Please help clarify

Before I get blasted (and I am sure I will anyway) can you offer some insight for me?
I have read some threads in the submission status where editors have said it could take years to get listed with Dmoz. It seems that if the editors are that backed up then maybe some more editor slots should be opened up. Or if an editor does not have the time to get around to editing then maybe that person should not be an editor. I do not intend to be rude, I am just curious. Also, It seems that if one person is editing a smaller category, and that person has a site he has personal interest in already listed in that category then it stands to reason that person would keep people out of the category to keep competition down. How is this prevented? How do I know the editor in the category I submitted my site to does not have a self-serving interest in not reviewing and listing sites to his (or her) respective category?
Please understand, I know everyone here is a volunteer and I respect and appreciate that. But YEARS to get reviewed...............
One last question is how can I tell when the last site was added to a particular category?

Thank you for any insight you could provide.
Scott

There are thousands of editor slots open for applications right now. Problem is that are are not enough people who apply who have the ability to edit. And of those that do get in, not everyone wants to review sites all day and night. And some get in and get bored and quit. And some edit too much, and their brains fry and we put them in institutions.

And if we tell an editor - "You are not spending enough time editing - go away" what has that achieved, we just lost an editor or might be doing a good job editing 5 sites a month. Do that 100 times, and that's 500 sites that won't get reviewed each month.

And for those editors that choose to edit just one category cause their site is there, sometime the are found to be coniving cheating mean nastry people who promote theiir site at the expense of others. Then we do say "go away and never come back". How that happens is not made public, but I've found a couple, and they aren't here any more.

And yes I've reviewed sites that have been waitng for well over two years, but they are in ODP now. But I reviewed a site last week within 12 minutes of it's submission.

Thank you for replying to my questions. I could not begin to imagine how many submissions dmoz receives each day. The task is very daunting indeed.

I started asking these questions because the category I submitted my site to only has 20 or 21 listings and it does not seem to have grown any since I originally submitted my site some time ago. My site www.propline.com was submitted to the category Shopping: Vehicles: Watercraft: Parts and Accessories: Engines, Drives, Propellers: Propellers

Could you tell me if there are a bunch of sites pending review here, or if there is no editor, or if there is an editor when was the last site listed to this category?

Many thanks to you for all that you do for the internet community.

Scott

We don't hand out any numbers or information about how much an editor is working in a specific area, sorry. This is due a combination of editors privacy and the fact that those numbers are highly misleading and should not influence any decision.

If an editor is listed in the category or one of the prent categories it usually is a good assumption that this editor is editing there. For status requests head over to the submission status forum, to post a request. Before doing so: [readme]readme[/readme]

>It seems that if the editors are that backed up then maybe some more editor slots should be opened up.
"Stop thinking in terms of storm trooper regiment, comrade, and join the revolution!" There are no "slots", open or closed! We don't have a quota of members like some medieval guild, or Ali Baba's band of thieves. We'll accept as many editors in a category as can show that there is work they are willing to do there.

>Or if an editor does not have the time to get around to editing then maybe that person should not be an editor. I do not intend to be rude, I am just curious.
I'll make a deal with you. I won't call this idea "stupid" (you can't possibly imagine how hard that is), and you can try to explain why you think it's a good idea to drive away the help. I'm doing this because even though the idea seems so self-evidently, um, ... counterproductive, many non-editors keep suggesting it. And I can't fathom what in the nine circles of non-sequitur Niflheim any of you are thinking, and the curiosity is getting to me.

The part of the ODP personnel policy about not purging dead horses or flogging deadbeats is set by edict of our Editor-in-Chief, so your thoughts on the subject won't change things. (You can write to him directly, but I think his mind is really set on this "volunteerism" idea.)

>It seems that if one person is editing a smaller category, and that person has a site he has personal interest in already listed in that category then it stands to reason that person would keep people out of the category to keep competition down. How is this prevented?
The category editor has no control over who else can edit in the category. None whatsoever. I think you'll agree that's pretty close to an optimal solution to THAT problem.

>How do I know the editor in the category I submitted my site to does not have a self-serving interest in not reviewing and listing sites to his (or her) respective category?

>THE editor? (You're thinking hierarchy of petty little dictators again.) The fact is, you can be absolutely certain that of the 200 or so editors who can edit in that category, most do not have such an interest. Just do the math. How many categories, think you, can I have such a self-serving interest in? 100, tops? What percentage of the total categories would that be? Now do that for each of the other 200 "more or less global" editors. That's maybe 20,000 categories each with ONE top-level self-serving editor -- and 199 NON-self-servers, at least in that category. And that's assuming we are ALL corrupt. If some of us, due to an oversight in the selection process, were insufficiently corrupt, then the number of categories with ONE self-serving editor would drop drastically.

Now, stand back, take a deep breath, and look at the directory as a whole. Compare categories with Yahoo! -- look at the sites they list and we don't. If you find a category where corruption is rife (we know there are some), report it to us. And there will soon be one less.

Yes, if each category had its own P.L.D., corruption might be a major problem. On the ODP vision of a cooperating community where NO EDITOR OWNS ANY CATEGORY, corruption is much less common, and can be handled swiftly when spotted.

>How can I tell when the last site was added to a particular category?
You can't. You can tell when the last change was made to a category (which might be addition, removal, or change of a site listing or a related category), but there is no way of telling when an editor last spent time working on unreviewed sites (whether adding, changing, moving, or deleting.)

>Two years' wait?
Yes. Look at it this way. You obviously feel you're in a niche where if you aren't listed, someone else will do a perfectly satisfactory job of serving your target audience. In other words, the simple fact is that the public (and therefore the directory) really doesn't need your website at all. Ever. There can hardly be any urgency to reviewing it! And the editors, who have an interest in looking at unique sites, are usually focusing their attention on sites that are not so necessary. Is that surprising? Or just inevitable?

Sorry for the honesty: You probably aren't used to it (it's not something that features prominently in Marketing courses or experience) and you may even be allergic (people who want to understand reality go into science or engineering, not advertising.) But that is the only answer I know how to give.

hutcheson said:

And I can't fathom what in the nine circles of non-sequitur Niflheim any of you are thinking, and the curiosity is getting to me.

Click to expand...

I think it's because of the common misperception that a category which already has a named editor either will not accept another, is unlikely to accept another, or cannot be edited in by anyone else. So those who don't understand our system are worried that a slow editor is gumming up the works somehow, when in fact the slow editor is slowly contributing to our productiveness without impeding anyone else's work at all.

If everyone on the Internet were to give us one honest edit a month, we'd be almost instant. (-: And even in the real world, every little bit helps. We're grateful for small amounts of good work, which is clearly better for everyone than no work would be.

Sorry for the honesty: You probably aren't used to it

Click to expand...

Actually, I think most people aren't used to Hutcheson's brand of honesty, but he really does mean it in the nicest way.

I have read some threads in the submission status where editors have said it could take years to get listed with Dmoz.

Click to expand...

I think one of the factors that is really hard to explain to non-editors is that the distribution of editors covering categories is dependent on interest, is not distributed uniformly, and varies over time as editors with different interests and available time come and go.

One of the more enjoyable things to do for many editors is building new categories, even on topics they don't have a personal interest in. However, once they are built, typically the editor who started it moves on to something else. Maintaining and continuing to build categories created by someone else isn't very exciting, unless you actually have an interest in the topic. Most of the categories that I find a lot of old submissions in were created in 2000 or 2001 when there was a lot focus on building up the structure of ODP. Until more editors join who are really interested in these topics, they just won't get as much attention as topics where an editor has an interest or areas where new categories are being developed.

I can understand what has been written here and I appreciate people taking the time to write. It is just very frustrating to see the category that I submitted my site to not being edited. It doesn't appear to have changed for some time. I volunteered to edit and I was rejected for some reason. I guess the powers that be feel it is more beneficial to internet users for a category to sit dormant for no telling how long than it is to approve an editor so submissions will get processed. I do not understand the logic, but then maybe if I did understand it my application for editing would have been approved.

Scott

scotts said:

It is just very frustrating to see the category that I submitted my site to not being edited. ... I do not understand the logic, but then maybe if I did understand it my application for editing would have been approved.

Scott

Click to expand...

The frustration is very understandable.

The understanding is appreciated.