My Experience with DMOZ

So I applied to become a DMOZ editor and got declined (twice)

I applied for this category Controls...PLC which has nothing to do with any of the sites I own, run, or have worked on...

I'm an Electrical engineer by education and thought I could help DMOZ.

The response I got the first time was that "I hadn't list all my sites in the application" . Which i hadn't. I hadn't list the websites I worked on couple years ago.

So I filled another application with a long list of sites I have ever worked on.

I got the application denied for the same reason...


until now I really thought there weren't enough volunteers to make DMOZ better, but now I see that's not the case...

I filed a complaint/post in DMOZ forum to have my application re-reviewed but I'm not about to spend another half an hour filling out a complete DMOZ application...

 

Well, that's a shame, when someone spent some of their own hobby time to review your applications and provide you with advice for preparing a more successful one.
Many current editors were accepted only after taking note of the advice they were given, and taking the time to make a complete or careful application, but if you consider that even that would take too much time, perhaps editing is not for you after all.
The integrity of the ODP depends on the honesty of its editors, and even a quick glance at threads here will show you that even one dishonest editor can cause huge problems, so great care is taken in reviewing editor applications. A good general rule is that if you are not sure whether a site could be considered as an "affiliation", it is best to include it in your list, and there is plenty of room for explanations as well.

 

i dont think you read my post at all, did you?

perhaps you are another one of DMOZ people reading application half way

 

I did read your post. Did you read mine?
All applications are handled by volunteers, so if they took the time to send specific comments it was because they wanted to help you with a future application. If you decide not to take that advice (or mine), that is absolutely OK, but please don't criticise the volunteers who try to help.

 

i have tried several times, all failed, got the same answers as yours.

 

My application was complete and the reviewer's comment were not true about me filing an incomplete application. I challenged the admins/moderators on the DMOZ forum to show me one single website that I own or had worked on and didn't list in the application. They of course havent come up with one yet.

It seems to me that DMOZ doesn't want webmasters with many websites at all. So they give the reason of "incomplete application". That's fine. Its their site and their rules. but they can't go around complaining about the lack of number of editors and blame their slow response rate to submissions on it.

 

Not at all!
There are many editors with loads of websites, and the public guidelines make it very clear that everyone is welcome to join the community, regardless of their associations, provided they are honest about them, and provided they edit fairly.
To quote:

As I have explained, every application is carefully reviewed by an experienced meta editor or catmod, and if they advised you to submit a more complete list with your next application, they had good reason to believe your previous list was incomplete. It should not be necessary for them to tell you which websites you have owned, contributed content to, designed, hosted, promoted etc.
Surely you are the best person to know that.

As I have also stressed, rather than feeling upset about being unsuccessful, why not simply re-apply in line with the advice you have been given, as countless others have done, successfully?

And as for

No editor would ever do that, because we do not "respond" to "submissions" at all. They are nothing more than one resource we can use if we want to, and there are far better ways of finding good websites than simply looking at those suggested by other people.

Well, if you got the same advice more than once, it seems you did not follow it in subsequent applications. Had you done so, you might well have been successful. That's precisely why the advice is given, after all.

 

My application wouldnt be any more complete than it already was...

you seem to be someone from DMOZ caring about how they look on this forum. so what is the hard part about mentioning one website that i own/contributed to and it wasnt listed on the application? lol

 

The usual blah, blah and nonsense with nothing of any use to say.

You got it, some people here can only repeat the guideline like a parrot in order to find an excuse for everything which is wrong with DMOZ but no brain to discuss anything.

 

We're still waiting for gworld to name the sites he has repeatedly accused me of listing abusively.
Until then I think we can safely ignore him as an untrustworthy troll.
So to return to the topic ...

I'm not sure how that would help at all, and it would not be a sensible use of my time, when you have already had feedback on your previous applications.
I have encouraged you to re-apply, and if you are sure that a reviewer could not find any affiliations not mentioned on your application, then you will have done as much as you can in that regard, and you can concentrate on making the rest of your application as acceptable as possible, by careful selection of sites, and reading the editor guidelines to help you with titles and descriptions.

 

I would have to agree with gworld, and not ignore his comment at all.

It will help clear up DMOZ application reviewer's claims. I am saying that the allegation of not-complete application is baseless and i (and many others) have been denied because DMOZ doesn't want webmasters with many websites on their moderators.

DMOZ might not care at all about me and my application but as you can see obviously on this thread (and positive comments I have received in PM for this thread) this is an issue that many webmasters want answers to.

My personal interest of being a DMOZ editor is over. I wouldn't want to put my personal time for a website that operates this way

 

It takes no time to apply for becoming an editor. I can usually make one in about 10 minutes. the most important part is to show that you are stupid and won't see what is happening once you are in or you are too much of a suck up to say anything about it.

 

DMOZ isn't run by people it is run by automated bots pretending to be humans giving generic replies to questions, markhod post are your best proof - there are about two dozen sentences which are constantly repeated and since they are still working on the bot those replies often have little to do with your questions.

This is old news, you have to lie and invent completely bogus personalty which cannot be traced on the net and then your in, but if they find you on Digitalpoint you are labeled as evil webmaster and part of the world conspiracy against DMOZ.

LOL! Who writes your PR texts? I need few done for my website and your author is doing first class job.

It is amazing how with such careful process there are so many editor removals (including very experienced ones) and with all removals being permanent while on the other hand projects like Wikipedia are letting even anonymous users edit (and link there is worth thousand times more then at DMOZ) and make permanent bans only on repeat offenders.

Not to mention everyone knows why was somebody banned at wiki while at DMOZ that is a great secret which only metas are allowed to know.

 

Editors with a little experience can usually figure out the reason without being privy to the meta forums, we all understand the rules, and there's really no reason to drag an editor through the mud publicly for abusing the trust that was placed in him/her. These are usually friends that we've worked with.

Being banned is humiliating enough, and no one else needs to know the reasons or the methods that were used to discover it. It's enough to know that the rules are applied equally from new editors all the way up to meta editors, and I've personally seen it happen.

It is always disappointing and sad, and it always makes us angry that the editor put themselves in a position that made it neccessary. On the other hand, it's good to hoe out the bad apples from among the honest ones.

 

You can say what ever you like, it still sounds like garbage and is totally untrue.

I operate a number of sites, one listed in dmoz, the others are unlistable. I applied to become an editor and actually had to re-apply NUMEROUS times, due to making small mistakes. The application itself is a learning tool....you either learn, reapply and hopefully get accepted or you give up. The choice is yours. Personally, i believe the spoilt attitude and sour grapes that you are displaying because you got rejected speaks for itself.

Regarding webmasters wanting answers......they are neither entitled to one, nor will be given one. DMOZ is not a listing service or a tool for webmasters and the volunteer editors have far more useful ways in which to donate their time.

 

LOL.

What do people learn? How to be on their knees all the time and kiss A*S?

 

GWORLD....you have a way of always trying to find the "bad side" in things. Always implying something is wrong, someone is kissing butt, or whatever.

The guy made some claims, I refuted them and as usual, you submit negative comments. You must have a very sad existence to be so negative all the time. Perhaps you should consider counselling? It may help with your mental well being.

Regards

 

gworld is a troll, snooks.
He can't even answer the repeated requests to name even one of the sites he accuses me of listing abusively.
Just ignore him like the rest of us.

 

Even when editor explicitly ask for so called evidence to be show in public? Since no such evidence has been shown I can only conclude that no evidence exist and that my removal was illegal based solely on personal grudge by some meta after reading my posts here.

Often when something is hidden and considered confidential it turns out to be everything but just and equal, usually it allows abuse, favoritism and personal grudges to take over but we already know that is how metas work on daily basis.

To me it seems that bad apples are the ones kicking honest ones out I'm seeing same thing happening now on Croatian Wikipedia (some other smaller wikis probably also have similar problem) but that is much hard to do at wiki beacuse other editors have actually voice and wont get removed if they dare to speak against admin so DMOZ with all its secrecy and zero rights to normal editors is no surprise.

 

How did you refute him? have you read his application? Do you have any proof that his application was not complete?
People like you is exactly what is wrong with DMOZ. Only editors who are to kiss a Meta's A*S at any time and agree with them, no matter what, can stay in the long run.