Declined Application Question

[kire1971]

Over a week ago I posted a message about some poor quality sites in the Price Comparison category. http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=149263&postcount=944

 

Since the category needed an editor, I submitted a site to the category over a month ago, and nobody was addressing my posting of the bad sites, I decided to apply to be the editor myself. username: kire1971

 

Sadly I was rejected for choosing "a category that is already well represented, or is broader than we typically assign to a new editor." Since there is no editor and looks like it hasn't been cleaned up in a while, I can only assume that the category is too broad. However, it's only 68 sites which is well under your 100 site max for new editors.

 

If it's due to volumes of SPAM submitted, I assure you I can quickly spot them as I think I've shown in my post http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=149263&postcount=944

 

If there were other reasons for declining the application, please let me know. If not, please reconsider. I was open and honest in my application and I could easily handle the category.

 

Thanks.

[donaldb]

It's very unlikely that the person who reviewed your application would have also seen the thread here.

 

There is no such "100 site max" rule. Some people are going to say 100 is too big, and sometimes 50 is maybe too big. It really depends on the nature of the category. There is also the issue of the amount of sites waiting in the unreviewed pile. If there are a lot of sites waiting, we generally are not going to give the category to a new editor no matter how much they might know about the subject matter. Knowing about the subject matter and knowing how to follow the ODP guidelines are two completely different things. We want editors who are willing to take on those spam congested categories, but we want them to gain a little experience in editing before they attempt it.

[DavidHart]

No offfense, Don but that seemingly excludes the middle. Given my absolute ignorance regarding the inner workings of DMOZ, please bear with me.

 

Presuppose, for the moment, that LargeCategory is very dynamic with a huge review queue and no editor, Presumably someone is reviewing those sites pro tem. Why is there an unrebuttable presumption that a new - rookie - editor would assume total responsibility for the new category? Afer all, DMOZ makes provisions for multiple editors of a single category. Would it not be possible for the rookie to assume just a reasonably manageable portion of the category while being trained?

[bobrat]

A large category might have hundreds of unreviewed and new editor could go in and mess all those up in day before anyone could stop them [intentionaly or accidentally]. That would take a lot of work for someone to go clean up after. There is no way to limit a new editor to only some range of sites in a category.

 

I've had a new editor working in a sub-category of one of my active categories and routinely had to go fix up the bad edits they were making and add back sites the deleted without good reason. But that was controllable, since there were only about 20 sites there, and I was checking the category every day.

[DavidHart]

That makes sense on the surface.

 

Nevertheless, were DMOZ a prospective (quality management) client, that answer would provide assurance of engagement - It leads to a number of follow-up questions regarding both process and accountability.

 

I'll defer further discussion in a public forum but would be happy to respond in private.

[kire1971]

Thanks for the replies.

 

If there are a lot of sites waiting, we generally are not going to give the category to a new editor...

 

I'm not really sure how many sites are waiting. That was only a guess as to why my application was declined since the only reason in the email was that the category "is already well represented, or is broader than we typically assign to a new editor.". There is one sub-category and it already has an experienced editor so at first my focus would only need to be on 37 sites and whatever is awaiting review.

 

new editor could go in and mess all those up in day before anyone could stop them...

 

I understand that an inexperienced editor can come in and mess things up, but that seems just as bad as an unedited category that's already full of SPAM. Maybe there should be a system where a new editor has a 'probation period' and requires the first X number of edits and reviews to be approved.

 

It's very unlikely that the person who reviewed your application would have also seen the thread here.

 

Should I bother trying to re-apply and mention my suggested edits? Are there additional issues that I can address in a new application?

[motsa]

I would recommend that you apply for a different category rather than trying to apply for the same category again.

[kire1971]

Thanks, I will try that. If i'm approved for another category, how long should I wait before attempting to add the Comparison Shopping category again if it's still available?

[bobrat]

First get the categroy, then learn to be an editor, then do a bunch of edits, then ask for a review of your edits, then ask when.

[topsites]

If it's due to volumes of SPAM submitted, I assure you I can quickly spot them as I think I've shown in my post http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=149263&postcount=944

 

Thanks.

 

I don't know, I have a similar problem so I can't say much as far as the rest of things, but if it is due to spam, I think being able to spot them is the least of the spam problem.

From personal experience, spotting the spam is no big deal, but once you get into these high-traffic things, the volume is something else.

 

* Engine spam

Engine spam involves email but is unique in its sheer volume. Most spam goes out in great volume, but ultimately it's one recipient per each email ... Not so with engine spam.

 

Some people may think spamming a search engine is to continuously re-submit the same Web site over and over to the same engine. Well, if someone does it a LOT, then yeah, but over the past 4 years I found this problem is relatively rare and usually the person doing it is not relentless in their efforts... Meaning they rarely ever do it to the point of really testing me... That, and it's not a robot.

So, what is engine spam?

Engine spam is when a Company specializing in URL or Web site promotion decides to submit their customer's links by using software. These companies sometimes take on hundreds of customers (some with networks of 40, 50, and 100 or more domains) and use their software to send out the links and this software is capable of sending 60-100 links/second, and can send out thousands of links to very few engines in a short amount of time, meaning a TON ... Well, it has roughly the same effect as sending out a million emails to only a few hundred recipients.

That's engine spam.

...

Some do their utmost to mimic the spam as a regular visitor's response to the add-url form and it looks very real, some even are so clever as to limit (or throttle) the software so the volume appears normal (as if). But no, it isn't hard to spot, it's just irksome. :-)

Still, weird they find these reasons for not allowing editors ... You are correct, I also find the ODP could use a good cleaning and a lot of categories lately have no editor, or the editor who is listed apparently has not updated their category in like a year (or three).

Peace

Pascal, mgr.

Awards and Topsites portal

[kire1971]

...spotting the spam is no big deal, but once you get into these high-traffic things, the volume is something else.

 

If the volume is indeed that large, I don't think even an experienced editor will ever tackle it. At least if the category had an editor, the editor could go out on their own to find good sites to list. They could also clean out the real SPAM that currently remains even after i've mentioned it countless times in this thread, on my application, on an abuse thread, in an email, etc.

 

More insight...

I recently applied again, and this time the reviewer was nice enough to send some comments. They state, "This is a very difficult category to edit and isn't a good choice for a new editor given all of the spam and affiliate sites that get submitted

here..."

 

The reviewer even gave the URLs I recommended as examples of such SPAM and stated they had been deemed unlistable. The sites I recommended were BizRate.com and PriceGrabber.com which I'm sure many online shoppers have heard of as they are two of the leading comparison sites. If those two sites are unlistable SPAM then that entire category needs to be removed.

 

Aside from Froogle and perhaps 1 or 2 others, ALL comparison shopping sites make money from affiliate and pay per click deals. For most comparison shopping sites, paying links are the only links listed. In essence, they are entirely made up of affiliates, advertisers, or both. However, in the comparison shopping category, that should be perfectly allowable since these sites are useful for consumers and add value to the ODP. What shouldn't be allowed are affiliates of the comparison shopping sites with their 'powered by' setups since those are merely duplicates of the original. If a site is independent and has an original list of merchants that are being compared, it should be considered for a listing whether those comparisons are affiliate and ppc links or not. Sometimes it appears that the ODP is so blinded by the 'no affiliates' rule that certain categories will suffer.

 

I would love to hear some of the other editors' thoughts on the subject. What makes BizRate and PriceGrabber SPAM when Yahoo, Shopping.com, BestWebBuys, and all the others are not?

 

Food for thought: The statements below were taken direcly from the listed websites...

 

http://www.nextag.com/

"Drive traffic to your online business by listing your products in our comparison shopping service. You control how much you pay per lead - see current category minimum rates - the more you pay the higher you rank in the listings."

 

http://shopping.com/

"Shopping.com rate card. Decide how much to pay and pay only when shoppers click through to your site. CPC rates start at only $0.05."

 

http://www.mysimon.com/ & http://shopper.cnet.com/

"Premier Sponsorship: Merchant logo link at top of all merchant listings pages, Featured position including product links throughout merchant listings pages, Featured advertising position through keyword search results pages, Targeted media plan

Preferred Sponsorship: Bold text link, Above all general merchants, Targeted media plan

General Sponsorship: Text link on merchant listings pages"

 

http://shopping.yahoo.com/

"Inclusion in Yahoo! Product Search and buyer’s guide pages is based on a cost-per-click price that varies by product category."

 

http://www.streetprices.com/

"List Your Products on StreetPrices.com: text $0.45/click, logo $0.55/click"

[kire1971]

Sorry to interject here but the ODP seems to openly ask for volunteers in categories they will NEVER be accepted to. Your recommendations state choose a category under 100 sites, but every rejection notice seems to say pick one under 50 sites. "New editors aren't accepted in commercial categories" and "New editors aren't accepted in areas with a lot of unreviewed" are supposed to be myths but, in reality, they seem more like truths. Do any new editors actually get accepted in these types of categories? I know it's difficult, but if it is possible what does it take?

 

Why doesn't the ODP simply put a note on certain categories to state "experienced editors only"? Better yet, if a new editor won't be accepted anyway, make the "volunteer to edit this category" link visible only to existing, logged-in editors. That would save a lot of application review time and the time spent responding to these types of posts in this forum. The way the system is now invites this kind of frustration. It also wastes your time which would be better spent approving editors in reasonable categories and on growing and improving the ODP instead of dealing with frustrated applicants (like myself...sorry) and BS.

[motsa]

Sorry to interject here but the ODP seems to openly ask for volunteers in categories they will NEVER be accepted to. Your recommendations state choose a category under 100 sites, but every rejection notice seems to say pick one under 50 sites.

Under 100 is possible. Under 50 is more likely, depending on the area of the directory

"New editors aren"]Since it depends on the category, that's not something we can outline. We'd prefer people start out with categories with a manageable number of unreviewed sites in general because experience has taught us that new editors get overwhelmed when faced with huge piles of submitted sites.

[kire1971]

Thanks for the responses and advice Motsa. I still think some sort of "experienced editors only" note would be beneficial in certain categories where there's no chance.

 

I have applied and was rejected for http://www.dmoz.com/Home/Consumer_Information/Price_Comparisons/

 

In your opinion, would it be reasonable to apply to the sub-category of http://www.dmoz.com/Home/Consumer_Information/Price_Comparisons/Music/

or is this also out of reach for a new editor?

 

Thanks.

[kire1971]

We'd prefer people start out with categories with a manageable number of unreviewed sites in general because experience has taught us that new editors get overwhelmed when faced with huge piles of submitted sites.

If this is what's holding back the approval of new editors in certain categories, why not just clear the pile or at least clear it to a reasonable level? Either delete the unreviewed sites or have someone quickly go through some of them until there's a reasonable number. The reason these piles are large is because of the lack of an editor. Not approving editors is only making the piles bigger. It's quite a conundrum... you can't approve an editor because the pile is too large but the pile will only grow unless there's an editor. In the meantime, the category itself degrades and makes things even worse.

[motsa]

If this is what's holding back the approval of new editors in certain categories, why not just clear the pile or at least clear it to a reasonable level? Either delete the unreviewed sites or have someone quickly go through some of them until there's a reasonable number. The reason these piles are large is because of the lack of an editor. Not approving editors is only making the piles bigger. It's quite a conundrum... you can't approve an editor because the pile is too large but the pile will only grow unless there's an editor. In the meantime, the category itself degrades and makes things even worse.

This demonstrates a lack of understanding of the situation. The biggest reason the piles are large is because people keep spamming them. There are categories where senior editors regularly go through and clean out the junk but it just comes back. Trust us in that you really don't want to be thrown into a spam-prone category while you're still trying to learn what it is to be an editor.

 

In your opinion, would it be reasonable to apply to the sub-category of http://www.dmoz.com/Home/Consumer_I...parisons/Music/

or is this also out of reach for a new editor?

My earlier comment still stands -- I'd recommend you choose something outside of Price Comparisons.

 

NOTE: I merged your comments from danmagicman7's thread into this one -- it's best if we keep all of your editor application stuff in one thread instead of taking over someone else's.

[kire1971]

NOTE to kire1971: I merged your comments from this thread into your own application status thread -- it's best if we keep all of your editor application stuff in one thread instead of taking over someone else's.

Sorry, some of my comments just seemed more appropriate to what was going on over there. I'll keep my comments here in the future.

 

My earlier comment still stands -- I'd recommend you choose something outside of Price Comparisons.... Trust us in that you really don't want to be thrown into a spam-prone category while you're still trying to learn what it is to be an editor.

Actually, I really do want to be thrown into this spam-prone category because nobody is addressing it (see my first post in this thread) and I know I can spot it and take care of it. I also think that some editors don't have a real grasp of this category, what it's about, and the sites that should be considered for listing (see my post #11 in this thread). I think my application and posts here confirm that I do have a grasp of the category and the experience to handle it. Am I completely wrong? Am I being naive?

[motsa]

The fact that *you* think you can handle it doesn't mean that *we* do. In any case, I've given you my recommendation. You can either take it or don't.

[kire1971]

Thanks for the recommendation whether I take it or not.

 

Let's forget my application for a moment and get to the issues everyone seems to keep sidestepping or ignoring:

 

1. Will someone please take care of, or at least discuss, the SPAM I listed here: http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=149263&postcount=944

 

2. Anyone care to comment on post #11 and what Price Comparisons are all about?

[kire1971]

I guess nobody wants to fix the spam or discuss my last post so I will continue toward my goal of becomming the editor there.

 

I submitted another application to:

http://www.dmoz.com/Home/Consumer_Information/Price_Comparisons/

on 1/26/05, username kire1971

 

Unless someone wants to approve it could someone please delete/remove that application? I would like to apply for a smaller unrelated category and gain some experience before I try again for that one.

 

Thanks.

[kctipton]

I believe you are not getting the "spam removal" results you want, either because (A) you are going about this the wrong way (i.e., have you contacted the Home/ or the Home/Consumer_Information editors about this?) or (B) your definition of spam doesn't fit what some experienced editors think is spam or © you want sites moved elsewhere that are perfectly OK where they are.

[kire1971]

Ahh, kctipton... someone who edits that realm of the ODP. Thanks for the reply!

 

have you contacted the Home/ or the Home/Consumer_Information editors about this?

I did contact rdkeating25 several weeks ago via the editor email link. I didn't contact you because I thought contacting one editor in that category would be enough.

 

your definition of spam doesn't fit what some experienced editors think is spam

I've read over as much of the editor guidelines as I could find on the public side of the ODP. Mirror (or powered by) sites are not allowed which is what many of the sites I've described are. The category description states that sites listed there require at least 10 stores where they compare prices. Several of the listed sites don't compare any prices.

 

you want sites moved elsewhere that are perfectly OK where they are

There were 2 sites I thought should be moved. They compare nothing but Books and there is a Books subcategory. In my opinion they belong in the subcategory.

 

 

I know this category very well but if I'm incorrect or confused about anything, please let me know as I would still like to become the editor there in the future. In the meantime, I am perfectly willing to start out in a smaller unrelated category to learn the intricacies of ODP editing. I'm interested in http://dmoz.org/Sports/Fantasy/Baseball/Contests/ but I cannot submit a second application. Unfortunately, that category is very time-sensitive since most of these contests require signup before the baseball season starts (in 2 months). Any help or advice is appreciated.

 

Thanks.