My Application

Hi. I applied to become and editor for a category that had 185 listings and was turned down. At the end of the email I received from admin, there was a note that suggested trying for a smaller category for a first time editor.

I then applied to a category with only 8 listings and got the same ending note in the email suggesting trying a smaller category.

Is there something that I am missing?

Jeffrey Levy
(Leffrey)

Could you name the category with 8 listings? It's possible it's either a spam magnet, requires unusual editing skills, or has hundreds of unreviewed.

Or it's possible that you were rejected for another reason in the standard rejection notice.

Did the category have any categories beneath it? Think of the Directory as a tree and the categories like branches and leaves. The leaf categories will be the one with no subcategories. As a new editor you should be shooting for the leaf categories.

We would not have to guess about it, if you gave us a link to the category you applied for.

I didn't include the category to begin with to see if that note in my email was possibly a standard note that goes into every rejection email sent. The category is:

Top: Shopping: Health: Beauty: Hair Care: Accessories: Jewelry (8)

I can't tell if the cat is subject to more spam than most, as I have no Shopping experience here, but there are approximately 3 times as many unreviewed as reviewed. I don't know if that would put it out of line for a new Editor or not. Please delete this post if the comment is out of line.

What exactly did the denial e-mails say? Was it something along the lines of the following?

Thank you for your interest in becoming an Open Directory Project editor!
Although we would like you to join us as a volunteer editor, you have
chosen a category that is already well represented, or is broader than
we typically assign to a new editor. We would encourage you to re-apply
for a category that has fewer editors or is smaller in scope, in order
to increase your chances of being accepted.

Click to expand...

It's pretty self-explanatory. That's the standard message when a category is either too large for a new editor, or is already well covered by existing editors in that area.

Or was it something different? It's hard to speculate when you don't know the content

Additional reviewer comments:
This category is far too large for a first time editor. For tips on choosing a category visit http://resource-zone.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=bemome

It appears it may have been an error if so I appolagize and hope you will consider re-applying. I remember looking at your application, but cannot remember the exact specifics. The comment does not appear to mesh with the category you listed above. Please re-apply.

Thank you. Perhaps it is avaialble on your end under the username: Leffrey. I have submitted 2 twice now and dread going back for a 3rd time.

Sorry, but we don't have any way to re-review an application that was already processed. You're going to have to go and do it again. Look at it as an opportunity to submit a really, really good application. Maybe third time's a charm Make sure that you read through some of the suggestions in the FAQ and General Advice thread.

Thanks, but I will pass. You guys need me alot more than I need to do this.

If your really wanted to hire editors, then you would figure out a way to suggest a particular category (maybe in the same major category but with a different subcategory than applied for) to an applicant with a YES or NO option to accept this smaller category instead of sending them a rejection notice and asking them to re-apply. It is a waste of time and effort for your reviewers and the same waste for the applicant to need to fill out another application and for the reviewer to have to review it again (when maybe the applicant had the proper credentials to begin with but the category was too big for him/her.) In addition to time saved, you would not be losing some or several credible editors like me that do not want to be sent into an endless loop of re-applying and lose interest (hence a lost editor.)

Please accept my comments as constructive criticism as I only help that this can help you help yourselves.

Best of luck.

Being an editor takes a lot of patience and persistence. If you do not have the desire to figure out what was wrong with the original application, to pick a better placed category and fill out a new application, then it is unlikely you would be a good editor. Note that I'm not saying that makes you a bad candidate; it just makes it more likely that you would fall into the category of the editor that logs in once, finds they do not actually have the interest and outlook it takes to edit at the ODP, and then never logs in again.

There is nothing more frustrating as a meta than spending so much time processing an application for an editor who then never does anything.

In some cases, editors who can't quite adjust to the culture and outlook even create more work for other editors who have to clean up after them when they quit logging in.

I am sure that you don't mean to judge me, but it appears that you have and without reading the beginning of the thread. I am not trying to sell myself to become an editor at this point, but I believe that I will need to stand up for myself after your post.

Thankfully, I have all the time needed to complete my jobs efficiently. You can see my other posts in this forum under different sections over the last month, which backs this up. I don’t bite off more than I can chew.

Regarding the first part of your comment “If you do not have the desire to figure out what was wrong with the original application” - If I didn’t have the desire to figure out what was wrong, then I wouldn’t have come to this forum, asked the question, waited for responses, and then posted my own. It is obvious from my presence in this forum that the desire was there.

Regarding your comment “to pick a better placed category and fill out a new application” that is exactly what my second application was for – it chose a smaller category. You can see this by reading the earlier messages in this thread.

It is a 3rd application the concerns me. I am happy to give my time, when it counts. When my time doesn't count, then time has been wasted. Imagine if you liked to give charity and were giving donations to an organization on a monthly basis. Suddenly you find out that the organization cashes your check each month and throws the money away. Giving your hard earned money made you feel good….but now finding out that it was all in vain makes you feel pretty bad. My time is valuable. I will not waste it. When I find out that there is a good chance that it my application was inadvertently rejected and is nowhere to be found to re-check, it makes me feel like the person whose money was thrown away. Had my application been rejected for a different reason, then depending on that reason, I would make an educated decision on whether or not to pursue.

In addition, I disagree with your comment to begin with. You made it seem as if somebody doesn’t come back to re-apply, then most probably he/she will not be a good editor. I believe that the characteristics have absolutely nothing to do with each other. A hard worker, good reviewer and clear writer (which is what you should be looking for) does not need to have the quality of persistence when it comes to applying for the job.

Regarding my suggestion of offering the applicant a smaller category on the spot….I don’t think that you have statistics showing what percentage of people who did not reapply would have been “one time logins” and what percentage would have been top editors. You will never know this without offering it to some. It was only a suggestion. Suggestions (whether taken or not) always help to improve an organization.

It looks like we've taken a wrong turn here and gone completely off-track - that's not good for anyone's stress levels. Everyone take a deep breathe and let's back-track a bit

As was mentioned above, the rejection of your second application was a big mistake. It's a lot more complicated for us to process applications than it may appear from out here. We do have a lot of applications to process and it is time consuming (and often painful ) Every now and then we may hit the wrong button. We're human - it happens

The bad news is that we have no way to reprocess an application. It's just not an option. The good news is that you can apply again. I know you're a tad disillusioned by the whole thing now, and I understand that. But if you do want to re-apply, you're welcome to do so. Otherwise, all I can say is sorry that things got screwed up and thanks for your time

My apologies, but I should have mentioned that I was making a general comment, not necessarily related to your own experience (your second category rejection appears to have been a mistake, one I'm certain doesn't occur often); that is, the "you" I used in my post was a generic you referring to all applicants, in response to this part of your post:

It is a waste of time and effort for your reviewers and the same waste for the applicant to need to fill out another application and for the reviewer to have to review it again (when maybe the applicant had the proper credentials to begin with but the category was too big for him/her.)

Click to expand...

My point was that there are often reasons for everything, which are not always apparent. Metas have been processing applications for over 5 years now, observing what makes a good editor and what doesn't.

I don’t think that you have statistics showing what percentage of people who did not reapply would have been “one time logins”

Click to expand...

While that is true, my observation is that an editor who is rejected with a note to apply again to a smaller category, who then reapplies and is accepted, is much more likely to be a good editor than one who mistakenly applies for a larger category and is then given a smaller category. I don't have figures to be certain of that, though. It may be different in different parts of the directory.

One thing I can be certain of, I have not yet met an editor--myself included--who really had any idea what it meant to be an editor before they were accepted. Quite often the characteristics a person thinks are good things for an editor, like being a good writer, are not necessarily a good indication of how they will perform as an ODP editor. All we can do is continue to do what experience has shown is the best method of processing apps.

I am sure that you don't mean to judge me... (snip) I am not trying to sell myself to become an editor at this point, but I believe that I will need to stand up for myself after your post.

Click to expand...

Actually, I believe you could be a good editor, and perhaps I was (apparently unsuccessfully) trying to challenge you a bit to get you to re-apply. I read nearly every thread in this forum and many others each day, but I rarely post. I try to post only where I think the post will do some good. I was trying, this time, to explain that filling out an application for a smaller category is not necessarily a waste of time. Perhaps I rushed the post too much. It is hard sometimes to be sure what tone will be read into a post.

In your case, the accidental denial of the second application is regrettable, but as donaldb said, we have no way to reprocess an application. You could look at doing a third app as a waste of time, but on the other hand, ODP does have its bugs. If you can get by this particular bug, you will certainly know that the other ODP bugs won't be as frustrating by comparison.