Quality control in, http://dmoz.org/Computers/Graphics/Web/Templates/

[conman]

The web templates category is lack of quality.

 

The following web site is closed or cannot be found.

Site Closed

http://www.bimsan.net/

http://www.1stthebest.com/

 

The following site is selling illegal templates. They are selling either templatemonster, boxedart, designloads, deonixdesign, or any other legitimate templates provider site.

 

Illegal Site

http://templatetimes.com

 

Maybe some people can remove it.

 

BTW, where are the other quality templates web site such as designloads? I cant find them in DMOZ. Im not trying to accuse the editors, just that Im sure they will submit their site in DMOZ. And I dont own any templates site, I use their services and I always use google and DMOZ to find resources online. Im just curious after I found a DMOZ sucks web site. But I wont disclose that web site address, maybe it is against the rules or something.

[chaos127]

I've dealt with the first two, thanks.

 

I'm afraid for the third URL, it's not obvious to me that if they are selling other people's templates that they haven't got a legitimate contract to do so. Unless illegality is obvious, we tend to leave sites listed, and leave it to the damaged part to take steps to take the site off-line. As it says in our site selection guidelines: "We don't expect editors to be legal experts or the Internet police." That said, another editor may think the illegality is obvious to them and take action...

 

BTW: there's a stickied thread above for reporting any similar problems you might come across in the future.

[chaz7979]

I hate to pile on here and I dont know how to do it without looking like a whiner but, this very category is the reason I signed up at these forums. I dont think the editor of this cat is affiliated with any of the sites nor do I think she is abusing anyone. Yet the category has an editor although it seems like it does not. This is the second time it has been brought up in the forums showing that there were a bunch of dead sites or non unique sites.

 

There are a bunch of really quality sites that are are not listed here. I have submitted my own along with at least three others and I have not seen any of them added over the last 18 months. All of the sites I suggested were as good if not better than most listed. I just dont get it.

[pvgool]

> I just dont get it.

Most probably the editor listed for that category is busy with other things either inside or outside of DMOZ and didn't spend (much) time on that specific category.

[chaz7979]

Why not pass it off to someone else or resign?

[pvgool]

That is not needed at all.

A category is not limited to a single editor.

Many editors not listed on a category can "work" in it (depending on the category some 250 to 300 editors).

A category can have more than 1 listed editor. An new editors can apply for a category when there is already an editor listed.

 

And BTW why lose an editor just because he can't spend much time at a certain moment. Maybe next week or month he will have a lot of time and list several dozen websites. Do we want to miss such a chance? And even if he lists only 1 site a month it is still 1 site more than he could have done when resigned.

[chaz7979]

And BTW why lose an editor just because he can't spend much time at a certain moment. Maybe next week or month he will have a lot of time and list several dozen websites. Do we want to miss such a chance? And even if he lists only 1 site a month it is still 1 site more than he could have done when resigned.

 

 

I agree, except that I have not seen much change in the last 18 months and maybe if that editor was not in place someone else could take over that category and get more done.

 

I could be wrong but from what I understand all an editor needs to do is login every now and then to stay active. Is there a program in place that tracks if the editor makes any edits? I just wish an active editor had to do more to keep their position within a category.

[chaos127]

I agree, except that I have not seen much change in the last 18 months and maybe if that editor was not in place someone else could take over that category and get more done.

As has already been explained, the presence of a named editor in no way prevents any one else from apply for permission to edit there, or editing there if they already have such permissions.

 

I could be wrong but from what I understand all an editor needs to do is login every now and then to stay active. Is there a program in place that tracks if the editor makes any edits?[/Quote]

Yes, if an editor fails to make an edit (not just log in) in any period of 120 consecutive days, their editor account is automatically suspended. They can of course apply for reinstatement after that if they desire.

 

Full details can be found in the ODP Guidelines for Editor Accounts

 

I just wish an active editor had to do more to keep their position within a category.

Since less active editors do not in any way block improvements to the categories in which they are listed, how would such a policy this help improve the directory? The likely outcome is fewer editors and fewer total edits, not more.

[chaz7979]

Are they not taking a position that can no longer be applied for? Would you accept an editor application for that category?

[motsa]

As a couple of people have already said here, the presence of a listed editor in a category does not prevent someone else from applying to edit there. To carry that further, it doesn't prevent a meta from accepting a second (or third or fourth...) editor to that category. If there is still improvement to be made to the category, then the number of currently listed editors is largely irrelevant. The only limit to the number of editors possible in a category is the amount of work there.

[gboisseau]

All categories are available for applications. Just because there is/are list(ed) editors in a specific category does not preclude having more. Example: http://dmoz.org/Business/Food_and_Related_Products has 4 listed editors - 2 years ago there were only 2.

[hutcheson]

>Are they not taking a position that can no longer be applied for?

 

NO, they are absolutely NOT.

 

>Would you accept an editor application for that category?

 

It would be considered on its merits, without regard for the number of editors (hundreds!) who COULD (but might not) edit there.

[chaz7979]

Good to know

 

When will the editor apps be available?

[hutcheson]

The announcement thread says:

 

Please be patient and, again, we ask that you not start threads asking when those forms will be available again--we will update this announcement when we have further information.

 

OK, I admit that you haven't technically violated the letter of the law -- you didn't start a new thread, you hijacked an existing one instead. But somehow I can't help feeling somewhere there's a spirit of the guideline that's feeling very very violated.