Please show us what part of editor application tests people on understanding DMOZ listing concepts and the ability to follow ODP guidelines. Look at the other thread about 2257, it looks like an Admin and a former editall can not agree on what ODP guideline means, so how does people who apply to become an editor should know?
Hi, As I understand it some of you are DMOZ editors, could you please read my replies on that thread and give your opinion with regards to the guidelines on shopping categories, in regional sections. I think it is pretty crystal, and in fact no different to "shopping" categories in "top", but I would love some input from more editors. Thank you. The other editors' silence on that point is telling, imo, but we'll see. Also although I think it is clear that Motsa is patently wrong, s/he has not turned it into a contest, locked the thread, or anything similar. Which is commendable in my book, as s/he has the ability to do so, and I know many in that position who have done, akin to a child sitting on their toybox. I don't think that inference from Motsa's post is correct. Motsa clearly states s/he had not read the application and was only speculating. My citation of the problems with the websites I listed were infact to do with their violation of the dmoz rules. What you are implying therefore is that the rules are there to be ignored, and a better dmoz editor is one who does so? That makes little sense to me, unfortunately. It is, however, their party and they may play the music however they wish. But it does not help their cause, it does not ensure quality categories with quality inputs and it does not ensure they are up to date. The addition, deletion and management of websites in each category is surely a necessary evil, since the internet, as with everything else in life is not static and changes will at some point be required. To leave it to the state where half the entries for a category are in violation of the directory's rules and guidelines is detrimental to directory and its reputation. Thanks for your replies.
So by just writing 3 URL and a short description that you can actually copy from the URL itself, they can judge if you have understanding of DMOZ listing concepts and the ability to follow ODP guidelines. They are wasting their time by volunteering as Meta, they can join the Human resource department of big corporations when they can judge applicants suitability for a job by just looking at their names and 1 or 2 line in their resume.
hi alcas, I edit in both regional and shopping and yes, the guidelines are quite different as to what sites are listable and how you describe them. You can't apply the Shopping top cat guidelines to the Regional shopping category listings. Regional sites must be have a physical presence in that region as apposed to Shopping cat. Also the description of a regional shopping cat usually describes what the business does and what you will find on the site. Shopping top cat usually tells what you will find on the site. Those are only a couple of the main differences. Hope that helps.
I know gworld that this concept is hard for you to follow but thats ok. Yes it is easy to see from the above info to see if the applicate has at least the basic concepts in place in order to handle the easiest of categories. Now stop wasting thread space.
Hi jjwill, Thank you very much for your answer. However, what you have posted is not validated by the regional shopping, united kingdom section (which is the relevant section in this discussion, although I am sure the others are the same too). I quote from page: http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Shopping/desc.html as follows: As you can see where I have highlighted, it requires the three elements, OR it must be a major retailer with a real physical presence. A single shop owned by a one man band is not permissible. It clearly states chain stores. Any other input from anyone or is it fair to conclude I was right? The dmoz guidelines are misunderstood by many editors, therefore crushing the notion that to be an editor you must most importantly understand the dmoz guidelines and rules? ps jjwill, in no way do I intend on being rude to you. I know the internet being a special beast is one that is very easy to misconstrue messages, often with both conveyor and the recipient to blame! I hope you have not taken offence to anything I have written.
That is funny, to find a suitable sites for a category and write those 3 URL descriptions, should not take more than 10-20 minutes for any half intelligent person. On the other hand we have people who have posted in DP that have wasted many hours and they have even given their application to editors to check for correctness and still haven't been accepted. The rational conclusion must be that either present editors don't know how to suggest web sites and write descriptions or the URLs that you suggest really doesn't matter.
Unfortunately this is true for some editors (im sure you dont know of any ). So I guess your premise is faulty if the applicant asks for advice from the wrong editor. Go ahead gworld and get your usual last word in on a boring, non-productive topic.
You are just too funny, so according to you, the editors had the understanding of DMOZ listing concepts and the ability to follow ODP guidelines since their application was accepted but after being an editor for awhile they lost the ability and can not suggest or write descriptions but they continue to be editor. It seems being an editor doesn't improve the mental capacity of a person and it has a reverse effect instead.
I edit mainly Shopping and Regional. In my opinion you are wrong, jjwill and motsa are correct. You can either reread the guidelines until you understand why or quit trying. It's up to you to decide what you want to do.
Hi compostannie, I will not be reapplying for the editor position, and since the rejection is unlikely to be due to that, you advice carries little merit. Can I also suggest that *you* reread the guidelines until you understand it better. It does not reflect well on you that you are unable to understand your dmoz structure and dmoz category guidelines well. But I am sure there is a reason you were chosen as an editor.
No offence taken. Are you sure you have read http://dmoz.org/guidelines/ http://dmoz.org/guidelines/regional/ http://dmoz.org/guidelines/regional/listing.html at least 2 or 3 times? Its all in there. Or did you only read http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Shopping/desc.html
Alcas the editors of DMOZ are much friendlier here and supportive. Why not try again. I was rejected too the first time but I will try again.
^^^ Yea practice makes perfect. Just review your app, see what you done wrong, or what you can do better from the possible reasons you were given in your rejection email.
LOL I have to laugh at gworld's posts when he makes up something out of nothing. Its that quick wit thing.. Gworld can pull a rabit out of a hat
I was top level Regional with a side of Shopping. The guidelines governing what is listed in each in the overlap area is very complicated and many if not most editors got them wrong for years, including metas and admins and me. There are not many who fully understand it and apply it properly even now. I would have serious reservations about a new editor trying to understand them when what guidelines do exist are at times contradictory and a bit fuzzy. And that is without adding the additional UK Regional differences. http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Shopping/desc.html That looks to me to be the correct Regional description. Though some other cat descriptions in UK...Shopping are wrong. I don't understand the problem here or what you are saying is wrong alcas, after reading both this thread and the RZ one. Motsa is saying you were wrong on 7 of your 11 calls but deleted the URLs and the reasons you gave. Feel free to publish the full list and reasons here, they won't be deleted. I can see at least one listed in the cat that I think is wrong that wasn't one of the 4 motsa accepted but could be on your list of errors. Also what were your sample sites - it may be someone can shed some light on what might have been wrong with them.
For the avoidance of doubt, I will break up the guidelines and give my explanations. For your information, Motsa has declined to answer whether s/he agrees those dmoz guidelines apply to that category, his/her initial statement was that regional does not carry the same guidelines as top shopping. link to the relevant page: http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Shopping/desc.html This instructs you to find the most relevant category within shopping to list your site. Which in turn implies that ALL of the guidelines on this page are relevant to ALL categories under this one (shopping). This reinforces my notion that sites which are NOT able to offer online shopping should be present within their locality. The line I have made bold is in contradiction of the reality of it. And I could have a cheap shot at Motsa and claim s/he does not like to have sites removed or edited left right and centre, but I won't as I think it would be out of context of his/her argument, although not out of context of reality. I have again made bold those lines most relevant to this discussion. As clear as crystal the guidelines lay down the fact that PRICES must be evident, and it should be a site where a user can order goods from the comfort of his own home, OTHERWISE the site should be in the local category relevant to the entry. UNLESS the website is for a CHAIN STORE (i.e. MAJOR RETAILER). No "ifs" and no "buts". The remainder of the guideline details certain further guidelines for differing categories, ALL of which are categories under the SHOPPING category, in Regional UK. Thus cementing the concept that the guidelines shown on that page are relevant to ALL those below it, otherwise they would not be there. Finally IF we were to accept that perhaps those guidelines under Regional UK, Shopping, were indeed not relevant to the categories below, what *are* they relevant too, then? Since that category has no entries? Nor can entries be suggested?
Not only editors should not have knowledge about the subject or web but also should be able to think in contradictory and fuzzy way.