becoming a DMOZ editor

good luck with getting applied, its usually only oxford math grads that get positions.

 

Can I get the source of your statistics, and maybe some additional proof that I am an Oxford Math Grad... as that would really help me find a job.

I don't know why you picked the name 'debunker' unless of course you are just posting to be debunked. Please refrain from posting lies and/or false information in the future, as when you post something the burden of proof is upon you to back up what is posted.

Without such proof, you just look silly. For instance, how many of the people that have graduated oxford really make up the 75,151 editors that have been accepted?

The best way to become an editor is to simply fill out the application using sites that are not listed within the directory but that fit with being listed. it also really helps to follow the guidelines in filling in the site titles and descriptions. Not all that much math involved really, in fact, had there been math on the application I likely would have been rejected

 

Yikes. Do I qualify as a summa cum laude as I got accepted multiple times.

Seriously as long as you know how to make a good description and knows your subject area very well, the chances of approval are good for anyone. It doesn't take a graduate of a prestigious school to be accepted. Many have tried and succeeded and if you won't you will never know.

 

I applied today for the personal blog category at letter R and after half of hour got my denial email.

ROFL

 

What was the reason?

 

They don't write the exact reason, just list the general ones:

 

Well, which reason do you think it was?

 

Lol Rezo. Knowing you might be guilty of all of it.

If I were you go back to the category you've applied for study the descriptions and be honest dude.

 

I think it's because :

My personal blog starts with R. It's one of the reasons that brought me to that category, but I applied there because I thought it's an easy one to get in so I can later proceed the more advanced ones.



I am re-applying for another letter, let's see if it'll work this time.

 

You are allowed to apply for a category using your own site, so it is not just that, or Q would not have got in for that reason as well as not being a Cambridge graduate.

 

Not sure what category you are talking about but if you are talking about http://www.dmoz.org/Society/People/Personal_Homepages/Weblogs/R/ its probably going to be to broad for a new editor to start out in. There are over 100 listed sites and the likely to receive too many suggested sites (and miss-suggested sites) for an editor trainee to begin with.

Applying to a smaller letter area like "O" for example is more likely to be an acceptable place for a new editor to begin. Less than 100 listed sites in the category being applied to is the normal recommendation, 50-75 listed sites is a better suggestion in most cases.

 

Sheesh you all are fast typers, or I am still frozen from the 1 F degree temps this morning. Having a site that would be or is included in the category is not a problem. Having many undeclared ones might be though. Without knowing the category or having seen your application, I would guess that you either didn't supply samples sites that would be listed in that category (or perhaps they are already listed) or more likely the category was just deemed to broad for a trainee. Reapplying for a smaller letter category would be the best advice.

 

ROFL here's the response for the application on the other letter:

 

Go figure, I nailed it.

Which letter did you try out this time?

 

One year of high school here, so I guess you don't need to be too smart to become an editor, .

 

Don't tempt us to a comment

 

I was rejected because i didnt disclose the sites that I am affiliated with, I have a lot of sites that have nothing to do with the category I am wanting to review, is it really necessary to list them all?
and how should you present them? I basically put: abc.com - owner , xyz.com -partner ... is this sufficient or should one describe their affiliation more thoroughly?

 

I too, still one month ago

 

It is so, but now. What if you receive more editing privs later?

Yes, its free

More information is more, but IMHO even with short descriptions there wont be a problem.

Wish you luck with your next application

 

A straight list of URLs is fine. We like descriptions such as owner, client, wrote content but don't need them. Anything more than that is definitely overkill (We have to read this stuff ).

The main thing is to ensure that the list is complete .