How about telling submitters to become an editor if they want a prioritized review

The title really says it all. How about advertising the fact more clearly on the submittal page (it really isn't clear), maybe even in a follow up email, that if you want a quicker review of your website, apply and become an editor.

This way, at least, people would have some recourse if they feel that the review is taking too long.

Over all, this would reduce the frustration on their part and they would know that at least the have an option. A pretty reasonable one, all considering.

Where does it say or imply that editors get a quicker review of their sites?

How about advertising the fact more clearly on the submittal page (it really isn't clear), maybe even in a follow up email, that if you want a quicker review of your website, apply and become an editor.

Click to expand...

Mostly because it simply isn't true.
I have a site waiting for listing since Feb 2002, and I've been an editor all that time. Yes, I could list it myself, but there are around 1500 other sites waiting in that area that I'd process first (and I have done some of them).
:tree:

As others have already mentioned, becoming an editor doesn't entitle you to a prioritized review of your site(s). If you happen to edit in an area where a site of yours belongs, then I suppose that could count as an expedited review process (since you can add it yourself) but being an editor doesn't mean that other editors will (or should) review your site before others (and adding your site yourself in a category you edit is something that should be done very carefully).

I assume that must be what he means; that if you're frustrated with the backlog in the category you're trying to submit to, you can always become an editor yourself and pitch in to fix it up. We do get plenty of editors that way and they're often quite good ones. (-:

The title really says it all. How about advertising the fact more clearly on the submittal page (it really isn't clear), maybe even in a follow up email, that if you want a quicker review of your website, apply and become an editor.

Click to expand...

Because that advice is essentially false.

Because that advice would recruit the wrong kinds of editors, with teh wrong kinds of motivations.

I think if one acted like an editor one might end up getting a faster review. That is, writing a title and description to the guidelines, and submitting to the best category. If an editor looks at the unreviewed sites, and sees a bunch of wacky looking submissions, and one that on first glance looks pretty OK, I bet they'd tend work on that one first.

I have tried for over two years to get my sites submitted and even tried becoming an editor but was told that I could not because I only would submit my own customers which is not true. I do follow the rules. I find it hard to believe that big name search engines like Google rely on DMOZ if they (DMOZ) cannot get sites listed in a timely manner.

crowroad said:

if they (DMOZ) cannot get sites listed in a timely manner.

Click to expand...

Ah. But we list sites in a timely manner. Maybe not the time you want. But certainly the timespan we are happy with.
Keep in mind that we also add a lot of sites that weren´t suggested at all, so they have a waiting time of 0 days.

If every webmaster wishing for an expedited review became an editor in some area entirely unrelated to their own website, ultimately the review time for all websites would decrease because there were more editors everywhere. It's the prisoner's dilemma. If everyone acts to benefit the good of the whole, without expectation of personal benefit, they receive benefit. If no one will act unless they are guaranteed personal benefit, no one benefits.

Understood. Just wish I could help. It's so frustrating being on this end and not being allowed to jump in and give a hand in my area of expertise. I see so many businesses in my area who need to be listed and I don't care if they were or ever are my customers. I suppose I look at it this way: anyone having experience with a particular section and having expertise in that area would be most likely to have competitors in it. That's life. If you sign up to be an editor for a particular section, you should have knowledge about it. Not everyone has improper motivations to be an editor.

crowroad said:

If you sign up to be an editor for a particular section, you should have knowledge about it.

Click to expand...

Although knowledge of a subject sometimes can be usefull it certainly isn't a recuirement. Knowledge of how to be a good editor is much more needed. I think with that knowledge you can edit in every category you want.

I see so many businesses in my area who need to be listed and I don't care if they were or ever are my customers.

Click to expand...

Better: I see so many businesses in my area who need to be listed and I don't care if they were or ever are my competitors.

If you sign up to be an editor for a particular section, you should have knowledge about it.

Click to expand...

Editalls and metas edit in all sections of the directory - my own logs span every single branch except Kids and Teens (where special rights are needed for obvious reasons). It isn't the subject area that one needs knowledge of but branch guidelines, category charters, application of guidelines, i.e. editing skills. Which you learn from experience.

If you happen to edit in an area where a site of yours belongs, then I suppose that could count as an expedited review process (since you can add it yourself)

Click to expand...

It was two years and maybe 15,000 edits before I listed my own main business site, long after I technically could have done. Which is why is grates so much when people come to this forum complaining because their site hasn't been listed in a couple of months editors are corrupt.

What does being an editor do to help a webmaster though, especially a commercial one, or a designer? Forget expediting the listing process. But when you have reviewed maybe 20,000 sites and rejected twice that number in spam, you instinctively know what a good site looks like in terms of content and usability. And you design your sites to be the best and most useful. And you submit your sites to other editors precisely in accordance with the guidelines. I got a call today from a client who had the "bright" idea to set up a load of sites each selling a single product. I'll take his money and give him his sites, and help him with his Google Ads but they won't get anywhere near DMOZ - I will make very sure of that. That's another thing, once an editor it gets kinda compulsive and you get very defensive about the quality, even when it comes to sites you have something to do with. If anything you set even higher standards for sites you are associated with than with others.

It was two years and maybe 15,000 edits before I listed my own main business site, long after I technically could have done. Which is why is grates so much when people come to this forum complaining because their site hasn't been listed in a couple of months editors are corrupt.

Click to expand...

Exactly!!!! My thoughts also! Except I'm at 2 years 7,000 edits and still haven't listed my site yet.

I originally joined to help with the backlog of the directory as a whole (not the category I submitted too). I thought if I help somewhere it will free up an editor to work on other categories, and eventually helping to free up more time for editors that may be able to work the category I submitted too. It never happened that way as I am still waiting. But I have woprked through many various categories and now happen to have the category I submitted to years ago, and my site's review is dependent on me getting 1,000 other sites reviewed first.

(sarcastic remark) Man the corruption is just rampant throughout DMOZ huh? (/sarcastic remark)

Later,
Rob

With all the back log why does it also take so long to get accepted as an editor? There are many honest & capable people who want to edit but DMOZ is equaly slow and unhelpful with them as well.
I understand the the general public can be selfish & unwilling to read basic rules but the people at DMOZ should realize there are allot of polite & capable ones out here too & should make every effort to recruit them.
It does seem weird.

Meta editors are volunteers, too.

With all the back log why does it also take so long to get accepted as an editor?

Click to expand...

I suspect that the above is an emotional statement, since there is no way that you could have access to the actual statistics. That data is closely held by the meta editors, and they don't give it out casually.

I can tell you, factually, that I became an editor in December 2002, and at that time the number of editors who had passed thorugh our doorway was in the 43,000 range. Now, less than three years later, the number on the opening screen is 68,257, so it is hardly an exclusive/restrictive club.

And we don't have a problem with backlogs in any case - see the bottom of http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=189139&postcount=3 for why.

Totally confused

I really don’t understand how dmoz works, I have been a web developer since 1993 when Mosaic 1.0 was the best bit of software you could get your hands on! Since this directory opened I have submitted different sites in the region of 1-2 a month, most of these sites are high profile websites, market research has been done in order for these sites to places in the correct directories and still I have no listings. It seems only when they receive a huge article in the press that anyone decides to do something about them and suddenly they appear in random directories that I never submitted to. I work on lots of niche sites that specialise only in their subject matter and are an invaluable source to their customers, they are rated as being the best in their field and yet their direct competitors are listed and they are not. I just don’t understand whats happening here. It seems to me that most directories that are in the region of 30-100 links are administrated by relations of business already listed in these categories and will not list direct competitors.

I strive to only work on websites that offer real services to customers yet most categories list useless sites that hold wrong information and don’t help anyone.

I suggest perhaps that if you wish to have your site listed that you must also give back to the dmoz community by reviewing 3 other sites that are your direct competitors for submission, from here they can be submitted or blacklisted. I’m not here to tell you guys what to do or how to do it, I think I am just rambling on now but I am just so confused as to why the sites I have put forward for listing have never been listed, no advertising, no banners, no spamming, lots of content only specific to the theme. Your perfect site!

For me the worst thing about all of this is that, having your site listed in dmoz plays a big part on where you stand in google with your keywords, so by not listing the best sites on the web in dmoz, not only do you direct your own customers to services that aren’t the best for them but you also contribute to bringing the overall standard of search engine results too its knees.

Should google rely on dmoz as much as it does? Would we all be better off with or without dmoz? I’m lost and confused and would really like a decent reply from someone and not a sarcastic reply from some administrator that’s been here for 3 weeks.

I appreciate all the hard work you guys put in but it’s the weak links that destroy it! I have applied to be an administrator, so have many editor friends of mine who are considered to be the best in their fields. You have rejected all but one of them yet three of my friends are administrators and know nothing about the categories they are on and do very little work on them, they signed up a year ago to prove a point and they have.

How? why?, where?, what? And when?

Kind Regards
Gary

gazzerman said:

... market research has been done in order for these sites to places in the correct directories and still I have no listings.

Click to expand...

That explains your problem. We want to list sites in the appropriate categories, not where market research indicates you'd get the most response.