Can Someone Act as Proxy in Applying to Become an Editor

I would like to hire someone to apply to be a DMOZ editor on my part as no matter how many times I apply I keep getting rejected.

The category I am applying to does not have any editors yet I keep getting rejected.

I think if someone created a proxy dmoz editor application service it would be well received by the many people who keep getting rejected by the Meta Editors.

 

Do you really think that submitting a fake application is a good indication of your honesty?
In any case, I have already explained to you that as long as you are honest and careful with your application, and provided you follow all the advice people have spent time giving you, there was no reason why you could not re-apply.

 

No I dont really want to do that.

What I want is for the DMOZ Volunteer Team to:

1. Answer their emails in a timely manner.
2. Make it easier to become an Editor.
3. If they are not going to list a Suggested URL, it would be nice if they contacted the site owner and gave an actual reason for not doing so and not a generic multi-answer that is basically meaningless.

If they cannot do the above then I think they should all be fired and the entire thing restructured, cause it just aint working no more.

 

Well, I'm sure AOL would appreciate your insightful comments and suggestions for improvement, so perhaps drop them a line?

 

And such is the response from ODP Editors. Agreeing with me would be so hard? Am I wrong?

 

hard to believe ODP editorial volunteer work have something to do with honesty

 

You don't need a proxy for applying. Just think a little bit about what they want. A middle aged stupid person who doesn't know very much about Internet and won't rock the boat for senior editors. I know what I am talking about because at one time I had about 10 editors account.
After you get in, you can join the senior editors club by proving that you are at least as dishonest as they are and you are ready to not only close your eye to corruption but also defend and engage in it.

 

Wow. You want to pay someone to apply for editorship for you....to a FREE directory?

And what happens if you are accepted by DMOZ? Are you going to hire this proxy to edit for you after you become an editor?

 

As I have explained, volunteer editors come from all age groups, most countries, and all levels of educational backgrounds.
We have teenaged editors through to people in their 70's. There are hundreds with high level degrees, and many others who may not have finished high school. There are techno whizzes, techno dummies, people who manage large corporations and others with nothing more than an old laptop at home. And every other group in between.
The only requirements are a computer, an interest in building the directory, honesty, and a willingness to spend some spare time improving the internet.

 

Not at all. I was not posting on behalf of the ODP or anyone else. I was simply pointing out that you will need to send your suggestions to the people who own and run the directory.
Volunteer editors have nothing to do with "restructuring the directory" or any other operational matters.

 

And pigs fly too.

I know about teenager editors, especially the one that DMOZ gave access to adult section which is full of illegal and underground porn.
Another of DMOZ volunteers mystery is about all the middle aged women from middle America (Who traditionally must be very conservative) who are Admins and Metas but are such big supporter of illegal and underground porns.
From experience of experimenting with different profiles, I can certainly claim that middle aged stupid person has the highest chance of being accepted as editor.

 

honestly I don't think is important to know who's one or another editor from some categories or so on ... actually is not important how much time they are doing the job they are pretend to do with honestly and of course to try to respect the rules which they are claiming to do , BUT ... I`m very curiousness to know what will happen with the editor who added for example the MLM/get rich scheme site which I said before , or the editor who added the clone sub domain .... even with young editors like gwolrd said up he have access to edit on adult category ... maybe hes at legal age on hes jurisdictions ... ( there for example is a felony to leave unrestricted access to adult stuff's for kids with less than 18 years ... )

 

I added a site fairly recently that I had not spotted did not comply, fortunately I don't think I do that often. If I did I would expect that my knuckles would be wrapped and if I continued to list sites that clearly broke guidelines I would expect to be removed.

So even relatively senior editors sometimes make mistakes, sometimes other editors find them, sometimes they are found by the public and reported.

But remember too, that sites change their content also and we do our best to try and keep the lists up to date but with millions of sites that can prove difficult. On my own dashboard I have about 10,000 sites formerly listed that have been checked by machines and found wanting and removed from public view. They wait for an editor to check them and either dump them or if now OK then return to pubic access. I shall probably spend the next few weeks of editing time checking some of those sites, just as I have spent the last few doing that. No sites will be looked at, by me, from the submitted q and none searched and found.

Some of the critics on here are just bitter because they were removed, others are webmasters who are bitter because they have not been listed but if none of us volunteered to put ourselves into the firing line, like here, we could just get on with editing and ignore some of the real questions that some people want to ask or information they want. Remember too for those who seek listing that if editors get fed up with the abuse on open forums and cut down or give up editing, then there is even less chance you will be listed and the q's get longer.

If you are an ex-editor who has been booted then there is little to say to you, nothing will quench the fire you feel against us, I feel sorry for you, to webmasters who have not been listed then apply to become and editor. Not an easy process you have to read the guidelines, but you all complain when a site listed does not comply, so why would we want more editors who can't read guidelines and comply. Yes you have to be scrupulously honest, but which of you wants us to have editors who are less than that?

Instead of whinging and whining get something done that really will get the q's down and allow you to make constructive comments about the way forward for DMOZ.

 

It seem it is more of your own personal problem that considers the truth, a form of abuse. There were many active and past editors who were and are welcome to all the forums because of their honesty, while the dishonest ones who only repeat the official line of BS, feel abused and in line of fire because the users will keep refuting their BS and lies.

 

Good reasoning, gworld, all past editors tell the truth all present ones tell lies, even for you that seems a new low.

 

That was not what I said. Both Annie and one eye were editors and they were welcome in the forum. It was only when they opened their eyes too much about the real situation in DMOZ that they became past editors.

 

At first glance I was going to say "Yes, you get it at last!" but then I realised you are accusing me of being a dishonest BS artist, so I revert to my previous opinion of you. Sad.

And I am still proud to consider Annie and oneeye my friends. *waves*

 

I don't know why my post should effect your opinion about me, I have no control over reality.

With friends like you, who needs an enemy?

 

Exactly. I neither need or seek enemies, because after all, I use the internet only for diversion, not for profit.

 

Well no I`m not an ex-editor , actually I think you understand well the story from the other thread ( my application was rejected within 73 minutes , and I truly believe wasn't even checked , just automatically rejected by a machine , the emails which come on my inbox was automatically generated and didn't had even one pixel human made ! )
Sites which I`m saying there ( and everywhere on other of my replies and posts from this forum and RZ forums : 1. didn't changed the content since was created - web.archive.org cant be edited by ODP editors thanks god / 2. didn't changed the owner - the whois records for the domains cant be edited also / 3. the propose of the domains ( like Jim named before ) isn't seems to be changed over the time ... / 4. mistakes ? well mistakes are human ! that's make this world to move , and anyone can understand when the mistakes are done and everyone can try to fix them ; BUT in this case - with this story - and with so experienced editors there is truly HARD TO BELIEVE even worst editor even had DMOZ will can be capable to add such sites which I named there like examples ! none will think even a second this can be true .