I've sent an application to become an editor on saturday, and I was wondering how long they usually take to review these applications. Do they receive a lot of applications ? Does anyone know the acceptance rate?
Obvious rejects - such as forgetting to answer a question or failing to provide 2 or 3 examples - are usually dealt with pretty quickly. After that, it's down to waiting for a volunteer meta editor to process it. The majority are handled within a couple of weeks and very few wait over a month. Some folks take time off over the holidays so it might take a little longer at the moment. I don't work in your chosen category's area but I must say that, with over 300 listings, it looks rather too large for a trainee . Yes, there are quite a few applications most days. The quality of the applications varies a lot by sector and so do the acceptance rates .
Generally you will get a reply within two weeks. If you have not gotten word after those 14 days you can ask about your application status, then can ask again after another 14 days... though generally you'll get a reply within the first week after submitting or at least the week after you first ask (week three). There are rare instances where your application gets lost in the shuffle of things and that is generally the cause of them allowing you to ask after the first two weeks...
Amazing Q edited for about 10 minutes, listed his own site faster than a ferret diving into a rabbit hole and now corrects what a meta, who actually accepts or declines new applications, says. You sure are some knowledgeable dude. NOT.
Are you just trolling? I think you are... My site was on my application and listed as an affiliated site. If there was something wrong with the site or my affiliation with it then I would not have been accepted... correct? It does seem that I am more knowledgeable then you are... http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10705] It's nice that at least ex-editors know what they are talking about... EDIT: The more you force me to back up the things I say by calling me a liar or what I say is untrue in some fashion the more proof I come up with that I am right...and if I am right that makes you wrong, and if you are wrong what does that say about what YOU are doing? Now please, before you call me out on some other thing you think I'm trying to lie about keep in mind I have yet to lie, I have provided links and quotes to back up the things I've said, and all you've ever done is troll. Heck, you've even disagreed with me when I've said the same things that you've said. You are looking VERY silly and are making ALL of the editors look like fools. Now the next time you wish to call me out make sure I'm actually wrong... ok?
The OP posts a question about how long it takes to get an application approved, gets an accurate answer, then along you come quoting resource-zone requirements for their status checks as being the authoritative answer as how long it takes to be approved. Status checks are quite different to editor applications. Why don't you go and play your flagaitious games elsewhere? Nearly everything you have done relating to the ODP, is, has been, and continues to be a hidden agenda built on a pryamid of lies and half truths.
Give us a break you guys. This isn't the season for petty bickering and squabbling about nothing. In fact I don't think that there is one. If you think that somebody is trolling, just ignore them and they'll starve soon enough. Oh and happy holidays .
Okay thanks for the replies fellas although some of use have deviated slightly off topic . Anyways, I have applied for a category with more than 300 links so I guess my chances are really low then. Oh and Merry Christmas!
Yes a category of around 300 sites is considered too large. My advice would be for you to wait until you get the rejection letter, and then apply for a smaller category - maybe a subcategory if there is one. If you can't get inspirations, I suggest looking at the Regional category for the place that you live - either that, or a subcategory, is usually a good starting spot, and you probably know the place pretty well. It's a good place to get your feet wet in the ODP pool, anyway.
since you did not have any obvious chance of knowing that the category you were applying to had 300 listings waiting , a rejection letter is the least of your problems , and is probably a good thing just try to apply for the regional or a smaller topical area and soon you can easily reapply for a bigger category i am sure.
I perhaps wasn't very clear. The requested K&T category has over 300 websites listed and clearly shows that from the public side. I didn't mention how many URLs were awaiting evaluation .
Jim did not give a time frame in his first reply. I did give a time, and gave a time based on DMOZ resources. Was my answer truly unhelpful? Was giving him the knowledge that he could check on the status of his application after two weeks some how bad advice? If it is, then why on earth would RZ bother to be so unhelpful... Yes, helping the OP by answering his question is some how a bad thing... Though I can say that every time I am helpful and and then told that I am a liar by editors certainly is playing into my hands. Its making the editors calling me out look like fools. Read my post, I gave a fair answer. An editor came in said my answer was bad, and then the editor made it personal by pointing out my edit count. Tell me just who is building up a pyramid of lies and half truths... I've yet to lie, I've given links and and other resources. All those that keep saying I am a liar have given nothing but their own post counts to back themselves up. If me quoting RZ sticky threads is your version of my telling a lie, what does that say about my source? If me giving links to ODP guidelines are half truths, what does that say about the ODP guidelines? Come on, do better then call me a liar, prove that I am lying... I'm also still waiting on you to find me another editor to back up your claims about following the ODP guidelines to get a DMOZ listing is shakey advice It's really strange that the two editors that won't give their names are the ones that are really spreading lies...
Oops, sorry, you did. I get frustrated with people calling me out so often without actually answering things themselves I overlooked that upon replying to other supposed editors. Either way though, I expanded on your answer and didn't contradict you or shed you in a bad light... and I certainly was not lying about what I said.
Its normal with 2,647 posts to be frustrated and not reading what others are writing...Merry Christmas
Yes it is. Must be the same trouble with Nebby & Revr as well. I man how dare they say my quoting official rules is a lie! LOL They simply must not be really reading my posts. Though do you have an excuse for posting completely off topic here to make a personal jab... you must be an editor ? I'm sure the original poster in this thread is grateful for your supposed help.
What you should see Q, is that you did not add anything to what Jim said that was useful and it was dubious. Remember that next time you add to someone who actually does the job that you are commenting on. When you have no idea at all what is involved and quote stuff from unofficial ODP sources and quote a link that has nothing to do with becoming an editor. I suggest you look at who is making themselves a fool. I trust that through the sludge you generated, Q, that the OP could find what they wanted.
If the members/editors at RZ are not official and should not be listened too, then the editors here certainly are not worthy of a second glance. If showing a member that they can ask for a status check is not helpful in the application process, maybe the status check system needs to be done away with. Again, linking up to the sticky threads at RZ that deal specifically with becoming an editor are unhelpful... it's strange that they are even there. Sorry that I tried to help. In the future, so that I actually give useful advice, mind pointing to an official and worthy source that I can quote... or are such things against the ODP guidelines? (keep in mind that the guidelines according to you and Nebby are not worthy of being quoted, and/or not worthy of being followed). Lastly, if RZ is not an official source for DMOZ, then why does DMOZ link to it? Talk about spreading half truths and lies... what is the ODP doing in pointing people to something other then the official blog? If me quoting that source is some how bad, even though I was quoting a post written by a senior editor, is some how false, then I simply am unsure how any one can ever be helpful...