Question concerning applications

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

Dear Editors,

Just a quick question: When an editor application is rejected without the meta-editor adding any specific reasons as to why this was the case, is there any way to get any specific feedback? And if this isn't possible, who can be contacted regarding making changes in the system-- if there is no way to get feedback, the applicant can't know what error was made and correct it.

windharp · Feb 10, 2004

If you received a mail, there was feedback in it. There are different form-mails for different cases.

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

Thanks for the fast response. So are you saying that there is more than one type of rejection form? I assumed that there was only a main form, which simply reiterated all the information in the application guidelines. The problem is that reiterating the guidelines is very broad, which means that an applicant can't know if their mistake, lets say, had to do with picking a wrong URL or writing an incorrect title or description. What can be done about finding out this information? What do you suggest? I am led to believe that an application could be turned down, and rightly so, on something very minute, but this is only apparant to the editor looking over the application.

jimnoble · Feb 10, 2004

It seems like you got the general purpose reply declining your application. If you decide to make another one, create it offline and then examine it crtitically, keeping in mind our previous response and our editor guidelines.

Becoming an editor is by no means an impossible task, but it's a lot easier if you apply the sorts of skills that you'll need if you succeed during the process.

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

Dear editors,

I went back and carefully checked the application as you suggested, and after a careful review could not find anything that did not fit in with DMOZ guidelines. If it really is something minute which was not stated clearly in the guidelines, is it possible to write an inquiry to the editor who reviews the applications? Not in the sense of asking about a personal application, but more in terms of asking the editor what mistake causes him specifically to reject applications.
My next question then is to find out who reviews the applications. For example, under the heading, "Reference," there are several categories, such as "Libraries." If an applicant submitted to one of the subcategories belonging to "Libraries" which lacks an editor, does this mean that the meta editor of "Libraries" reviews the applications?

Thanks for you time!

windharp · Feb 10, 2004

My next question then is to find out who reviews the applications.

Editors with special permissions (called "Meta" and "Catmod") do that, it is totally independent from the editors listed in related categories. Sorry, but for privacy reasons we don't disclose who handled a special application. Most obvious mistakes are handled in the FAQ thread at the top of this forum.

So are you saying that there is more than one type of rejection form?

Yes there are different ones. A more detailed system would mean more "paperwork" for us. Since we are all volunteers we hrm... dislike those type of work

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

Thanks again for replying so quickly. So if I understood you correctly, you are saying that the meta editors who review applications are not tied to specific categories. If this is the case, then how are they able to judge which applicants can bring the most expertise and best sites to the category, assuming of course, that the applicant has followed the editing style guidelines as specified.

windharp · Feb 10, 2004

No, we won't start arguing about our processes here. Meta editors are promoted because of experience by consensus of others.

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

All the information you've provided has been helpful, but I have a question. Assuming that an application was revieved by a meta, rejected, and the applicant decides to immediately reapply to the category, is the application reviewed by the same meta? And can the URL's from the last application be reused in the new one?

windharp · Feb 10, 2004

You can reuse from your last application what you think might be good. But don't try to play Meta-roulette, we trust each others decision.

lissa · Feb 10, 2004

You can reuse the URLs and can apply to the same category, but even if you get a different meta to review it, if it is exactly the same application it will most likely be rejected again. (Note, I am not a Meta, but I believe that the Metas are fairly consistent in how they review editor applicantions.)

If you are really sure that you have written guidelines compliant titles and descriptions, then it is likely that the category you are applying to is not appropriate for a new editor. Try a different category - maybe a subcat, maybe one that is related, maybe one in a totally different area (a hobby, your hometown, etc.)

Good luck!

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

Thank you everyone for your patience. I was reading through some of the other posts in the forum, and an editor mentioned the following:
"From having been on the application side of things, the search for new urls is the most valuable part of the process. It gives the applicant an idea of what is or is not out there to be added, and whether or not they really like the topic"
Would it be accurate for me to say then that the quality of the URLs have the most weight in determining the acceptance of an application? And if this is the case, then why are so many sites virtually identical in content and topics in certain DMOZ categories, really offering nothing unique?

jimnoble · Feb 10, 2004

Would it be accurate for me to say then that the quality of the URLs have the most weight in determining the acceptance of an application?

No it wouldn't. All parts of an application are important or they wouldn't be there. Speaking for myself, the entire application has to be acceptable if I'm going to approve it.

Now, you've had plenty of good advice about how to make an application, both here and in the various documents you've been referred to. Please stop trying to get us to tell you which parts of the process are the most important. Instead, I suggest you concentrate on digesting the information you already have and use it to create a successful application.

If you aren't able to do that, then being an ODP editor probably isn't for you.

administrator · Feb 10, 2004

I apologize if my questions have become irritating. I believe that to tackle a problem, you have to research all the possible ins and outs and not be afraid to ask questions. So again, please be patient and thank you for dedicating your time to this forum.
I ran across another interesting comment stating that if an application only shows 2 suggested URLs, it will most likely be rejected. I would just like to verify if this is true or not.

bobrat · Feb 10, 2004

I think you should read the instructions for applying to be an editor that you will find at http://www.dmoz.org/ and read what it says there.

donaldb · Feb 10, 2004

It's impossible for us to comment on specific applications. But...

Here are the reasons from the standard rejection letter. I think that they are pretty clear. Can you honestly check off all of these items and say that none of them apply to your application?

Incomplete application. Insufficient information has been provided in some fields including reason, affiliation and/or Sample URLs.
Improper spelling and grammar.
Sample URLs are inappropriate for the category which one has applied to edit. They may be too broad, too narrow, completely out of scope, poor quality, or in a language inappropriate for the category. All non-English sites are listed in the World category. Applications for World categories that include sites only in English will be denied. Likewise, applications for World categories that include sample URLs in languages other than the one appropriate for the applied category will be denied.
Not properly disclosing affiliations with websites that are, or have the potential of being, listed in the category.
Titles and descriptions of sample URLs (and other information provided) were subjective and promotional rather than unbiased and objective. ODP editors do not rank or write website reviews. ODP editors provide objective and unbiased descriptions of websites and their content.
Self-Promotion. Application which leads us to believe that the candidate is interested primarily in promoting his/her own sites or those with which the applicant is affiliated. The ODP is not a marketing tool, and should not be used to circumvent the site submission process. If this is an applicant's motivation for joining, then we ask him/her not to apply. Editors found to be inappropriately promoting their own site will be promptly removed.[/list:u]Have you read all of the information in the FAQ and Advice thread in this forum? It is very helpful.

Question concerning applications

administrator

windharp

Meta/kMeta

administrator

jimnoble

DMOZ Meta

administrator

windharp

Meta/kMeta

administrator

windharp

Meta/kMeta

administrator

windharp

Meta/kMeta

lissa

Member

administrator

jimnoble

DMOZ Meta

administrator

bobrat

Member

donaldb

Member