP guidelines on the use of capitals and symbols. Please take care with this if you apply again. Thank you and Good Luck.

==================


So yesterday I reapplied to become an editor changing the site listed above to another site. Within a few hours I then received an email again advising me that my application had been denied.

So my question is firstly why? And also why was I encouraged to apply again only to be turned down again. After looking at the new site I recommended it is in no way worse than many other sites already listed in the directory, and does not appear to break any rules for submission to the directory.

I feel that the ODP is in danger of becoming a flawed business model. You have relevant sites that cannot get into the directory because no-one has edited parts of it since 2007 and people like myself who would love to assist in the development of the directory, being turned down for no apparent reason.

I would still like to become an editor for the Open Directory Project and would urge someone to take another look at my application and reconsider the decision to deny my application.

Regards

Robert

Now this category as you can see only has 30 listings, well under the 100 that is advised is a good category to apply for

Click to expand...

I can't imagine why you think that. The application form recommends a category of up to 100 listings.

Also I noticed that this category has not been updated since June 6 2007 and therefore appears to have no editor.

Click to expand...

The date is erroneous - a bug in the DMOZ 2.0 backend software that is being introduced. It'll be fixed in time. No category has no editor. Over 200 of us can edit in any category that interests us and we do.

The general paragraphs in the email (which you didn't quote above) still apply. Prospective editors with any diagnostic skills (they'll need them as editors) should be able to work out which ones apply to them for themselves.

I feel that the ODP is in danger of becoming a flawed business model.

Click to expand...

I certainly hope so because it isn't a business. It's a collection of hobbyist volunteers with a common directory building goal.

urge someone to take another look at my application and reconsider the decision to deny my application.

Click to expand...

We have no mechanism for re-evaluating a declined application and changing the decision. Also, we don't discuss the details of a declined application.

Hi Jim

Thank you for responding to my post. I would like to explain myself on a couple of the points I made.

Firstly when I made the comment about the 30 listings, all I meant was that it only has 30, and as such according to your guidelines would be an appropriate category to apply for.

With regards the last updated date, I obviously was unaware of the situation you have, so I accept that the directory is updated on a frequent basis. I must say however that to an outsider it does look as though it isn’t kept up to date.

The flawed business comment I made wasn’t meant literally, as I know that the ODP is not a business. What I meant was the concept of building the directory looked flawed, as it appeared that you cannot get an entry into the directory, purely because no-one is reviewing the applications. This however you have now explained and told me doesn’t happen.

Finally I accept your comment about not discussing reasons for declining an application, but I still do not understand why I was encouraged to reapply. Did I reapply too quickly?

I cannot see that after changing the third URL as advised, that it was my choice of site that was not suitable. I spent a lot of time hunting through various sites that would be applicable and finally chose the one I submitted.

I am puzzled as to this because as I look through the directory I can see various instances of listings that breach the guidelines laid down by the directory. For example mirror sites, listings with full capitalisation in the titles, grammatical errors and sites that are not up to the standard you recommend, just to name a few.

I am not wishing to get into a lengthy discussion about this as I’m sure you are not, however you surely must agree that every listing in the directory is not adhering to your own standards, and as such you are not practising what you are preaching.

Anyway after all the hype and discussions I have read about the ODP and about the difficulty people experience in obtaining a listing, or becoming an editor, I am left feeling saddened by the whole issue. The absolute main reason for my application was to assist in your goal to become the largest human edited directory on the web, and to allocate time to ensure that any submission that is worthy of a place in the directory, actually got one.

I will obviously re-evaluate my thoughts on this, and maybe take a look at it again in the future.

Regards

Robert

aquabathrooms said:

Finally I accept your comment about not discussing reasons for declining an application, but I still do not understand why I was encouraged to reapply. Did I reapply too quickly?

I cannot see that after changing the third URL as advised, that it was my choice of site that was not suitable. I spent a lot of time hunting through various sites that would be applicable and finally chose the one I submitted.

Click to expand...

We always want people to try again. Many of the current editors had to apply more than once.
In a second (or 3th) application we hope to see that you read the comments, learnt from them and solved the issues.
The reposne you got mentioned several issues. Solving only one is not what we were looking for.
Please read the thread FAQ and General Advice than look back at your previous applications and try again.

I am puzzled as to this because as I look through the directory I can see various instances of listings that breach the guidelines laid down by the directory. For example mirror sites, listings with full capitalisation in the titles, grammatical errors and sites that are not up to the standard you recommend, just to name a few.

I am not wishing to get into a lengthy discussion about this as I’m sure you are not, however you surely must agree that every listing in the directory is not adhering to your own standards, and as such you are not practising what you are preaching.

Click to expand...

There are several option how this might have happened.
Most realistic one: the website involved did change over the years and we did not notice this. Reviewing a site is one thing. Constantly checking all listings is another thing, it takes enormous amounts of time. We have to prioritise the little amount of time we have. We also rely partly on the public to let us know about websites that schould not be listed anymore.
Another option (less likely but it happens) is that the editor did make a mistake. He, we are humans. And humans are known to make mistakes.

Anyway after all the hype and discussions I have read about the ODP and about the difficulty people experience in obtaining a listing

Click to expand...

That is caused by the fact that people do not understand what DMOZ is.
It is not something in which you can obtain a listing. We do list websites but the intent is not the listing itself but the category as a whole. We want ot provide information to our users. The users are the people looking for information, websmaster / website owners are not users.

The absolute main reason for my application was to assist in your goal to become the largest human edited directory on the web, and to allocate time to ensure that any submission that is worthy of a place in the directory, actually got one.

Click to expand...

Reason 1 (help building the directory) is a good one.
Reason 2 (ensuring a listing for sugegsted websites) is not a good one. It is not a bad one either. But revieiwng suggestions is not the task an editor should apply for. It is all about building categories. If an editor uses the pool of suggested websites for that goal it si OK, if he does not use the pool of suggestions it is also OK.