Lets be honest

Dear Editors


I have submitted my site over a year ago to your online web directory.
Since that time i have investigated sites listed in you directory in specific categories that reflect the same i have applied to. in that time i have listed many sites that where not working properly or in the wrong category and the editor has removed them or made adjustments.

This is not a complaint but must be honest ..here is an example listed in your directory....<url removed> this site is listed in your directory.

Please tell me how this site meets dmoz requirements and guidelines.


Thanking you in advane
John

Thank you for helping us in our quality control endeavours.

We don't have the effort to visually inspect several million websites every week (or even every quarter). Every day, lots of websites temporarily change to under construction notices and it would take a darned good robot to spot every one.

I've temporarily delisted it.

I'm puzzled about your use of the 'honest' word. I just don't see why you'd use it in this context.

jimnoble said:

Thank you for helping us in our quality control endeavours.

We don't have the effort to visually inspect several million websites every week (or even every quarter). Every day, lots of websites temporarily change to under construction notices and it would take a darned good robot to spot every one.

I've temporarily delisted it.

I'm puzzled about your use of the 'honest' word. I just don't see why you'd use it in this context.

Click to expand...

It is not my intention to insult anyone here at OPD ......The word honest is used based on my work here at OPD ,There is no possible way to explain how certain sites get listed and others do not .This is as you mention Quality control .. I have done much resaerch here that can be verified from my postings and things just dont add up.So with this said i think you should show as much consideration to members of this forum as you show to your editors.

I view this site on occasion and see many people applying to become editors and most are rejected.

You can search certain categories and find many have not bean updated for many months.

So why not add people eager to help this project.

It just seams there is no intention to help anyone unless your part of this click..

Johnnyg

There is no possible way to explain how certain sites get listed and others do not .

Click to expand...

Why siteA is listed and siteB is not listed are two separate things. Unless it's the case of duplicate content or mirrors, the listing or lack of listing of any site is not dependent on the listing or lack of listing of any other site, even within the same category. With regards to sites being listed that perhaps shouldn't be, well , there are any number of reasons for that: the sites may have changed over time (like the one you mentioned), may have been added by mistake, may have met the criteria for listing when first listed but the criteria has changed since then (MLM sites come to mind as an example), etc.

So why not add people eager to help this project.

It just seams there is no intention to help anyone unless your part of this click..

Click to expand...

New editors join every day. Most of them don't post here so you get a unbalanced impression of the application process. But even here you'll see people asking about their applications and later posting as editors. We love to have people join who are eager to help, but that doesn't mean we can (or should) accept every application, regardless of whether that application shows an understanding of the category or a potential for learning to edit per the ODP guidelines or an ability to write in the language of the category, etc. The problems you see already with regards to quality control would be worse in an ODP free-for-all.

why not add people eager to help this project.

Click to expand...

Everyone is welcome to apply to become a volunteer, and provided the application is complete, honest, and shows that the person understands the ODP guidelines and is willing to follow them ... they are accepted.

It is not at all difficult to become an editor and contribute to building and improving the directory. Many thousands of people have been accepted over the years, from all over the world, of all ages, educational backgrounds, interests and work experiences.
So it can hardly be called a clique.

When submitting a site I think it would be very helpful if an e-mail is received acknowledging the site submission. I have submitted our site but have no idea where it stands. Any suggestion from anyone?

The only acknowledgment you receive is the one you get on your screen immediately after you hit enter. There is no other communication from the project or its editors.

There are no plans to change this.

___________
I'm a retired editall. My opinion is just that and has no official standing.

I have posted some listed sites here to be reviewed ...........they are know removed from this post. can you please tell me why they where removed


johnnyg

The post was removed because this isn't the right place in this forum for you to post such things, and you'd already posted the same thing in the right place.

Posting the same thing twice isn't helpful, since it may mean that one volunteer editor wastes time checking the same things that have already been checked by another. With the details in just one place, when an editor has checked things they can post in that thread to let others know, so they don't repeat the effort.

My intention is not to waste anyones time here ....i was making a point.

My intention is to define open directory project

When you google dmoz this is what comes up

Help build the most comprehensive human-reviewed directory of the web.

my reply ............ok

When I Google (or Yahoo!, or Live, or Ask.com, or Lycos, or AOL ...) dmoz, I get http://www.dmoz.org/

Are you saying you get these fora?

I think he meant to put the last line of that post in quotation marks.

That is,...

When I Google ..., I get this: "Help build the most comprehensive...."

I'm not sure what he means by "define" the ODP. As for any other website, the only valid definition is implicit in the ODP's goals and content.

My intention is not to waste anyones time here ....i was making a point.

Click to expand...

You were posting URLs of non-working sites to make a point? I'm sorry, but you are preaching to the choir here. We all of us desperately wish that more people would help us find the bad links in the directory - there is not much we can do about it other than ask for help, though.

It is very much appreciated that you take the time to tell us about links that don't work or don't do what the description text says. Thank you very much. :rose:

i have done so on many ocassions you can check my posts...the point i was trying to make is good work should be considerd.

I am willing to check any category for bad or broken links you just tell me where...

I do not have any editorial skills at all ..but i can help

i have done so on many ocassions you can check my posts...the point i was trying to make is good work should be considerd.

Click to expand...

Should be considered for what?

A position

Unfortunately it is difficult to understand the point you are making, but we are all doing our best.

Do we appreciate the help of non-editors in pointing out dead/broken links? Yes indeed! (See jimnoble's and nea's posts above.)

Do we know that there are still a lot of dead/broken links listed in the directory? Yes, but as volunteers we do our best, with the help of tools and non-editors like yourself.

Do we want more editors to join? Certainly! (See motsa's post above.)

Is it easy to become an editor? Absolutely! (See my post earlier.)

Does being an editor or helping with quality control entitle a person to special treatment regarding their site? No, definitely not.

I hope this covers all your concerns.