Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

Tips For DMOZ Editor Wannabes


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#1 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 04:52 PM

If  your main purpose in applying is to get your site listed, then just don’t.  Reviewing meta editors are experienced senior editors who can spot those a mile away.  You must show a strong desire to edit without an underlying agenda.

Consider the application a performance test.  Don’t just read the guidelines, study them.

Pick a small category usually somewhere between 30 to 60 listings that you would perceive to be a non spammy category.

Check the category description to make sure it is the correct category for the URLs you are submitting with your application.  If no description is available, one or more of the parent category descriptions should give you an idea if the URLs are appropriate for the subcategory.  Category titles can be deceiving.  Just because you have pet websites to submit does not necessarily mean they would fit in Shopping/Pets or even Recreation/Pets.  Some pet websites might only be appropriate for a Regional/Locality listing.

Titles can be the title of the website itself, however when listing business or commercial sites, the title of the company should be used regardless of the title provided on the site.

Descriptions should contain absolutely no promotional hype or keyword stuffing whatsoever.  Tell what the site is about and what can be found on the site simply and concisely.  In some cases descriptions in the category may offer some help so long as you consider the fact that some of them may have been written before possible changes in the guidelines.   For this reason do not necessarily consider every single description as a good example.  

If you perceive yourself as an expert or qualified for any particular field, another category might be best for your initial application.  Otherwise, you might be sadly disappointed.  An applicant’s qualifications or expertise in any given field is not relevant to becoming an editor. The application is strictly to determine if you understand site placement, can write guidelines compliant titles and descriptions, show honestly in reporting all site affiliations regardless of relevance to the category, correct grammar, etc.  And in some cases your qualifications or knowledge could possibly diminish your capabilities as an editor. It's just best to stay away from categories that you have a strong attachment to until you get some experience elsewhere.

Save a copy of your application just in case something does go wrong with the application process.  You must reply to the confirmation email in order for the application to make it through the system.  If you do not receive the email, first check to see if it was caught by your spam filters.  If not, you will have to reapply.

If English is not your native tongue, you must be very fluent in English to edit anywhere in the directory other than your own language in the World section.  When in doubt, make your initial application to your native language.  Perhaps you can apply to other parts of the directory in time.

If you receive a rejection email, do not expect a detailed outline of your mistakes.  The standard rejection mail contains the most common reasons for rejection.  One or more of those reasons will apply.  You will only receive personal comments from the reviewing meta if none of the common reasons on the standard rejection letter applies.  Consider all reasons given to see which one/s do apply.  Many, many good editors applied several times before being accepted.  It is up to you to find the reasons for rejection, correct them, and reapply.  If you cannot find your mistakes, it’s possible that you aren’t cut out to be an editor.  Many are not.  Each of the thousands of editors who have contributed to the directory took the same test, so it would be unrealistic to expect special treatment over all previous or current editors.

My persoanl opinion is that a small Regional locality is one of the best training grounds for a newbie editor.  Regional is much more easily defined than some of the other branches.   And even what appears to be a small category in Shopping or some of the other branches can be quite spammy and not appropriate for an inexperienced editor.   A small town for which you are familiar will offer you links to quality websites to list that others would never find, such as local newspapers, delivery trucks, billboards at high school sports games, etc.

If I can do it, anyone can!  All it takes is a sincere desire to help build the directory and the ability to follow instructions.  So go for it!  

Edited by dogbows, 27 April 2006 - 05:01 PM.


#2 jjwill

jjwill

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:16 PM

A couple of common mistakes to avoid -
1. Suggesting a site already listed in the directory: Even though you may not see it in the category you are applying for, it may be listed in another cat in the directory. So always do a search on dmoz.org leaving www out of the root url.

2. Using category titles in the listing description: Not all metas will catch this but many do. i.e. - if you are suggesting a site to Shopping/Sports/Golf avoid using the words shopping, sports and especially golf.

3. Always be sure that a regional listing actually has a building location in that locality. It matters where the location is not where they ship to. Also, if they have multiple locations you need to find the smallest region category that includes all the locations.

I hope that helps. I’m sure there are many others but those are the ones that came to mind. :D

#3 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:24 PM

Wow! Thanks jj, those are great adds. :cheers: Darn I can't believe I left those out. :D

#4 bwelford

bwelford

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 9011 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:39 PM

Welcome to the Forums, jjwill. :wave: Also hi dogbows, we haven't conversed as yet.

You collectively have set down some good advice for aspiring DMOZ editors. I had only one small question, jjwill. You said the following:

So always do a search on dmoz.org leaving www out of the root url.

Why does it matter? Don't they both lead to the same place?

#5 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:53 PM

Thanks, Barry! I think jj has gone for the day, but I can answer it for you. The DMOZ search is not like a regular search engine. It was mainly put in place to help editors when adding sites. If you use the complete URL for some reason it doesn't work properly. So when searching there to see if a site is listed, instead of searching for www.cre8asiteforums.com use cre8asiteforums.com. Otherwise, you might get no search results found when in fact it is listed. Now why it works like it does, I can't answer. :rofl:

#6 podman

podman

    Unlurked Energy

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 07:57 PM

1. I've yet to find out why leaving out the www. is important, sometimes it works with it, sometimes not. Sure would be nice if someone put a note to that effect on the search page. http://search.dmoz.o...ced_search.html

2. Another good category to start with is something related to a hobby, but not a money making hobby.

3. When looking for Regional categories to apply for, select a town/city, not a state, county, or metro area.

4. Note that most sites that sell things retail and online go in Shopping - though there are many exceptions (mostly in Art). Sites that are not US based and do not sell worldwide have special confusing rules - read all the notes in the Shopping categroy.

5. Sites that sell from stores generally go in Regional

6. Sites that sell Business to Business are usually in Business

7. UK based sites have exceptions to the rules, don't expect to understand them until you become an editor in Regional UK. I expect that reviews of editor apps in this area will be forgiving of these details

8. Regional sites get pushed down to the most precise physical location of the business, not the target market.

#7 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 09:16 PM

It's a bird, it's a plane, NO, it's PODMAN! HeeHee, thanks podman. Those are more great tips. I really appreciate all the editors who are pitching in to help. However, I am looking forward to editor wannabes posting. If you have specific questions, then please ask. We will do our best to help where we can.

#8 Juliette

Juliette

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 02:36 AM

Hey dogbows - thanks for the topic start and thanks to everyone else for the extra info.

I was looking at becoming an editor for a small section - maybe a single author in the literature section or something similar, but i am a copywriter for a group of online stores that sell health products and i thought that my application might be turned down because of that? Can you give me an opinion on that.

The editing job would be for my personal time so it would be an exercise to get these sites listed.

#9 jimnoble

jimnoble

    Honorary Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 03:43 AM

Just to add a few more words about ODP's rudimentary search system.

It was, and still is, primarily intended to help surfers and editors to find an appropriate category from a keyword. They can then visit the category and hopefully find a whole bunch of relevent websites, some of which might not use the keyword at all.

It's not intended as a tool to find out whether or not a particular website is listed. It can be used that way if the www is omitted, but that's a side effect, not an objective. I'm not aware of any plans for change.

#10 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 04:03 AM

It's not intended as a tool to find out whether or not a particular website is listed. It can be used that way if the www is omitted, but that's a side effect, not an objective. I'm not aware of any plans for change.


A shame, actually.

I would think that looking to see where a site is listed would be a useful, and helpful ability for anyone using DMOZ who wanted to try to find similar sites to one that is listed.

Say I want to find other authoritative sites similar to the Economist. I could go to DMOZ and type in economist.com and find out that it is in this category:

http://dmoz.org/News...is_and_Opinion/

Once I'm there, I have some excellent choices of sites that provide thoughtful analysis of news.

Now that topic might seem fairly obvious, and my search to find similar sites might seem a little lazy, but it's a nice way to find information quickly without having to try to guess the hierarchy of the directory.

Say I wanted to find some good project management software, and I knew of one vendor. I search for their name, and I get this category:

http://dmoz.org/Comp...AP/Consultants/

Wouldn't have guessed that nor looked there.

Dogbows,

I really appreciate the time and effort that you put into your initial post, and the great responses that it has received from other folks who have offered suggestions about applying as an editor of the directory.

If I weren't so busy with many other projects, I would seriously consider applying. Though I would guess that there would be aspects of the culture and bureaucracy that I might find maddening.

Wonder what the DMOZ would look like if it allowed editors to use tagging. Now that might be interesting. :)

#11 jimnoble

jimnoble

    Honorary Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 04:48 AM

@bragadocchio:

You already can do all that you're suggesting - just search on the domain name without a www. Also, most businesses are listed with the company name as the title so you can search on that too if you don't know their domain name :)

#12 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 06:53 AM

Sorry to take this thread even more off-topic, but bragadocchio has pointed to one of the best uses of the ODP. Apart from browsing the directory itself, you can get the benefit by using ODP-fed 'similiar sites' tools, such as Alexa and http://www.ucmore.com/ and clustering engines such as Exalead.

#13 bwelford

bwelford

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 9011 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 07:20 AM

Off Topic offtopicIf you think that was off-topic, Jean_Manco, how about this! :)

Rant ! rantSorry but sometimes I can't stop myself. I'm sure we all appreciate the inputs from DMOZ editors here. Anything that helps us interact better with such an important entity on the Web can't be bad. However sometimes it's a little mind-boggling.

What caused this emotional outburst was your explanation about search, jimnoble, and the correct way to check out whether a domain is included. I have been making all sorts of mistakes in the past because I wasn't aware you shouldn't include the www before the domain name.

It isn't mentioned in the Help page on Search Results for Your Site. That seems to assume that I will want to check that my domain is in DMOZ correctly for its keywords. So within the Help page it directs me to a Search Engine Watch page on How To Use HTML Meta Tags. That's a little surprising since it was written by Danny Sullivan on December 5, 2002. If you keep going, you'll find a link on the keyword metatag in another SEW item, Search Engine Features For Webmasters. What it says is the following:

Crawling Meta Keywords The following do - Inktomi, Teoma. The following do not - AllTheWeb, AltaVista, Google. (Teoma support is "unofficial")

That's all very disappointing.

This domain name without the www is of critical importance to a large number of the DMOZ customers. Yet there's no mention anywhere. This thread seems to imply we shouldn't be using DMOZ this way. But we're the customers, aren't we?.

My image of DMOZ is that it is seen as a magnificent cathedral by its builders. It's intended as the best cathedral ever by the members of the DMOZ faith. OK folk may wander in through the front door and be impressed by the architecture, but it's not really intended for them.

If only DMOZ had a marketing department. Marketing is about defining a group of customers and making the best possible product or service that meets their needs. Of course the product/service package is ideally defined by what the customer needs. That's called being customer-centric.

Well perhaps that's too much to ask for. At the very least perhaps DMOZ could make a big thing about using the non-www version of the domain to check whether a website you're interested in is included in DMOZ.

When you can get around to it, you might also figure out who the Help is meant to help and modify it accordingly. As the dear departed Peter Drucker said, Help is defined by the recipient.


#14 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 08:23 AM

Thank you, Juliette. No, being a copywriter for online stores will not prevent you from being an editor if you declare all the websites for the online stores on the application. For you that may be quite a few, but it is critical that you declare them and any others that you are affliated with. I do suggest that you do not use any website that you are affiliated with on the initial application. And in your case I also suggest that you apply to a category entirely set apart from the Health or Shopping categories. Your literature/author category sounds like it might be a very good start for you. Once you prove yourself as an editor in a totally unrelated part of the directory, you can later add other categories to your editing permissions.

It's important to note here that it is ok to own or be affiliated with websites as an editor. And it is even ok to list them if they are listable according to the guidelines. But you must show complete impartiality between sites you are affiliated with and their competitors. It is always best to prove your honesty and integrity in this situation before adding any of your site affliliations.

I hope this helps!



Edited by dogbows, 28 April 2006 - 08:25 AM.


#15 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 08:43 AM

Jim, thanks for clarifying DMOZ search, I think...... :flowers:

Barry, unfortunately there is much that was written in the beginning of the directory that needs to be updated drastically. The problem is that it requires a volunteer who has access and who is willing to do the work. Obviously it is not something any one has been willing to put part of their spare time into doing, yet. It would be nice if someone did.


#16 shadow575

shadow575

    New To Community

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 03:01 PM

dogbows,
Thanks for inviting me to this thread. I am not sure how much more I can contribute to the thread that hasn't been discussed. Going back to your original post (which I think is why you invited me :) ) I might add the following few oppinions:
  • Spelling and grammar should be checked before submitting site examples. A minor mistake probably wouldn't be a hinderance, but poor grammar or an abundance of spelling issues might be.
  • In Regional-unecessary repetition of the locality in the title or description should be avoided.
  • Refreshing yourself with the Guidelines for Descriptions prior to submitting an application is a good idea.
  • Many rejected applications receive specific "Reviewer Comments" but many don't as well. There are always reasons given for rejection of an application. Recieving the general rejection letter isn't a bad thing. It means that whatever caused the rejection is (are) very common, and can easily be fixed. Look the application over carefully and make sure not do those common issues again.
  • Don't be discourage with a few rejections. It happens to many of us. There is something to be said for persistance :) Unless your rejection letter indicates that further applications won't be necessary fix the issues you had and reapply (paying special attention to specific review comments if given) and keep trying.
Hopefully that helps to some extent.

Regards.

#17 dgeary9

dgeary9

    Mach 1 Member

  • Members
  • 334 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 04:26 PM

There was another thread on this a while back, and I was the "editor-wanna-be" (the thread was on the problem of a shrinking DMOZ editor population). The short version is that I followed all the rules I could see, applied for a small, non-commercial category, and got rejected.

Let me say that arguments like "you shouldn't get special treatment (reasons for being rejected), the current editors didn't" or "just fix the mistakes you made and try again" don't sway me to try again. I was willing to contribute a few hours a month to help edit some categories I care about, especially given the editor shortage.

The problem, I think, is that I felt like I was offering DMOZ something - and that most of the replies, here and elsewhere, make it sound as if DMOZ believes it is offering me something. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but if you are truly needing editors, you may need to figure out ways to woo, rather than putting up barriers to entrance.

I've managed volunteer organizations from the inside, and it is really hard to figure out how to balance a welcoming exterior with very real resourcing shortages. I'm not saying it's easy - but I'm one of the people that walked by your door, took a step or two towards the entrance, and didn't feel welcome enough to stick around. It's like marketing - you don't have long to make a good first impression and entice me to more actively engage.

#18 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 05:13 PM

Thanks shadow, I appreciate your input. :thumbs:

Dgeary9, editing isn't for everyone. Every editor I have ever met considered editing a hobby. No more, no less. So yes indeed it does offer them something. Finding and fixing mistakes is part of being an editor, so if you have a problem finding and fixing the mistakes on the application, then most likely you wouldn't enjoy editing anyway.

When I applied, I didn't apply to help the directory. I applied to build up my home town in the directory. I had a lot of local sites bookmarked on my computer that I did not see listed in my home town. As a matter of fact I wanted to build up my home town enough that I spent days on end studying everything I could find that would help me do a splendid application. I dare say, it fell way short of splendid, but at least it was good enough that I was accepted in less than five hours.

Editing is not about being willing to spend a few hours on a category you care about. It's caring enough about the category to spend the hours necessary to get accepted so you can edit there.


#19 dgeary9

dgeary9

    Mach 1 Member

  • Members
  • 334 posts

Posted 28 April 2006 - 08:27 PM

I hear you, dogbows - that jives with the message I felt like the DMOZ editor submission process was sending. All I wanted to say is that my response to that message was to walk away.

If you're getting all the editors you need with your current process, then my feedback is easily discarded. If you're not getting enough editors, then perhaps there are other decent candidates out there who responded the way I did to the "admissions process".

Just my two cents :).

#20 jjwill

jjwill

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 01 May 2006 - 05:36 PM

I can understand how you feel about the response that is sent. It is a sweeping responce on purpose and can seem kinda cold. The problem is that editors have to be self motivated in order to be affective in building the directory. Nobody is going to help you in that area and really cant if you think about it. The applications process is set up to weed out those who aren’t going to take the time to really read and follow the guidelines and able to find sites on their own. The ability to follow the guidelines is very important in maintaining quality control for the directory without the need for a meta editor looking over other editor shoulders. Hope that makes sense. :)

#21 dgeary9

dgeary9

    Mach 1 Member

  • Members
  • 334 posts

Posted 02 May 2006 - 08:55 PM

I agree that editors need all the skills you describe - I'm simply not convinced your application process doesn't turn away signficant numbers of people who actually possess those skills.

Anyhow, enough from me :). Good luck with attracting the new editors you need to keep DMOZ strong and healthy.

#22 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 09:28 AM

Tips For DMOZ Editor Wannabes………….hmmmm

Not meaning to be cheeky,or rude but when I see this kind of post I often wonder what motivates the writer to post it. I'm sure that in this instance the topic starter has the best of intentions.

Surely the best source of information on this subject is on the DMOZ website, if not. Why not?

Personally I think, there are two types of people who would wannabe DMOZ editors,

1. People who see it as a way to gain financially or in some other way.
2. People with nothing better to do – it’s a hobby, or passion. Call it what you will.

I have no problems with either of the two types of person I have described.

What really “scratches my Porsche” is when people describe at length the virtues and skills required to become a DMOZ editor, with the sole purpose of “telling the world” that they have those skills and virtues.

In the immortal words of Shania Twain, “that don’t impress me much”. :D


TreV

Edited by manager, 03 May 2006 - 09:37 AM.


#23 jjwill

jjwill

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 12:30 PM

Hmmmm. Well I know Dogbows and she’s not one for tooting her own horn. She truly loves to help others succeed. It’s a shame you don’t see it for what it is without complicating matters by insinuating something that it’s not. Since you don’t know what her motives are and since you obviously don’t know her, why would you assume the worst?

Why would DMOZ describe mistakes that others make? That is part of the weeding out process. The ability to learn on your own, correct your mistakes on your own and apply the guidelines on your own is not something DMOZ is going to teach to anyone other than by putting the guidelines out there for anyone to read. It is also reluctant to give out much details in its application process in fear of spammers will use it to their advantage.

Now Dogbows can speak for herself but I believe she started this thread to give some hints as to what are some of the common things to look out for, what mistakes to avoid, and what are better categories to apply for than others. She’s doing a little bit more hand holding than what you are going to get from RZ or dmoz.org.

If you find the information useful, great. If not, I don’t think it is useful to question the motives of anyone in the forum without something to back it up. I’m sure you wouldn’t want others to do that to you. It only alienates others and promotes a “them and us” mentality that is not constructive.

I came here because Dogbows asked me to and I know she asked other editors also so why would she pretend to toot her own horn. If editors want to get slammed, they can just shoot on over to DP. That said I would hate to see this forum not make use of those resources that Dogbows has graciously provided either through her posts or by inviting other editors to help out in posts.

Hopefully this thread is useful to others. If not, it will die on its own without the need to question anyone’s motives.

#24 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 01:48 PM

Now Dogbows can speak for herself but I believe she started this thread to give some hints as to what are some of the common things to look out for, what mistakes to avoid, and what are better categories to apply for than others. She’s doing a little bit more hand holding than what you are going to get from RZ or dmoz.org.

Thanks jj, you know me all too well. :D As an ex-editor I can do a little more hand holding than some of the current editors are willing to do. However, I didn't start the thread to help DMOZ get more editors, but rather to encourage potentially good editors and hopefully help them understand the process better.

Tips For DMOZ Editor Wannabes………….hmmmm

Not meaning to be cheeky,or rude but when I see this kind of post I often wonder what motivates the writer to post it. I'm sure that in this instance the topic starter has the best of intentions.

Surely the best source of information on this subject is on the DMOZ website, if not. Why not?

To the best of my knowledge all the information provided here so far is on dmoz.org. Sometimes it just helps the light bulbs to go off when it is stated in a different way. With different editors posting in their own style and sometimes addressing problems that they themselves had with the application process, hopefully it will help those that want to edit, but have not yet succeeded in understanding just exactly why they have not been accepted.

Personally I think, there are two types of people who would wannabe DMOZ editors,

1. People who see it as a way to gain financially or in some other way.
2. People with nothing better to do – it’s a hobby, or passion. Call it what you will.

I have no problems with either of the two types of person I have described.

I suspect you are correct, and frankly I have no problems with either myself. However, the financially motivated applicant usually makes it so obvious that it is the main purpose in applying they seldom if ever succeed in becoming editors.

What really “scratches my Porsche” is when people describe at length the virtues and skills required to become a DMOZ editor, with the sole purpose of “telling the world” that they have those skills and virtues.

In the immortal words of Shania Twain, “that don’t impress me much”. biggrin.gif


TreV

:rofl:

Edited by dogbows, 03 May 2006 - 02:06 PM.


#25 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 01:56 PM

Not meaning to be cheeky,or rude but when I see this kind of post I often wonder what motivates the writer to post it. I'm sure that in this instance the topic starter has the best of intentions.


I'm pretty sure that Dogbows does have the best of intentions with the opening thread in this post. While she's not presently editing for the Open Directory, it's pretty obvious that it's something that she enjoyed immensely, and wanted to share some of what she picked up from there for others who might be interested, and have the time to get involved.

We discussed the post before she made it, and her intentions were to give a little insight into the application process, and make it a little easier for people who might be interested in getting involved. Nothing more at all. As she so eloquently notes in the post she published as I was writing this response. :D

Surely the best source of information on this subject is on the DMOZ website, if not. Why not?


A good question. jjwill's thoughts on that are probably on point with the concerns that the editors at the Open Directory have about the application process, and it's good to see that discussion. Thanks, jjwill.

While we could discuss what we might see as problems with the DMOZ, I'm not sure that our forum posts are going to change around their policies much. The only way to do that might be to become part of the organization, become well respected within it, and try to make positive changes from the inside.

I'd like to thank Dogbows, and the other folks from the DMOZ who've participated in this thread. Sometimes forum threads on the Open Directory can get a little contentious, so I'm really happy to see you all come out and try to steer this thread in a positive direction. I know I've learned some from the posts in this thread. Thanks.

#26 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 03:12 PM

Howdy,
bragadocchio, I was totally unaware that,

Sometimes forum threads on the Open Directory can get a little contentious.


I rarely read this section, because I'm too busy reading other parts of this forum. I only submit sites to DMOZ; I’ve never applied to become an editor, I read the guidelines once, and they seemed pretty comprehensive.

I have learned some useful stuff from this thread too, and echo your thanks to dogbows, and the other participants, the “omission of the www” mentioned earlier is good to know.

jjwill
It appears that you may have took exception to my comments, I apologise for that unconditionally.

Please feel free the question the content, or motivation behind any of my posts. I positively encourage that kind of thing. :D

TreV

Edited by manager, 03 May 2006 - 03:21 PM.


#27 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 03 May 2006 - 07:17 PM

bragadocchio, I was totally unaware that,


Yep. Maybe an understatement on my part. :)

But, I really do respect the intent behind the editors posting to this thread, and I think that there are people who would get a lot of enjoyment out of becoming editors of the Open Directory.

the “omission of the www” mentioned earlier is good to know.


Definitely! It makes it a lot easier to do some of those similarity type searches that I mentioned above.


Please feel free the question the content, or motivation behind any of my posts. I positively encourage that kind of thing. :)


Same here. :)

#28 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 04 May 2006 - 11:19 AM

What really “scratches my Porsche” is when people describe at length the virtues and skills required to become a DMOZ editor, with the sole purpose of “telling the world” that they have those skills and virtues.

Manager, I didn't respond to this earlier because it was just too funny at the time. I apologize for that. The truth of the matter is that practically every human on the face of the earth *has* the skills and virtues to become an editor. If nothing else gets through in this thread, I hope this fact does. Yes, the guidelines do seem quite comprehensive. And unfortunately it causes too many to assume they don't have a chance. It was my first inclination until an editor started encouraging me to apply. When I said at the end of my first post here, "If I can do it, anyone can" I was as serious as a heart attack. But having edited for well over a year, I can truthfully say, there was still a lot I did not understand. I am a 61 year old grandma from small town Alabama. I have very little formal education past high school. I know absolutely squat about computers and the internet. I could go on and on about what I *don't* know. Anyone applying just needs to focus on the most common general guidelines, specifically those that apply to the category they wish to edit, and have the desire to contribute some of their spare time to do so.

I repeat, if I can do it, anyone can. And yet at the same point I have seen some of the best editors I know in the Open Directory Project state publicly that it took more than a few applications for them to be accepted. My point is just don't assume it is harder than it actually is.

KISS! Keep It Simple, Silly.
;-)

#29 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 04 May 2006 - 12:59 PM

Hi dogbows,

Manager, I didn't respond to this earlier because it was just too funny at the time.

LOL It was meant to be funny! I’ve written 99.9 % of my posts with a smile on my face. :)

From reading your earlier posts in this thread, I decided that you were, both genuine, and had a sense of humour. I thought I made it clear I was not referring to you in my mini rant. I think your post will inspire many to take the plunge, and try to become editors.

There is a minority of current and ex editors, I have come across on the web who appear to adopt a superior attitude. I think I have the right to express that view, and I hope it does not cause offence. As much as I would like to provide links to blatent examples of this behaviour, I don’t feel there would be much to gain by naming and shaming these people.

I guess it’s just some of the negative terminology used to describe people who are not accepted as DMOZ editors that I find tiresome and unhelpful. Like “weeding out”, “failed” applicants, “rejects”, and so on. When this terminology is used, people like me can suggest that such authors are implying they are: “successful”, “the cream of the crop” and needed, etc etc…

I think much of this comes down to human nature, I have a friend who is always banging on about how hard to was to join his local golf club, he is really just telling me that he is part of a select club.

This doesn’t make my friend a bad person, but I often find myself reaching for the Shania Twain CD :(

TreV
Edited for typos

Edited by manager, 04 May 2006 - 01:21 PM.


#30 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 04 May 2006 - 02:42 PM

LOL It was meant to be funny! I’ve written 99.9 % of my posts with a smile on my face.

Well now it's time to let you in on the best kept secret of all, and the most important thing an applicant should possess. You absolutely have to have a really sarcastic sense of humor if you expect to make it as an editor! :)

There is a minority of current and ex editors, I have come across on the web who appear to adopt a superior attitude. I think I have the right to express that view, and I hope it does not cause offence. As much as I would like to provide links to blatent examples of this behaviour, I don’t feel there would be much to gain by naming and shaming these people.

Oh my, you've seen those too! :yuk: Why oh why do you think I chose this forum? :(
I agree wholeheartedly, but the part I found most enjoyable about my editing career was all the wonderful friends I made from around the globe that I would not have otherwise met. There are many, many more of them than there are of the ones you describe. Unfortunately, most of them do not participate in external forums, so it is easy to assume that about all editors.
:crybaby:

#31 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 04 May 2006 - 04:11 PM

Off topic,

the part I found most enjoyable about my editing career was all the wonderful friends I made from around the globe that I would not have otherwise met.

dogbows, you strike me as the sort of person who would make a lot of friends wherever you go. :) Nice to see you here !

TreV

#32 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 04 May 2006 - 10:40 PM

dogbows, you strike me as the sort of person who would make a lot of friends wherever you go. :) Nice to see you here !

TreV


Ahhhh, so now that I have made you fall hopelessly and madly in love me, have you picked out the category you want to edit, yet? :rofl:

Edited by dogbows, 04 May 2006 - 10:42 PM.


#33 Juliette

Juliette

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 05 May 2006 - 02:56 AM

I know this sounds very twee, but as someone who previously felt a bit put off by all the regulations, dogbows has really encouraged me to try again. I'll apply this weekend and let you know how it goes. :)

#34 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 05 May 2006 - 10:18 AM

Juliette, there will always be some good and some bad with any organization. There are a lot of things I don't agree with about the running of DMOZ. However, the application process is not one of them. Lowering the standards or doing too much hand holding through the process has only proven that other editors then have to clean up after those who didn't quite grasp it up front. I may have only made a small contribution, but I believe that some of what I contributed would have never been done otherwise.

Make sure you save a copy of the application and good luck! :)

Edited by dogbows, 05 May 2006 - 10:24 AM.


#35 jjwill

jjwill

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 05 May 2006 - 02:38 PM

Yes Juliette, good luck and don't get discouraged if you don't make it the first time. :D

#36 lmocr

lmocr

    Unlurked Energy

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 05 May 2006 - 05:45 PM

I may have only made a small contribution, but I believe that some of what I contributed would have never been done otherwise.

I had to register just so I could say this - that is so not true. Dogbows made a huge contribution (and hopefully will again in the future)!!! :applause:

#37 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 05 May 2006 - 06:01 PM

Awwww! Thanks, lmocr, but you and I both know that you tend to fall in the category of being just a wee bit prejudice where I am concerned. :D

I am very glad to see you participating here. By all means please continue to do so. I appreciate all the editors who have contributed to this thread.
:cheers:

#38 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 06 May 2006 - 03:04 AM

have you picked out the category you want to edit, yet?

Just to answer your question, dogbows. I was thinking about applying to become a dmoz editor, I ‘m still not entirely convinced that it would be right for me. It’s not due to fear of rejection. It’s largely due to what I’ve found whilst reading about the experiences of applicants, editors and ex editors. I tend to want to know what I’m getting involved in before committing myself. :)

Before I ran my own business, I had to go for job interviews like most other people.
I tended to research the organisations and positions I was applying to /for before arrival at the interview; this was partly to show that I was keen, and partly to establish if the organisation or position was right for me.

Where I found that there was an unusually high staff turnover in the organisation generally, or in the position I was applying for, it would trigger alarm bells. Sometimes I found could gain more of an insight into the culture of an organisation by speaking informally with the people within in an organisation.

I think it is unfair that some dmoz editors have suffered abuse in public forums. In some cases were people suffer abuse it makes then become defensive, that’s only natural in my opinion. However it could be argued that when people get defensive it impinges on their objectivity. I often wonder why people declare that they are editors, given that there is seldom a requirement to do so.

Personally speaking, when someone states that they are a dmoz editor; I may be guilty of subconsciously judging then by the standards they expect from applicants. This is in much the same way as people expect police officers to have high standards of conduct whether they are on or off duty. In addition if someone states that they are a dmoz editor, and I see clear evidence that they lack basic comprehension skills it makes think badly of dmoz, rightly or wrongly. There is no insinuations in this post, I've written precisely, and what I wanted to say. I enjoy healthy discussion and debate. :)

#39 dogbows

dogbows

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 06 May 2006 - 09:15 AM

That's all understandable and I don't disagree. Only you can decide if you have the drive and desire to edit. It's not right for everyone. The directory is far from perfect, and I suspect that it will always be that way. However, I do feel I must comment on this one statement.

In addition if someone states that they are a dmoz editor, and I see clear evidence that they lack basic comprehension skills it makes think badly of dmoz, rightly or wrongly.


In this case just make sure you consider the possibility that what you perceive to be lack of comprehension skills might be an editor who edits in World in their native tonque where comprehension skills could be very good but less evident if they are not communicating in their native tongue when you make that judgement. ;-)

#40 jjwill

jjwill

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 07 May 2006 - 08:26 PM

Well dmoz is what you make it. You can be involved as much or as little as you want. There are editors that love to edit in teams and others who do it with very little contact with any other editor or admin. You can get envolved in the internal forums or not. The only real requirements are following the guidelines and edit once in a while ( i think its once every three months or you become inactive). It's really not a big deal unless you make it one. :)



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users