http://www.football4sale.com

driftwood,

I am only continuing this conversation/thread in hopes that other submitters are reading this and will understand both sides. I am not saying you do not make valid points - I am saying you do not fully understand.

I can say that I spend anywhere from two-eight hours per day doing actual editing and listing sites. I have a "real" business to run, family, and children. I caught the flu bug or something the last couple of days and have not done a whole lot of actual editing – listing/moving maybe 40-50 sites.

When I go into a category I first delete all duplicate submissions, updates that are not warranted, and move non-working/dead urls into my private bookmarks to check later. I have a broadband internet connection and on a category that has 800 –1000 or more unreviewed it can literally take minutes just to bring up the edit screen of unreviewed sites. I cannot imagine what some editors go through with a simple dial-up connection. I have heard it is a real plus to have a broadband connection as many times the dial-ups time-out before bringing up the screen. I sort the sites by date and then will copy all of the unreviewed sites from the screen including titles and descriptions and paste into a document for editing. This is much easier for me to open the sites from the document and rewrite the changes to urls, titles, descriptions, and editor notes. I complete 10-20 listings and then go in and list them by copying and pasting the info.

One site can take two minutes and the next may take ½-hour investigating something that doesn’t seem quite right. So the time it takes for one site may mean that 15 others may have been able to get their sites listed in the time spent on one. Do I like it – No, but I will not delete a site because it is taking up time and I won’t just click through and list it because it’s too much of a bother to take the time required to treat it properly. You also have to remember we do not “judge” sites on their design or quality – it is listed based upon the value of the information contained. If you had to wade through some of these sites that have 3-minute Flash presentations with “no” skip-intro link you would know what I mean. Chances are a person with a dial-up connection will never see their contact information as it would take 10-15 minutes just to get to it. Do I delete the site – No.

It is not a glory filled position being an editor as there are no benefits at all being an editor. I think that is why many editors leave or the Metas do not approve as many as you think they should.

No, dmoz/odp or the editors are not perfect and neither are the submitters that send their sites to be listed. I don’t hold it against the submitters so please don’t hold it against us <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Dave

Added: Just wanted to add that I had a lot more ideas/solutions when I was on the other side of the fence like you are – I had not a clue when I hopped the fence <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
If it wasn’t for the great Mentor that I had/have I would probably still be clueless.

dstanovic

I'm with you all the way....except for

there are no benefits at all being an editor

Click to expand...

the problems occur when an editor decides that there are benefits, that is promoting their own site, or delisting/refusing competitor sites.

Therefore ODP has to be (very) fussy about accepting editors.

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who watches the watchman?)

Agreed, but that is usually (not always) caught before they do too much damage <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

I wouldn't touch any sites that I am affiliated with a 10-foot pole as you are just asking for trouble <img src="/images/icons/blush.gif" alt="" />

Dave

"there are no benefits at all being an editor"

Apart from the enormous satisfaction of doing a job worth doing and the comradeship of like minded editors <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />.

Jim,

I agree <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I may of painted the picture of editing a little too drab. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

I thoroughly enjoy editing, the distant relationships, and camaraderie that is shared between editors.

I certainly don’t want people to think it is an arduous “job” with no rewards – there are rewards but they come from within oneself and are not tangible benefits (at least that's what I was/am trying to get across) <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />

Dave

&gt;&gt;If only the sites picked by the editors are entered then it is as I said in another posting "a club" not a SE or DIR.

No doubt for many people, that would be the goal and result of their editing. We try to select editors from people who think differently. I think we often succeed.

[Later, guys. I'm tired of deleting spam. I think I'll go search for some good sites that were never submitted.]

If only the sites picked by the editors are entered then it is as I said in another posting "a club" not a SE or DIR.

Click to expand...

I just realized that this was a comment to one of my posts and felt I should clarify that I never said that I, or any other editor, only adds the good submissions from the unreviewed queue. I said that I look for good submissions first.

I think that dstanovic gave clear, precise explanations for why it takes so long for some sites to get reviewed. Even with a large dedicated work force it would take huge amounts of time to weed through the unreviewed, not to mention there are other tasks the editors need to do. All-n-all, the ODP editors do a good job. (Not counting the bad editors, they know who they are).

You are assuming a lot here, my prime problem (I share it with hundreds) is that I have waited months for my site to be added. I have stimulated conversation thats all, I've not come on here to point fingers although I have pointed out problems. These problems are not new I was told some of them by editors some weeks ago. I work solving system problems, that does not mean I fit new hard drives. Workflow management, human behavour &amp; dealing with acual facts not asumptions form my everyday work. I get paid well because I'm one of the best in my area. The reason I'm is simply because I have the ability to quickly see though problems to solutions. This is natural to me and hence the reason why I'm commenting on these problem, I can't help myself.
Yes I'm looking form the outside in, this is in fact the best place to view problems. At the end of the day if the bods that run DMOZ think nothing needs improving then they have failed, things can always get better and thats why I point these things out. I sure, in fact I know a great deal of great work is done for no payment by 99% of editors. Unfortunatly for me my site is the hands of the other 1%.

Driftwood,

If you still fail to see why your site has taken this long and you still believe you have the answers to why - this thread can be closed as it is going nowhere <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" />

I am editing in a category that has 11,477 unreviewed sites. This is just one small area of the directory. I have run my own business for over 20 years and I believe (although biased) that I've done a pretty good job. There are sites I am listing that make the time you have waited seem like days instead of weeks.

I can see the "facts" are not going to change your mind so I will refrain to further contribution of this thread as you are judging the work of others that you have absolutely no clue about. When told you ignore the facts and go on complaining about “your” problem.

Sorry but I will not take part in this any more than I have.

Dave

Since this forum is for status of submissions and that has been answered, I'm closing this thread. Discussions about problems perceived from the outside are not unwelcome, but they should be done in the General or Site Submission forum.