questions for the editors

And what's wrong with my kitchen/restraunt analogy? I think it can work pretty well!

Click to expand...

A few questions to you:

You insist that you still only run a soup kitchen, and, out of sheer principle, that that's all it is and ever will be. That, however, is not the reality of the situation. While some can still get a bowl of soup, the prime reason for it's current existence is to give out recipes whick will be used by the restraunts to make a living.

Click to expand...

If you consider it important or even vital for restaurants to rely on free receipes from a soup kitchen, don't you think that these restaurants have a fundamental problem with their business plans?

Have you ever taken into consideration that there are top level categories other than Business or Shopping like i.e. Arts, Reference, Science, Society etc.? I see no reason why Business or Shopping should be given any priority just because some site owners think (and so far I've seen no proof for that) that a DMOZ listing is vital to them.

There is a fundamental difference in perception between webmasters and editors (in general).

As a webmaster, you are focussed on one site, or a group of sites. Your aim is to promote that site and attract visitors. As an editor you are typically responsible for thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of sites. Your aim is to provide useful resources for the visitor to the ODP and for the downstream users of ODP data.

So, to give a typical example, lets say there's a category on Widget Retailers with 100 listed sites, and there's an editor "visiting" that category. The editor might first review all the existing sites if they haven't been done for a while, removing any dead or ineligible sites (e.g. ones with changed contents, ones that no longer meet guidelines etc). The editor might then add one or two major international Widget Retailers that are missing, and then moves on without processing the 50 or so sites sitting in the unreviewed queue..

..now, in this case the webmaster would cry "that's not fair!" based on the view that if there are still eligible sites waiting for review, then the category isn't complete. However, from the point of view of the *visitor* the category is full of functioning sites, including all the leading widget retailers. It doesn't really make a difference to the visitor if there are 100 or say 120 sites listed as *their* needs have been fulfilled.

The frustration happens (in my view) because of this gap in perceptions. Fundamentally, the ODP's customer is the visitor or data users, *not* the webmaster.

An another thing.. frequently (as has been said in this thread) sites get listed because they are found or noticed by editors. Sometimes (often, even) these sites have never even been submitted to the ODP. If your site is truly world class, then it would most likely get listed if you submitted or not.

My perspective has changed, after working on Greenmonkey's category, and another Shopping category earlier this week.

Personally, I have recently been spending too much time looking at unreviewed submitted sites, and not enough time re-reviewing listed sites. The users of our data (both on our site and at those of our down-stream data partners) can't see how many sites are in unreviewed, and for the most part really don't care. What they can see is the quality and breadth of the sites listed. When no one re-reviews the listed sites on a regular basis, we end up with non-functioning or off-topic or useless sites listed.

I cannot rely upon Robozilla, our automated dead link checker. It does not find sites where all the content has been removed and a "We've gone out of business" message left on the index page. It does not find sites where the hosting company has switched the site over to an "If you own this site, please contact us about making payment" message. It does not find sites that went out of business and are now a mirror of site already listed under their "real" name and URL. It doesn't find sites that have changed business models and now belong in a different category. It doesn't find European sites that once offered an English translation and were listed in an English-language category, but now are only in French, Spanish, and German. It doesn't find sites where the site was hacked and all content removed. It does not find when the All Music Guide or the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (or other similar sites) change the structure of their deep links, so that deep links to pages for specific musical acts redirect to some other page on their site. We are getting better at dealing with hijacked URLs, but there are old hijacks still listed that Robozilla won't catch.

So, in the end, I'm convinced I need to spend even less time looking at submissions, and more time improving the quality of the listings we already have -- Foe

thehelper said:

See http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?p=74834#post74834

I could have sworn I chimed in on the above thread to say I was looking into the situation. I look back at it and it appears that I have no comments in that thread at all. Anyways, sorry about that. I did not realize it was going to spark all of this. I have to put this to - My Bad. Sorry.

Click to expand...

You DID reply in this thread, at: http://resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12396

That's what happens when a submitter has three threads running on the same topic; and why we therefore ask for all comments to go into just one thread.

giz said:

You DID reply in this thread, at: http://resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12396

That's what happens when a submitter has three threads running on the same topic; and why we therefore ask for all comments to go into just one thread.

Click to expand...

Excuse me but I thought I was following forum rules.

1. One thread asked about submission status.
2. One thread in another section asked about Yahoo Store Policy claififications.
3. The 3rd thread was not mine I chimed in the discussion and an editor made it personal.

Still a tone. What gives. And where was I wrong save perhaps making this thread personally.

Still a tone. What gives.

Click to expand...

I was about to ask you that.

As has been pointed out, it's hard to determine the intended "tone" in an Internet forum with contributors from various cultures all chiming in.

Starting multiple threads in different fora about the same subject is generally considered improper netiquette no matter what discussion board you're on. It does make it hard to keep track of who said what when.

Perhaps any further discussion of greenmonkey's specific situation should be continued in one of the other threads.

hutcheson said:

Our job, our only job, is to find good websites and add them to the directory.

Click to expand...

Can I assume that this would not include holding any form of discrimination towards those of a certain industry, that are viewed as spammers ? You did say good websites, period.

Some of these posts IMO are like wading through parliamentary Spin Doctor releases, I'm no more knowledgeable that when I started reading this thread.

Adding, Why is it that a high % of posters always start or include a sentence with an apology towards the powers that be? I know I feel compelled to. Like it or not, admit it or not, there is a demi god status that is very much alive, well & kicking with some editors here.

All in all; no this is not a brown nose reply, generally I feel people do appreciate the time editors put into the ODP.

xixtas01 said:

As has been pointed out, it's hard to determine the intended "tone" in an Internet forum with contributors from various cultures all chiming in.

Click to expand...

However from my view it's a us against them undertone that emanates from some editors. Sarcasm, put downs and general condescending replies are not acceptable in any culture that I know of. Attempting to throw a smoke screen over this by using the internet forum as the catalyst for bad manners, is just another excuse IMO.

cic]Can I assume that this would not include holding any form of discrimination towards those of a certain industry said:

? You did say good websites, period.

Click to expand...

You don't mention which industry, but it is a fact that we list even porn sites - I know no worse spammers than those.

Adding, Why is it that a high % of posters always start or include a sentence with an apology towards the powers that be? I know I feel compelled to.

Click to expand...

It is a cultural convention in many different cultures to do so when asking for a favour, as the majority of posters here do. It's a social formula, not intended by either the sender nor the recipient to be a true apology.

cic said:

Sarcasm, put downs and general condescending replies are not acceptable in any culture that I know of.

Click to expand...

Then we can reasonably ask the same standards from the non-editor posters to the forum. I find that just as lacking, in a lot of ways.

One of the unfortunate things that I have noticed about the internet is that it seems that on newsgroups, Yahoo groups and the like, it does seem to be de rigeur to act in just the way that you describe. Add to that making fun of someone's lack of typing and/or spelling abilities and general flaming. That last is something that I have rarely, if ever, seen on this board.

It can be very difficult when asked the same question for the twentieth time by a different poster, and the answer is published in the guidelines, to come up with a courteous reply. We should I agree, but we are all human. Mea culpa.

It is also difficult to respond to the twentieth demand for something which is expressly against the rules of conduct on this forum in a way that is constructive and polite. You (in general, not specific to this poster) may not like it, but those are the rules, and you agreed to them when you signed up for an account on this forum (implictly or explictly).

I'm not saying that we shouldn't improve - just because non-editors don't know how to behave doesn't mean that the editors shouldn't.

It is not our fault if posters feel that they have to somehow apologize for something right off the bat. I remember the first 4 sites I ever submitted to dmoz.org back in 1999 - one was the real site of the business I was working for and 3 doorway pages. Of course the doorways were rejected but the main site was listed. I was clueless back then and not even an editor. However, the process of dmoz.org intrigued me enough to apply as an editor and find out how stuff worked myself. I have never regretted that decision for a second.

foetusized said:

The unlisted site aside, what I would like someone to do when they encounter a category that is in such bad shape, is point it out to us. We have an area here in this forum where we give folks the directions on how to tell us about categories or listings that have problems. Such a category is not serving our customers (neither web searchers nor RDF users) so we would want to fix it.

Click to expand...

I would be more than willing to do this but as I was turned down from being an editor why should I. If the ODP knows some of it's cat's are in bad shape, should not seek to sort it out using it's own editors.

One thing I have to say is I read a lot of criticism and not many constructive posts that could actualy help the directory to run smoothly.

OK, so the editers job is not soley to reveiw sites and they can use many other sources to find relevant sites but how does one help an editer to find there site if it is new and on the closer side of oblivion.

A human run directory is always going to open to abuse but I.m sure there are measures that could help it be less of a problem than it would seem from reading all the negative stuff about the ODP.

Why not instead of bashing the ODP simply offer a way it could work better, bring it to the atension of an adminstrator and may be, just may be we can find a solution that keeps all happy.

If there isn't a active editor in a category, and or sub category then is ODP really doing its job? Since ODP has such a problem with editors in categories why not open the doors up for people to become a editor? Why not allow 100 - 500 & or more editors per category/sub category depending upon volume? this would allow for back up and make stiffer guidelines for editors meaning... If you are a editor you must edit at leaste 5 sites per month.. No long waiting... Lets get ODP ACTIVE and not so darn passive. Just because ODP is human edited doesn't mean that ODP has to be slower than molasses or snails.

why not open the doors up for people to become a editor? Why not allow 100 - 500 editors per category depending upon volume?

Click to expand...

There is no limit on the number of editors that can be active in any given category. And if you're asking us to sacrifice quality for quantity and just let anyone who applies become an editor, that's just not going to happen. And, let's face it, you can't force editors to edit in areas that hold no interest for them so there will always be areas of the directory that very few people want to bother with and those areas will always have a large pool of suggested sites.

If you a editor you must edit at leaste 5 sites per month.. No long waiting

Click to expand...

Even if we did such a thing, it doesn't guarantee no long waiting since someone can edit 5 sites sites a month without ever looking at the pool of suggestions (and we're just fine with that since the growth and quality of the directory, not the reduction of the pool of suggested sites, is our priority)

help me ?

How promote the site viewpage ?

http://netcad.900du.com/

We don't offer general promotional advice. Why not try one of the forums in this list?

I would be more than willing to do this but as I was turned down from being an editor why should I.

Click to expand...

That sort of sums the whole thing up now, doesn't it?

No one is "obliged" to help us.

None of our editors are "obliged" to edit.

A good number of people we have turned down as editors have felt strongly enough about overall good of the project to continue to help us in a different capacity. Some have later gone on to become editors, many have not.

If you do not wish to help in any capacity other than being a named editor, that is perfectly fine with us. The ODP is not for everyone. There are hungry people, families without shelter, individuals with substance abuse problems, children without families, and victims of crime or mental illness -- all of whom could use a loving hand. Find someplace where your talens will be needed and appreciated and lend a hand there. Everyone will benefit.

At one stage I thought about becoming a DMOZ Editor, I am glad I did not bother.
If people would only study the thousands of threads in other forums they would soon learn ONE SIMPLE THING
'Submit to DMOZ' only after you have checked your site from top to bottom, check all your links, make sure there is no construction under way, make sure you are submitting to the right category and then leave it alone. I visit here because it brings a smile to my face!

you only missed one thing: make sure you have unique content that can be easily found.