two sites removed from dmoz after requesting category change

I'm just amazed, I try to be a good member of the dmoz community, and keep the directory organized, but no good deed goes unpunished.

I requested a category change for a site of ours about a year ago. After over a month, rather than changing the category and updating the description, it was removed.

Did the same thing about 2 months ago - requested the site be moved to a different category, because it was no longer relevent for the category it was in - completely removed.

This goes to a generalization I've made many times elsewhere on other forums. DMOZ editors (at least in the categories I frequent) are lazy. #1 They rarely actually look to see if a site belongs, it seems they only very very quickly glance and make rash judgements like "I DONT LIKE - DELETE!" #2 They don't add new relevent sites and #3 they don't recuse themselves from service when their contributions are less than acceptable.

I'm fairly dismayed at the removal of 2 of my sites in particular, rather than recategorizing them, of course. I'm even more dismayed at the decline of DMOZ.

I hope someone develops a better and truly open directory someday. Maybe a wiki, that would be good.

Out of tens of millions of edits, you've deduced a pattern based on a careful study of, um, two of them.

And you read minds, too.

Your standards may be too high for mere mortals, and so I'd expect you to recuse yourself from judging them.

My first impulse was to post the following reply:

Sometimes I come to the conclusion that site submitters are stupid and even lazier than DMOZ editors. They also tend to be abusive spammers. I spend much time yesterday moving sites to the correct category for the benefit of site owners who could not be bothered to find the right category. I then spent addtional time removing submssions of sites that were already lsited correctly, and the owner was just spamming to multiple categories.

But I'm supposed to be polite in this forum, so I erased that post and repalced it with:

It is quite normal that when sites change categories that have to be reviewed again by other editors. This is normal and patience is required.

Hutcheson - I don't have experience with tens of millions of edits, I have experience with 2. How can I make a judgement on anything other than my own experience? In two out of two cases for me I have had content rich, unique and valuable sites removed. That's where my judgement comes from.

I don't read minds. Sarcasm is for the lazy.

Bobrat - Thanks for not posting your first impulse....oh...wait...

Anyway, thanks for the insight. I didn't realize that the site being removed may be temporary while another category editor reviews the site. However, based on my previous experience I would give odds that the site won't be relisted, despite it's value.

Finally, my judgements about the editors in the categories I frequent has less to do with my own sites and more to do with the staleness of the categories. The categories rarely change and submissions take months. I would understand if the category was constantly changing why submissions/changes would take months, but I'm left with the thought that it's just laziness on the part of the editors. I actually applied for editor in one of the categories I'm complaining about, because I'm an expert on the subject. But, since this niche category was "too broad for a new editor", it was declined in favor of keeping the experienced editor who updates with fresh sites bi-annually.

A lot of misunderstandings in your last post. Let me try to explain a few.

1) All editors are volunteers and give as much time as they want to the project, this means an editor can never be lazy. Maybe this "lazy" editor is adding 100 sites each day in other categories.

2) If a category doens't change often it might be that
- the sites should be listed in sub-categories of the one you are looking at, if a site is added in such a sub-category the last edit date of the mother category won't change
- no editor is interested in this category enough to spend a lot of time reviewing sites for that category

3) It will have totaly no effect on new editor applications if a category already has an editor listed. There isn't such a thing as "replacing other editors" neither do categories belong to an editor. There are several 100 editors that can "work" in very large parts or the whole directory without being listed as an editor for those specific categories.

4) If a category is too broad for a new editor you should pick a smaller one. Common advice is to select a category with 10 to 50 sites listed.

5) Being an expert on a subject is not one of the things needed for the editor application. It can be helpfull but is not requested. You will have to show that you could become a good editor. See also FAQ and General Advice About Becoming an Editor

abby, this may be far too radical an assumption to entertain, but ... had you considered NOT making a judgment yet?

There are alternate explanations for most everything you see -- on the net and off. In my experience, it is fairly seldom that people approach the ODP insistent on the most discreditable explanation possible for whatever they see -- and find anything they want.

I would understand if the category was constantly changing why submissions/changes would take months, but I'm left with the thought that it's just laziness on the part of the editors.

Click to expand...

I spent several hours today reviewing and forwarding sites which were suggested in error to categories where I have permissions. To me, pardon my confusion, this means that the category is "constantly changing".

The fact that you cannot see what is being updated, does not mean that changes are not taking place.

Just my 2 cents

DesertJules said:

I spent several hours today reviewing and forwarding sites which were suggested in error to categories where I have permissions. To me, pardon my confusion, this means that the category is "constantly changing".

The fact that you cannot see what is being updated, does not mean that changes are not taking place.
Just my 2 cents

Click to expand...

I'll throw in three cents and we can make a nickel
I can (and often do) spend most of my editing time simply deleting duplicate multiple suggestions and spammy deeplinks for the same sites and moving the mis-suggested ones to the appropriate category.

I understand that an editor might be actively rejecting sites, and that I wouldn't see that. However, I happen to know that in a given category there are fresh authority sites that are not being added. So, despite any possible busy bee rejections, some editor isn't making the ODP all it can be.

I can see I stirred up a hornets nest of editors coming to the defense of editors.

Understanding that users are often complete idiots, is it just slightly possible...even remotely possible that one of your editors is a complete idiot?

Absolutely possible. But it's more likely they're just not very active and that's a completely different kettle of fish.

abbynormal1: Let me explain. If you make a request for a listing in category A to be moved to category B, this may be dealt with by an editor who can edit in A, but not B. So the listing will arrive in the unreviewed pile of category B. It will wait there until an editor comes along with the ability, time and interest to edit in B.

So what you see from the outside is the listing vanishing. It may appear that it has been deleted. Now that is a possibility. Sometimes an update request will draw attention to the fact that the site no longer fits our guidelines, either because of changes on the site, or changes in the guidelines. So I'm not going to say that an update request for a move will never, ever lead to a deletion. I'm simply saying that there is an alternative possibilty.

What motsa said.

abbynormal1 said:

I can see I stirred up a hornets nest of editors coming to the defense of editors.

Understanding that users are often complete idiots, is it just slightly possible...even remotely possible that one of your editors is a complete idiot?

Click to expand...

Quite the contrary. What you did is fire off a general insult attack (that has been launched more times than I care to count) on all editors and what you received were responses from several editors who responded to the insults. They all just happened to be very similar in wording.

There is sure a chance that an editor (or editors) could be less than good, but that doesn't mean that ALL editors are and there are many, many that can edit in all categories. The most likely scenario is what motsa explained that either the editor is not very active or may not be currently very active in that category.

I know I still maintain my editor name on my home state category but do to other projects I don't have as much time to edit there as I would like to. Still though it is my home state and I try and edit there whenever I can. Am I lazy because I have only logged a dozen edits there this year? Could be, or it just very well could be that it was because I made 3 dozen edits in Spain, couple of Hundered in Canada and also Mississippi, not to mention other branches (non-regional) that I work in.

open directory...as a wiki...available now!

abbynormal1 said:

I hope someone develops a better and truly open directory someday. Maybe a wiki, that would be good.

Click to expand...

Funny you should say that...but you might like to see http://www.chainki.org which is basically the open directory (currently English only) as a wiki

Interesting site, but unfortunately they do not follow the Open Directory License correctly.

bobrat]Interesting site said:

Open Directory License[/URL"] correctly.

Click to expand...

They do now (I think) .

See http://en.chainki.org/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page for the discussion.

Must be your site

Change has been noted within internal editor notes - thanks