Directory Attitude - An Open Letter to DMOZ!

[charlesleo]

Why have you been waiting. Didn't you have anything better to do in all this time

I take offense to this insult. I work very very very hard. Ony recently had I redone my website (everything inlcuding the graphics) and bothered to see if I had been previously listed in the ODP. I was shocked to see it wasn't.

 

Lastly' date=' we sometimes impart news that the poster doesn't want to hear. That shouldn't be confused with rudeness[/quote'] For the most part, everybody has been kind and generous in their help - at least in response to this posting. All of your help has clarified alot of things that the 'Please Read' sections did not make obvious.

 

Hence our slogan 'Suggest and Forget'

lol.

 

@Gloria - You sound like a great person and you have a very valid point. You've changed my opinion. I hope everyone is well also.

 

So who made YOU so superior that your claims on other people are paramount' date=' and their claims on you are nothing?[/quote'] Huh?

 

 

On that last note. I will reinstate my initial reasons for posting - that I saw some very harsh responses to people who submitted to the ODP and inquired about it. If no one feels a need to do anything about this, then that is your choice. I am not saying everybody here is rude (apparently there's alot of very friendly editors), but some.

 

 

I was under the impression this volunteer service worked mostly on queue - and I tend to think most outsiders still do. At one point (even for a short period of time or in its infancy stages), I'm willing to bet it did work that way.

 

A source of alot of people's frustrations is due to the way this system is structured, the fact that they aren't listed, and that they think a lack of listing here will harm their listing success (again all speculative.)

 

I am in no way complaining - but just stating some simple facts. It appears there's alot of categories which are overlooked at for months - even years.

[charlesleo]

@giz. Please don't take what I've written out of context.

 

I thought the main point of this project is listing websites. Nothing more nothing less. I didn't realize (nor does the general public) that this is mainly organized by 'personal' editorial interest and that suggestions often have very little weight and the queue goes largely ignored.

 

Editors' date=' umm, edit. Why do you think that it would it be more efficient to bounce a suggestion back to whoever suggested it, perhaps many times, than simply to edit what they submitted to make it directory compliant?[/quote'] Yes. Simply hit a button 'Deny' and send an automated letter stating various reasons why their suggestion may have not been accepted. Ask them to correct any details following a checklist and let them resuggest. Quick, simple, and effective. One less step everyone has to worry about.

 

Are you sure you weren't a POW camp guard in a previous incarnation?

I didn't attack you. Please don't attack me.

 

You seriously do not get what a volunteer community is all about.

Again' date=' please don't attack me. I do understand what a volunteer community is about as I contribute to other forums daily - I even help people out who can be viewed as competition by helping them improve their images. Check out my nick Jujubee on the Chaosforum at http://www.chaosgroup.com. Youll see over couple thousand [i']volunteer[/i] postings helping other people.

[hutcheson]

>I was under the impression this volunteer service worked mostly on queue - and I tend to think most outsiders still do.

 

This is certainly a recurrent delusion. And it is hard to overcome.

 

But the fact is, the ODP could get alone fine without any suggestions at all. Or without any particular volunteer. We prefer to keep both. But if there were some vicious dictator that forced us to choose between editors who might not ever review any particular suggestion, and submitters, then we'd choose -- in a heartbeat! -- to keep the editors and drop the submitters. Because we can do without submitters. We cannot do without editors.

 

But suggestions are solicited, and editors kept on the rolls, because the presumption is that the ODP will get along better with every miniscule bit of help.

 

>A source of alot of people's frustrations is due to the way this system is structured

 

Very likely. The system is not structured so that it can be controlled by spammers. And any mechanism that gives more control to site suggestors, must inevitably give proportionately MUCH more control to spammers! So the editors, knowing the reality, are always working on ways to be LESS dependent on, LESS controlled by, LESS prioritized by, site suggestions. Going the other way is Not A Contemplatable Option.

[jimnoble]

and the queue goes largely ignored

That's maybe true of some of the spammiest categories but they are the small minority. I can tell you that the regional category to which you recently suggested your website had an empty pool of websites awaiting review a few days previously. To me, that suggests that it's not being ignored at all.

[motsa]

OTOH The Business category you previously mentioned submitting your site to, well, I certainly have no intention of wading in there and I doubt I'm alone in that.

[charlesleo]

OTOH The Business category you previously mentioned submitting your site to' date=' well, I certainly have no intention of wading in there and I doubt I'm alone in that. [/quote'] lol. Brutal honesty. I can't say I wouldn't want to edit the 'Dutch Line Dancing' section either...

[spectregunner]

Yes. Simply hit a button 'Deny' and send an automated letter stating various reasons why their suggestion may have not been accepted. Ask them to correct any details following a checklist and let them resuggest. Quick, simple, and effective. One less step everyone has to worry about.

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

That actually adds many, many more steps to the process.

 

You submit a site.

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

You change one thing, resubmit

I deny it and simply hit the button sending you a form letter.

And so on.

 

I am not in the least interested in listing a site whose owner has modified/changed/redesigned/homoganized the site to meet ODP's requirements. I only want to list sites with genuinely interesting, unique content who have designed their sites to be useful and beneficial to surfers.

[charlesleo]

How about the option to do that as well as the option to edit it if you so desire?

[gloria]

It really doesn't take much time for an editor to write a Guidelines compliant description once you get the hang of it. Most of the time is spent sorting through the garbage that spammers submit and browsing the site to make sure that it has sufficient unique content.

 

Teaching someone who writes hype for a living has to do a 180 degree turn though, and it can take quite a bit of time to teach them how to write a non-hyped description.

 

How about the option to do that as well as the option to edit it if you so desire?

Most of us enjoy editing.

 

If you're going to find a way to save us time, please find a way to remove spammers from the planet.

[hutcheson]

>Ask them to correct any details following a checklist and let them resuggest.

 

99% of the time, that would be a deliberate lie. The rest of the time, it would be either an accidental lie, or a maliciously deliberate lie.

 

Perhaps one-hundredth of one percent of the time, there would be something that could be done. I've rejected over 100000 suggestions, and in that lot didn't see ten that could have been "corrected" or that anyone would ever want "resuggested." It's simply not a problem that arises. There is nothing there to solve, and it's pointless to try to solve a nonexistant problem.

 

Or -- it's pointless to waste valuable resources trying to solve it. Look at it this way. Every night, before you go to bed, slap your face and say to yourself, "flim-flam-scam-spam-die-die-die!"

 

I promise you it'll work: you will never in all your born days, run into the problem with ODP submittals that concerns you. Never. I guarantee it.

 

I wish all the world's problems were so easy.

 

And it won't waste editors' time.

 

And so, it's not a problem that needs solving.

[lissa]

One thing that is probably not obvious is that although each and every category was created by someone interested in the topic at some point, that doesn't mean that that editor is still maintaining it, or is even an editor anymore. So right now Eric-the-Bun's Dutch Line Dancing category may be well maintained, but if he becomes interested in another topic or drops ODP as a hobby altogether, the category is likely going to be ignored except for occasional quality control unless another editor with an interest in Dutch Line Dancing shows up.

 

I'm sure that there are many categories that are fairly extensively developed which showed a lot of strong growth over a short period of time, and then have shown almost no growth since (although suggestions may be piling up). This is just part of the random nature of editing. If there were more editors with more varied interests, this effect wouldn't be so noticeable (that many categories go long periods without significant growth).

 

The response you got to your application to be an editor showed that the reviewer thought you would be accepted provided you applied to a smaller category. If you don't find one in Business that interests you, try a subcat for a hobby you have or try applying to edit your hometown in Regional. Once you are an editor and get some editing experience (and feedback on your work) you can apply for the Business category you were originally interested in. Many editors (myself included ) were rejected on their first application. Please try again.

[charlesleo]

I'm still shocked this system is setup mainly via interest, and queue is is largely ignored. But it does makes sense to keep editorial interest alive to keep it this way. Perhaps the suggestion page can be modified to say the following:

 

1) The header could say 'Suggest a Site' instead of 'Submit a Site'.

 

2) Wherever it says 'submit', the wording changes to suggest.'

 

3) Where it starts to say, "Please note: We are not a search engine and pride ourselves on being highly selective. We don't

accept all sites, so please don't take it personally should your site not be accepted" could be fleshed-out a bit to state:

 

"Please note: We pride ourselves on being highly selective. We don't

accept all suggested sites, so please don't take it personally should your site not be accepted. Contrary to popular belief, it is not our obligation or responsibility to anyone and/or search engines to list your suggestion.

 

There is alot of talk on the Internet on how a listing on DMOZ "improves search engine results." This is not necessarily the case. DMOZ has no control or obligation as to how any search engine chooses to rank websites.

 

DMOZ lists sites based mainly on volunteer editorial interest, and the suggestion 'queue' weighs little. A new site listing can appear live from several days to several years depending on individual editorial interests, category selected, and amount of spam to that category."

 

___________________________________________________________

 

 

I think without having a full-statement, the editors and moderators here will just continue to get slammed with 'why wasn't my site listed!' remarks from people and loads of resubmissions. I'm sure this eats up a good chunk of your time.

 

___________________________________________________________

 

On a separate note, I applied to edit a category that I was interested in, under:

 

http://dmoz.org/Business/Construction_and_Maintenance/Design/Illustration_and_Rendering/

 

There's currently 169 listings there. I don't see how this really seems "too broad" and send me a denial for this section - especially since I work in this field on a daily basis.

 

Too broad? Architectural Rendering and Illustration is very specific.

[bobrat]

queue is is largely ignored

That's because there is in fact no logic to considering it as a queue (I try to call it a heap).

 

Although queues exist in many parts of society, the asssumption is that it works in DMOZ. For example, when you go to a bakery, you assume you will line up and get served in turn. The bakery runs it that way, because it keeps customers happy. In fact from a bakeries point of view it would make better sense to serve the big spending customers ahead of the rest.

 

Banks (where I live) often have different level queues, those with simple transaction get to gfo to the fast queue. Those with lots of money to invest, get to bypass the queue and go directly to the managers office.

 

Supermarkets usually have an express line for those with less than 16 items

 

So in fact queues are not always implemented in the same way. The bottom line is usually just that people expect to be served in turn.

 

--- continued on nest post

[bobrat]

OOPS = continued in post below. --> --> -->

[lmocr]

On a separate note, I applied to edit a category that I was interested in, under:

 

http://dmoz.org/Business/Construction_and_Maintenance/Design/Illustration_and_Rendering/

 

There's currently 169 listings there. I don't see how this really seems "too broad" and send me a denial for this section - especially since I work in this field on a daily basis.

 

Too broad? Architectural Rendering and Illustration is very specific.

Broad refers more to the number of listings and unreviewed in the category. Anything over 100 is, pretty much, automatically too big for a newbie. Something closer to ten listings (that you could easily triple) would be a good place to start.

[bobrat]

But it makes no sense to do that in DMOZ. First the interanal workings are much more complex. If you want to call then queues, then there are more than half a million of them. Each category has it's own queue.

 

Think of a bank with 500,000 lines of custmers and 100 tellers.

 

How do we deal with that. Dealing with customers in the order they come in the door just will not work. We would spend our time running around in circles.

 

That's wahy editors work out the best method that works for thm based on how many lines of customers they can service, and various other factros.

 

Sometimes it makes sens to go the line of customers that is waring the best looking clothing - it might indicate their potential investments are better than the rest.

[hutcheson]

bobrat has done a good job of describing why queue-monitor is not a job that CAN be done either by humans or by machines on the ODP scale.

 

It is important to remember that it is not a job we WANT to do. It would be horribly unfair to both our surfers (who want us to find what is most important to them, not what is most heavily promoted) and to webmasters who focus on collecting good content, not promoting themselves), and it would favor no honest persons, but only spamming SERP perps.

 

Anyone can think of any number of ways editors can be bludgeoned into death (or at least into inactivity) once they are "nailed to the wall" by a fixed prioritization scheme based on suggestion dates. While this is unquestionably the worst imaginable scheme from any possible point of view that matters (i.e. everyone but the serp perp), I believe the fundamental problem will occur in any other fixed scheme: once known, the spammers can and will manipulate the scheme to prevent editors from doing any useful work whatsoever.

 

The only way for the ODP to survive is to keep editors absolutely free to look spammers in the eye and say, "I don't care what you want, I'm going to do something that I think is worth doing" -- and then slam the door in the spammers' face, closing off all future communication.

 

Any approach that doesn't CONTRIBUTE to that goal of editorial freedom will be counterproductive, and probably catastrophically so.

[jimnoble]

There's currently 169 listings there. I don't see how this really seems "too broad" and send me a denial for this section - especially since I work in this field on a daily basis.

...170 at the moment, so some work does get done .

 

Our experience shows that it's best if editors start in categories much smaller than that one. They need to learn the basics of how to edit before we are willing to give further permissions. It's a damage control thing . It has been said that joining ODP is much easier than gaining promotions. For some people, that's true. When we first join them, we merely think they can do a good job. Once they've got their feet wet, we can measure how well they're actually doing it .

 

It might seem counter intuitive, but we don't find that the people with great topic expertise necessarily make great editors. It's nice if they have it of course, but that's looked upon a bonus. Analytical and communications skills, integrity and attention to detail are amongst the attributes that I look for .

 

<edited for grammar :o>

[charlesleo]

Completely understandable.

 

Not that anyone is wondering or even asked - but I have worked for Scholastic, Simon & Schuster, Houghton, Prentice Hall, and Pearson Publishing in various editorial capacities. Production and publishing was my original career.

 

Anyhow. I did notice this just a few minutes ago:

 

http://www.google.com/Top/Business/Construction_and_Maintenance/Design/Illustration_and_Rendering/?il=1

 

It seems like Google Directory is definitely putting mroe stock into DMOZ than most other directory listings... It's safe to probably say that they do weigh towards the results listed here.

[jimnoble]

Google's directory is based upon our RDF data dumps - but is usually rather less up to date. That's why it has the ODP attribution at the bottom of every page .

[hutcheson]

Charles, experience is what happened to you. Don't put too much stock in it.

 

Skills are what you have. They matter. If you'd spent another half-lifetime in the Library of Congress or the Smithsonian, designing classification systems for arbitrary objects, that would be great. As it is, we make do with what we have. And our editing standards aren't really up to professional level. It's in our taxonomic standards where we are more detailed than Dewey, and where editors are regularly expected to make judgments that come ready-made to the typical librarian.

 

But many humans are trainable. And in an subject they know better than the average person does, they can often learn to make judgments comparable to a professional librarian. (We have caught classification errors in the professionally-edited directories!)

 

Motive is why you're doing what you're doing. That is critical. The ideal demonstration of motive is that you're already doing ODP-like work, or similarly public-spirited work: that is, if the ODP did not exist you'd feel compelled to invent some part of it.

 

So, show how ODP-like work coincides with your own personal mission (preferably as demonstrated by your own activity) -- and demonstrate a minimum of linguistic and taxonomic fluency, and we'll take a chance on you being able to learn the rest.

 

And ... be prepared to help teach your skills to amateurs, (by gently demonstrating professional standards), because even without your specific experience, chances are you know SOMETHING that few other active editors do.

[charlesleo]

Thanks Hutchenson. That's wisely stated.

 

On that note, I think the directory should also list categories in which editors are 'desperately' needed - that is highlighted categories which are small enough for a newcomer to manage. It seems like a hit or miss application method. It feels as if no matter what section I would volunteer for, there will always be an automatic DMOZ response which reads 'too broad for someone starting out.'

[pvgool]

I think the directory should also list categories in which editors are 'desperately' needed

That is easy. If someone thinks (s)he is needed in a category that category needs an editor.

- that is highlighted categories which are small enough for a newcomer to manage.

Although the norm is for new editors to start in small categories I have seen new editors in larger categories. I think it also has to do with the type of category a new editor is applying to.

It seems like a hit or miss application method. It feels as if no matter what section I would volunteer for, there will always be an automatic DMOZ response which reads 'too broad for someone starting out.'

I can asure you there are no automatic responses. There are standard emails but they are always send by a human person.

[Eric-the-Bun]

It feels as if no matter what section I would volunteer for, there will always be an automatic DMOZ response which reads 'too broad for someone starting out.'

 

This is why the suggestion is to pick a small, lowest-level regional location category is often made. People are (naturally) often interested in what they feel they can handle topic-wise without realising the difficulty of editing.

 

When I applied I choose a category where I could see no complications (e.g. in deciding whether a site would belong or not), there were 7 listings and I found 30+ sites easily. It was not a topic I specifically knew about - I really wanted another in the same area but could see there would be more head-scratching involved in getting it right which I did not want at first. I reasoned that if I found the editing process was 'easy' I would progress quickly, if not then having an 'easy' topic, would mean I could concentrate on the learning aspect.

 

To be honest, one of the things I learnt was how much I did not actually know about my hobby - having to think in terms of a directory structure and categories does give you a different perspective which was an unexpected bonus.

 

regards

 

PS ...there are many folk-dancing categories that are certainly ideal for someone starting out e.g. Greek, Bavarian etc.

[charlesleo]

Ok. Seeing that I don't think the category I was interested in is ever going to move (and I'm completely serious - check it out for yourselves), I see little choice other than to start editing a new category and eventually move over to the one I originally wanted.

 

So I've found a topic I am interested besides 'architectural illustration.' It is 'Spirulina' and it would fall under 'alternative medicine', but a new sub-category would need to be created called 'aglae.'

 

I don't see anywhere to suggest a new category for this.