Meta pvgool Posted May 13, 2006 Meta Posted May 13, 2006 I hope you will answer hutcheson's questions. Maybe we should ask these questions to all people wanting to post at R-Z. Maybe we should ask them to all people wanting to suggest a site. Back to the questions, I do consider question 4 answered truthfuly at least. There is still questions 3 - 7 - 8 - 10 - 11. In the mean time I'll try to answer your questions (by rewriting them they make a lot more sense) 3. Please remember I have been watching the category and the upper levels this tree appears to have become root bound and or needs a bigger pot. Why has the growth stoped on this tree. Most probably because noone was interested in 'working' in that tree of categories. 7. Some of your own editors speak up in other places and forget to spoof there **************, thats how I found there comments and concerns of corruption. Why cant editors come forward in forums like here and why do they have to go other places to say some thing. So yes I am looking at everything the whole picture. I don't understand the question. From what I make from it. 1) Editors are all volunteers and are allowed to participate in every forum they want and are also allowed not to participate in any forum they don't want to. They are also allowed to write anything they want (except to copy material seen as private from internal DMOZ sources, zee http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/communication.html#privacy ) 2) We know that like in any community some of our members don't act according to our standards and some are corrupt. We know this has happened in the past and we understand that this very probably will happen in the future, it even might be happening right now. The only thing we can (and will) do is fight these people. When discovered they will be removed and their wrong doing corrected. In this fight we appreciate any help from non-editors. That is why we have a possibility to file abuse reports. 8. I forgot what I was tring to ask here Doesn't matter. I forgot what I wanted to answer :wink: 10. My question is and I am still asking is there an editor for the category I was looking at. I am not asking if he or she is working it just is there one asigned to this category. This question has already been answerd many times. In every category 'work' can be done by several 100 editors. (but nonone knows if they actualy will do some 'work' and when they will do it) Only a few categories have an editor name listed at the bottom. Please also read the FAQ (hmm, haven't we asked you before :angel: ) There's no editor for my category - will my submission ever get reviewed? 11. the category has a question asking people to volunteer for for this category. Does this category need an editor is that the reson for the question at the bottome of the page. This is not how it works in DMOZ. Every category can use the help offered. But no category needs help. Categories only need editors if someone thinks (s)he can do some usefull work in that category. from one of you other postings This kind of worries me because you tell people submitting a site once is more then enough,I have read this as well... So if peoplle are not supose to submit more then once then when the submissions are deleted to get the category caught up. You sould not here from the person ever again because there site probably was not good any way even if it was never reviewed at all. So a person could go along time asking about a site, being told to wait and be patient, and that some one will probably reviewing there site. Mean while Dick Dastardly has already tied the web site to the rail road tracks and it is gone. Do I undstand this write? Like all your questions you are looking at it form the wrong side. Looking at situations like a webmaster is the wrong side. Looking at situation from DMOZ perspective is the right side. Webmaster: one site was rejected for wrong reasons -> DMOZ is doing a bad job DMOZ: one site was rejected for wrong reasons but we listed several 100 other sites this day and we deleted several 100 other sites for good reasons -> DMOZ is doing a good job DMOZ user: I can find many sites about the subject I am looking for -> DMOZ is doing a good job Webmasters all think that their own site is the most important thing in the world (nothing wrong with that thought). But from the big DMOZ perspective it is just one of many possible sites to include in the directory. If a suggested site was rejected for the wrong reasons and it is a realy good site we will find it through other sources and list it at that time. DMOZ is not interested in individual sites or individual webmasters. DMOZ is also not interested in any effect a listing will have on the site being listed. DMOZ is only interested in building a good (preferably the best) directory. I will not answer PM or emails send to me. If you have anything to ask please use the forum.
timamie261 Posted May 13, 2006 Author Posted May 13, 2006 (1) An editor's job is to: (a) find, review, describe, and categorize good websites (b) process site suggestions when the site qualifies under the Dmoz guidelines. Answers modified (2) The editors' work is defined by: (a) What they think is worth doing and what is dictated under the editor guidelines of responsibilities of Dmoz (3) Each editor's priorities are defined by (a) His own interests, abilities, and definition of "importance". And that will promote the growth of the directory (4) If a website doesn't get reviewed today, (a) It's OK. (5) Site submittals are: (a) at least 90% pure spam garbage, (6) Editor rejections of list able sites (whether by mistake or with malice) are: (a) Very rare, too rare to worry about I do not believe malice should ever come in to play with a listing, this should always be done objectively 6 seems to be a little unclear and this seems to be the best answer. (7) Site submittals are: (a) an unreliable, biased, and often-abused way of supplementing editors' ways of finding sites, (8) Editors are responsible: (a) to the community, to use the ODP privileges to do only work that helps build the directory. (9) The way to get a good grasp of how the ODP works is to: (a) go to the "submittal status" forum, and review a few hundred websites, looking at the process and outcome of their review (and acceptance or rejection). I am working on this believe this or not I come in to hundreds of emails most being spam. I have managed to reduce spam posting on my site through the use of a small piece of code , and a filter. Please do not get me wrong on this some still manages to get through (10) The best way to build a directory is to: (a) develop efficient ways of finding good sites, and even more efficient ways of rejecting spam quickly. (11) The solution to quality control is: (a) allow the reporting of quality problems, and give editing privileges to editors who care about quality with proven track records. answer modified (12) Have you done the right thing on #9 yet? I have read part of that forum. a) My site dose not reek of buy here like the ones that were rejected. b) My site provides people ways of locating vehicles from other people and dreams that could never be reached, ie I wish I could afford that car I love that car. c) My site provides ways of buyers and sellers to become informed of scams and become and informed seller and buyer. d) My site provides a place for how to editorials to be submitted, clubs and events around the world. e) My site does not contain spam. f) My site is safe for everyone. g) My site is SSL in all modes you choose. h) My site is competitively submitted to the right category. i) My site is international known around the world by many car people and I can see this in the systems logs I wish Lagos Nigeria did not know about it some times. j) The most important "Does my site deserve a listing" this is up to the editor to make this decision, if there is one for the category I have submitted it under. What were your conclusions? My thought alot of the sites in question reek of just selling you something, and lack any supporting information other then a way to contact them to make a purchase. There is no submittal status any more, I have not looked for one nor am I looking for one. (13) Have you made any suggestions that address the real concern in #10 yet? I can not make a recommendation until all my answers are clear to me and I know more on some of these matters. What are they? I have a few ideas on the spam issues, they would probably be considered lecturing, or telling some how to do there job. I am trying to understand the Dmoz of today. (14) Have you made any contributions to ODP quality, in the form of information that editors could use to improve the ODP in any way whatsoever? What are they? In the past years, I did not waste my time or editors time submitting garbage sites. I made sure the sites met the guidelines. I will continue to submit sites of quality as any thing else would be a waste of your time and mine. If things change for me and I find a better safer way of making money, I would most certainly contribute a few hours of time daily to Editing categories and like I said before I would give a 100% effort to quality. I would dump the obvious spam sites and run a script over them for the obvious trash, ie one pagers, scams and so on. I do believe that any one should be able to visit the results of the directory and that it should be content safe for everyone. (15) Have you managed to avoid making suggestions that would cause editors to waste much more time with completely unproductive activities -- that is, activities that did nothing at all to contribute to the purpose of the ODP? If not, have you apologized and retracted your suggestions? As for useless suggestions I don't believe I have made any, people ideas should always be considered, whether they are a good or not. They do not have to be implemented nor should they if they are bad ideas. Ideas are good and most humans have them, if your not making mistakes then your not learning of moving forward. On the other hand making fraudulent mistakes are not excepting by any standards. If your looking for an apology or retraction here I am not going to make one. I do not believe I have wasted any time with the questions I have asked. And in fact since some of my posts I have noticed some subtle changes, I can not mention them here as I have been asked not to refer to the other thread. I have removed what I believe to be sarcasm from some of your provided answers and have added to some that seemed to be incomplete.
timamie261 Posted May 13, 2006 Author Posted May 13, 2006 DMOZ is only interested in building a good (preferably the best) directory. some of these sites really lack content and vaule as well. This is what kinda bothers me on some of this comparing my site to others. I can say I really do look at my site with a negitive attitude most of the time looking for the ways it 'sucks' and I have removed them. I am always open for suggestions, I got one just a few days ago telling me I should take this site down when I traced the email back it came back to a competitor with very few cars on his site. they had requested a link from my site to theres, I had to use rules for this. Did the site meet the standards I set for my site 'no' did it equal the site rank my site had 'no' was the site on an IP Blacklist 'yes' how does the sight rank on my sucko-meter it did not even rank a 0. So the site did not qualify for a link on my site. I do know from my system logs that some of the people here visited the site in question, boomarked and have look at it agian today as well, I sow the link back to thei forum with the visitors ip address to the site from the forum then revisited directlt from a bookmark. So I do beleive the site has some value, the few from here looked at alot of cars and the scam page, and clubs page as well, we did have alot of clubs and since the move to new servers to suport such a large site, most of the club lisings were lost. They are coming back though this will take time though. I do beleive the site is a important part of the car hobby industry and the site is growing. Not intending to spam here, or promote my site as I have not listed the site name here.
Meta pvgool Posted May 13, 2006 Meta Posted May 13, 2006 (1) An editor's job is to: (a) find, review, describe, and categorize good websites (b) process site suggestions when the site qualifies under the Dmoz guidelines. Sorry, as it was back in schol, only one answer is allowed and only one of the answers is correct. "process site suggestion" isn't the right answer. The pool of suggested sites is only one of many ways to find good websites (and as such is part of (a)). Editors are not obliged to review the suggested site, but most of us do as it is still a good point to start if you want to find sites (except for a few spammagnet categories). .. answers skipped by me were the correct answers .. (12) Have you done the right thing on #9 yet? I have read part of that forum. a) My site dose not reek of buy here like the ones that were rejected. b) My site provides people ways of locating vehicles from other people and dreams that could never be reached, ie I wish I could afford that car I love that car. c) My site provides ways of buyers and sellers to become informed of scams and become and informed seller and buyer. d) My site provides a place for how to editorials to be submitted, clubs and events around the world. e) My site does not contain spam. f) My site is safe for everyone. g) My site is SSL in all modes you choose. h) My site is competitively submitted to the right category. i) My site is international known around the world by many car people and I can see this in the systems logs I wish Lagos Nigeria did not know about it some times. j) The most important "Does my site deserve a listing" this is up to the editor to make this decision, if there is one for the category I have submitted it under. Although a lot of these points have no relevance in relation to a DMOZ listing they are worthwhile to have in a website. Based on the points given by you the site can be listed. But at the moment of review the site (and only the site) will have to prove it is listable. I am trying to understand the Dmoz of today. Seems to me that you are on the right way (14) Have you made any contributions to ODP quality, in the form of information that editors could use to improve the ODP in any way whatsoever? What are they? In the past years, I did not waste my time or editors time submitting garbage sites. I made sure the sites met the guidelines. I will continue to submit sites of quality as any thing else would be a waste of your time and mine. Seems that you are doing the right things. We appriciate that. Thanks. I will not answer PM or emails send to me. If you have anything to ask please use the forum.
Meta hutcheson Posted May 13, 2006 Meta Posted May 13, 2006 >some of these sites really lack content and vaule as well. This is partly true. Some sites that are listed really do not deserve to be listed by our current rules. If they were reviewed today, they would be removed or rejected. Which raises two questions for editors: (1) how can we do a better job of picking which sites are likely to retain their value? and (2) how can we do a better job of finding listings that do not currently have value? And ... this is partly false. You and I as website developers have our own standards. If our work doesn't live up to OUR standards, we ... fix it, or throw it away and start over. That is right and proper. But the ODP is not a listing of sites that conform to your standards or my standards. It's a listing of sites that conform to the ODP standards. And a lot of things that matter -- a LOT -- to me, have no bearing at all on an ODP listing. You will find websites that you'd be ashamed of, and that is OK, so long as they meet the ODP criterion, which is "significant unique content." And any ODP editor has to be able to look at a site and say, "I'd be ashamed to publish that online" -- and still go ahead and list it, because it contains unique content. >This is what kinda bothers me on some of this comparing my site to others. Don't compare your site to the worst sites listed, unless you want to be on the way out, like they are. Compare your site to ALL the sites listed, and if it's not better than EACH ONE of them in some significant way(*), and better than nearly all of them in some particular way(*), then count on it not being listed. (*) This way has nothing to do with the technology used, or the attractiveness of the package, or the popularity of the site, or its position in any kind of ranking, or the potential for user participationk, or even whether it manifests some particular kind of obnoxious advertising (although we do draw the line at serial window-poppers). The way has to do with unique content, information that can't be found anywhere else on the net.
timamie261 Posted May 13, 2006 Author Posted May 13, 2006 Don't compare your site to the worst sites listed, unless you want to be on the way out, like they are. Compare your site to ALL the sites listed, and if it's not better than EACH ONE of them in some significant way(*), and better than nearly all of them in some particular way(*), then count on it not being listed. I use all the sites to compare my site, and I continue to make the site better each time. they had requested a link from my site to theres, I had to use rules for this. Did the site meet the standards I set for my site 'no' did it equal the site rank my site had 'no' was the site on an IP Blacklist 'yes' how does the sight rank on my sucko-meter it did not even rank a 0. So the site did not qualify for a link on my site. I do have simple standards for providing links from my site to others, because my site carries a viewing safety standard. This is what I was refuring to. And yes I am very hard on my site, it better be better, I dont like low qaulity. This is why there are so many different things from cars to security of the user viewing the site. If I had more money and more time, I would put more into it. After my last posting I was out side removing the plenum from a vehicle to test the central port injector. and could not get back till now, so I was not ignoring anyone. Now I have to go rip the fuel tank out and place a pump in the tub. so Have a nice day I still have more questions there is still the matter of number 8.
motsa Posted May 13, 2006 Posted May 13, 2006 You didn't actually ask a question for #8. You just made a couple of statements. Presumably, you want to know whether or not having mirrors will cause you trouble. The mere act of having mirrors isn't a problem as long as you're not suggesting them to the ODP.
timamie261 Posted May 14, 2006 Author Posted May 14, 2006 ok here is a thought I keep a list of all my submissions in excell I know what and when I submit This realy happened, not fanasty - I guy selling a car on my site thought the search engines were just to slow picking up the new ads and updates You probably already know at this point what he did, and your right he submited his ads to yahoo, google, and msn. He was honest about and told me thinking he had helped me 'NOT' What if a helpful person comes along and submits my site to Dmoz on there own with out my permission as this has already happen in the other search engines. Mind you with there car ad link or some other lame thought they might have. Oh and the gas tank is out on the ground. vehicale is running I will probable put it back in some time tonight or at first light. The vehicle did live.
spectregunner Posted May 14, 2006 Posted May 14, 2006 This very, very rarely happens. Without giving away any details, suffice to say we know how to handle it on the rare occasions when it does happen.
Recommended Posts