How To Get Rejected in 2 hours or less??

[MyFastBasket]

I'm trying to understand what the real guidelines are for becoming an editor.

 

I read posts here that some applications go unanswered for months. Others reapply and reapply to no avail. This evening about 2 hours ago I applied - and about 5 minutes ago I was rejected.

 

I am an html editor, I built my own web site and maintained and contributed to others. The reason for rejection which came from a blind email was...

 

"Although we would like you to join us as a volunteer editor, you have chosen a category that is already well represented, or is broader than we typically assign to a new editor. We would encourage you to re-apply for a category that has fewer editors or is smaller in scope, in order to increase your chances of being accepted."

 

The category still shows the link recruiting volunteers which is why I applied? There doesn't appear to be anyone there.

 

Can a moderator advise me what categories are in need of volunteers? Also, can you explain what 'smaller in scope' means. I chose a bottom level category. What did I do wrong?

 

I would like to reapply.

[motsa]

"Too broad" generally means the category is at too high a level or is too large for a new editor. The fact that your application was rejected quite quickly underscore that since it means that it was very easy for a meta editor to see that the category wasn't appropriate.

 

For example, in Regional, an application for a Region category might be rejected with the "too broad" comment because very few sites are ever listed at that level -- unless your application demonstrated that you knew exactly the type of site that would be listed in such a category versus what would be listed at the locality level, you'd likely be rejected quite quickly.

 

Without knowing what section of the directory or what specific category you applied for, it's impossible to give more specific information.

[MyFastBasket]

Thanks for the input. The 'Too Broad' doesn't make any sense to me because I am the owner of a business in that category. I also didn't apply at the top level but at very specific lower level specifically for that reason and where I thought I would be needed.

 

The category itself isn't of a technical nature either so I don't know what they might be looking for.

 

Can someone tell me if it's ok to reapply?

[chaos127]

The 'Too Broad' doesn't make any sense to me because I am the owner of a business in that category.

I afraid I fail to see way in which you owning a site that could be listed in a category can affect whether or not its considered "too broad" for a new editor.

 

There are two main occaisions when the "well represented, or is broader" message might be used:

 

1/ The category is too large for a new editor to take on. This may be based on the number of listed sites, or it may also be based on the number of sites suggested by the public waiting to be reviewed. Either way, it's better for the new editor and the editors who'll be mentoring them if the new editor starts off somewhere smaller.

 

I don't know if this applies to you or not, but I'm sure you read the part of the application instructions that says "Your chances of becoming an editor are greater if you apply for a small, underdeveloped category to start (generally categories with less than 100 sites)."

 

2/ The category has a wide scope; so wide that very few sites belong there -- most being listed elsewhere in more specific categories. Due to the lack of sites that actually belong there, there's little scope for a new editor to demonstrate their editing skills in the category. Again it's better to start somewhere else.

 

Since you haven't told us the category you applied to, I'm afraid I can't be nay more help than that. Unless you've been told specifically not to reapply, its fine for you to do so. But you'd be well-advised to understand (and correct for) the reason for any previous rejections -- otherwise you'll just be wasting our time as well as yours!

[MyFastBasket]

The category was gifts...and with that being said there were a few hundred listed sites, but the section I applied for didn't have an editor, which is why I thought I could help and which is why I applied.

 

I submitted my own site in November 2007 and it still hasn't been reviewed to my knowledge. My thought is that with that kind of backlog there is a genuine need for help.

 

Also, when I looked through the category it has dead links, sites that are nothing but link farms etc. Does anyone monitor that? Again, my thought was you needed help.

 

When I take on a project I am very committed and would put in the effort that is required.

 

No, I wasn't told not to reapply but I don't understand the reasoning behind all of this. There are editors all over this forum answering questions fairly quickly. I was rejected in less than 2 hours and I'm certainly not trying to waste anyone's time. In fact its quite the opposite.

 

If there is such a backlog why wouldn't you at least consider a new editor? It isnt' even logical. Thanks for listening.

[MyFastBasket]

I have one more thing to say.... Neither of your two explanations apply to the category I chose.

 

You said....

1/ The category is too large for a new editor to take on. This may be based on the number of listed sites, or it may also be based on the number of sites suggested by the public waiting to be reviewed. Either way, it's better for the new editor and the editors who'll be mentoring them if the new editor starts off somewhere smaller......

 

I applied to the bottom most level. No editor and it only had a few hundred sites.

 

You said....

2/ The category has a wide scope; so wide that very few sites belong there -- most being listed elsewhere in more specific categories. Due to the lack of sites that actually belong there, there's little scope for a new editor to demonstrate their editing skills in the category. Again it's better to start somewhere else.

As I said 'gift baskets' is pretty self explanatory. I don't think anyone would get confused about submitting to that category. In fact the scope would be perfect for a new editor like me with experience.

 

Thanks again for listening. Any further thoughts?

[motsa]

I applied to the bottom most level. No editor and it only had a few hundred sites.

A few hundred sites is too large a category for a new editor, even if it is the lowest down you can go in that particular branch.

[MyFastBasket]

A few hundred sites is too large a category for a new editor, even if it is the lowest down you can go in that particular branch.

Ok. So then there is a cutoff or maximum number. What is that number of sites in a category for which a new editor would be accepted? Can you give me an example of a catgory in the catalog? Thank you.

[motsa]

Under about 100 sites is usually suitable but it depends on the category in question.

[adda4u]

i think it is tough...

[chaos127]

Well, the 100-sites rule-of-thumb is given in the application instructions -- soyou should have known about this before your applied...

 

As for finding suitable categories, have you tried looking in Regional? For example, in my neck of the woods, any sub-category of http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/Bedfordshire/ with the exception of "Bedford" and "Luton" is probably suitable for a new editor.

[MyFastBasket]

You are correct - I should have known. I just thought it was so close and I'm experienced in the category that they might have considered by app. I might look at Regional at some point but right now I think I'll throw in the towel.

 

Thanks for everyone's input.