DMOZ Submission Reward - $1K

how many active editors are there in DMOZ?

I am talking about those who do something at least once a week and have been for say at least 6 months?

 

At this precise moment, 4.

Of course, some of them are still sleeping... and 7 or 8 are having a shower.

 

I don't believe that that number is available anywhere, internally or externally. Sorry.

 

It is now -- post #102

 

Only 4? Did one of them die?

 

No... statutory holiday in her part of the world, Gazelle...

 

Oh.. I want a holiday. Maybe I will move to that part of the world.

 

anyone get this guy listed and recieve their $1000 yet?

 

I believe Bradley did - he hasn't been back in a while

 

the opposite is more likely to have happened.

 

If any editor tries to list his site they will almost certainly be terminated.

 

Ah. Feel the love. Feel the objectivity.

 

you sure? says here I've posted on digitalpoint every day this week except the 19th where I was away

 

Really, that is the first I've ever heard of that one. Didn't you guys tell me before that it's ok for an editor to list his/her own site?

 

macdesign didn't mean "his site" as in "the editor's site"... he meant "his site" as in "the original poster's site".

 

Oh, that should be self explanatory of course.

 

You'd think so, wouldn't you?

 

It should be self explanatory that an editor listing a site that has offered a reward to get listed, would be fired for doing so, yes.

 

My original post was open to misinterpretation, thanks for the correction.

An editor can list his own site, provided it's objectively done, and not favoured over other sites. New editors have been known to mark their own sites cool, which is absolutely forbidden - [even if the site really is cool] but it's usually a newbie mistake. A lot of new editors mark sites [not their own] as cool and have to be corrected.

It's considered a good idea for an editor to ask another editor to review site descriptions for sites they own, in order to get an unbiased opinion.

I have several sites listed in ODP, all but one was added before I became an editor - they are all in categories I cannot edit. The one that was added after I became an editor and is in a category that I can edit was added by another editor.

All sites I own or have any financial connection with, even if they are not listed in ODP have been registered in an internal database. Failure to do this may be grounds for removal of an editor. I doubt any editor being paid to list a site will be using that database.

Someone offering to pay a bribe for getting listed, will in many cases have their site permanently banned.

 

It certainly ought to be if those undeclared sites are then listed by him, or rival sites have their descriptions edited by him.

I should imagine it's fairly hard to detect though. An undeclared affiliation is precisely that, one DMOZ isn't aware of. You would have to look at every site that editor adds to his category and investigate any affiliation, with WHOIS lookups and a thorough sifting through the contents of that site, etc - a Herculean task!

Odd behaviour must be easier to spot though, e.g. an editor editing a lot of site descriptions (keeping descriptions up to date and within the guidelines is one of an editor's tasks, sure, but not a priority compared to filtering out links or sites gone bad, and reviewing new sites)

It's certainly a sign of dishonesty on their part, but what if it's just someone who's site is genuinely good enough, but has been sitting in the unreviewed sack for ages, frustrating him to the point where he'd do this? No doubt he reckons a DMOZ listing would be worth $1000 to his site/business, but to what extent should the financial benefit to the owner come into consideration in the editor's mind?

I suppose once the site is accepted, there will be a strong suspicion the bribe was involved - DMOZ can't check bank records so there'd be no way of knowing. Should innocent until proven guilty apply here?