ODP / DMOZ How Many Active Editors?

No there isn't. Meta editors have no power to create editor accounts other than by accepting a conventional application.

As to efficiency, the application form asks a number of questions, the answers to all of which are important. A direct email bypassing the application is unlikely to include all the required info. It would be much more efficient to use the application mechanism provided (when available).

 

Why on earth would that even be allowed? It's clear that the ODP holds a VERY STRICT submit once policy followed by a stern NO QUESTIONS mindset.

Oh, right... they hold editors to a higher standard then the websites they collect *rolls eyes*

 

Sorry, Q, but in my eyes people offering suggestions of a site and people applying to be an editor or re-applying is quite different and at one time RZ did do site status reports but found that not helpful, obviously they still believe that doing editor application status reports is. But it's your desire to return that one is talking about and to address the community in that way I would not have thought helpful.

 

Its not helpful that I am putting the websites first? Yeah, that's likely the mindset that has prompted them not to properly accept or reject my request Gods forbid I actually want to put the sole purpose of the ODP before all else, we all know that the ODP certainly does not do that... so it's really no wonder is it?

EDIT:
I also guess it's important to note that RZ is NOT an official channel, in fact it's no more official then Digital Point! Why on earth would I have to log into a 3rd party site to check my status? Isn't there an official means of checking such status? One with a DMOZ URL? Why is it soooooooo hard to actually speak with editors? They are certainly not too busy putting websites first, that's clear by the fact they don't bother with site status checks by will bother with potential editors.

Yes, yes, editors add sites...but think about it, if they are putting more thought into editors then sites, then what are the new editors going to do? That's right, put more thought into editors then websites.

 

Not more thought, Q, but DMOZ is not a listing service, but it does set itself up to accept editors and it does set itself up to do that in a reasonable timeframe. Editos are not suggestions they are applications. But it's up to you just remember many of the editors who check the applications do read on here and see people's attitude.

 

Even though it's guidelines say it's a service, and that it's a site for listings...

Its also set up to review suggested sites in a reasonable time frame...

And just like the suggestions they are reviewed and either accepted or rejected.... or in some cases completely ignored.

And it's up to you just remember that many of the editors who check the applications do not read there either...

And again, Digital Point is just as official as RZ as NEITHER are a part of the ODP itself.

 

Just pop up the reference of where DMOZ makes that claim or comment.

 

LOL... right after you point to the references of where they claim the same about applications. I figured the proof was in how the site itself was set up and the reasoning behind such a set up. the ONLY reason the ODP is there is to collect sites. Therefore it stands to reason that they want Site Suggestions to run as smooooothly as possible, even more so then the editor review process.

Are you seriously saying that editors are more important then the sites they collect? It certainly seems that way, and if that IS the case, then the claims about the ODP being an elitist group editors stands true and strong as they push aside the entire site review process in order to do nothing but increase their own ranks!

EDIT:

Besides, I've said this time & time again, I will not prove ANYTHING to YOU until you prove that you are an editor... what's good for the goose is good for the gander right? Why is it you think you can ask for proof yet NEVER EVER back up anything you yourself claim? Funny that... you and your double standards!

 

ROFLAO several times!

 

You know something Q. I really hope that your application to return is not accepted. All the double talk and insinuations that come from you, the constant stirring and the plain mistruths are simply an indication of your sad and pitiful character.

Many of the posters in here are asking genuine questions and you feed them a constant trail of half truths and exagerrations.

I think that if your application is accepted, the Meta doing the review is being abusive to the directory. I really do

 

Point out my mistruths!

As for double talk, it mainly consists of complaints against the ODP as they need to be out, followed by 'yes, it's worth submitting'.

Wanna talk about double talk? Why not post that exact phrasing to Anon up there? He is the one that spreads lies and wont back up ANY claims! Most of my claims I have backed up... the ones I can not prove mostly revolve around speculation that Anon is a female and not an editor of the ODP at all... if ya catch me in another, feel free to point it out! However, keep in mind, that to ANY ONE other then an ODP editor a COMPLETED TRASNACTION WITH POITIVE FEED BACK FOR AN ODP LIST PROOF THAT IT HAPPENS. *shrug* So wanna come back and talk about double talk?

And the editors here are doing EXACTLY the same thing, though they are often just telling the other half.

Why? Because I will put the websites I review first? I'll try to make the place a bit more open and accessible to the general public? I'll try to close that communication gap that is sooooo strong? I'll try to actually HELP the directory by pushing it forward then holding it back like soooo many editors are doing today? Yes, I can see why you'd think that is abuse.

 

Don't believe everything you read...

Here is a link to my profile: http://www.dmoz.org/profiles/qryztufre.html] and Ive not been an editor for over a year!

It goes back to your original post "Im just curious, of the current 85,662 stated editors, how many of those are frequently active?

You should keep that in mind while discussing things with ANYONE ANYPLACE claiming to be an editor!

And even when you do find an honest to goodness editor, remember they can be less then reputable, misleading, rude and sometimes outright evil.

Jimnoble in this thread said there were 10,000 active editor is an example. Then Anonymously of course needs to introduction (then again, she is not really an editor, she just claims to be one).

Though I do get a kick outta the bad rep I am getting in this thread. I wonder if it's safe to assume it's editors feeling the pain of the statement "truth hurts" as NO ONE has bothered to actually stand up and back up their claims, all the editors can do is seemingly call me names and point out my edit count. Which is REALLY sad, as I've backed up my claims... is it really too much to ask they do the same? Is it too much to ask they be honest when they want me to be? Is it too much to ask that they be civil when people are being civil to them? I guess it is... as they have proved themselves within this very thread.