I have longly suspected that DMOZ is full of competitiors that were smart enough to sign up as editors before DMOZ became as big as it is. After trying to submit my site for six years (and strongly suggesting my editor was my direct competiton), here is the last response (after requesting a second time to becoming an editor). There are inconsistencies between your various applications that lead us > to the conclusion that you wouldn't fit in well here. > > Please don't apply again. Here is my response: I only wanted to become an editor after six years of requesting my site to be added. I have no doubt in my mind that the person(s) in my category is in direct competition and will not allow my site or other related sites to be added. I will be an excellent editor to this category and really do want other sites related to be successful. Please prove you are not my competition and are a random editor seriously looking at my credentials. If you wish, select another category and I will prove, without doubt, that I am legit. I am glad you responded to this but it is very weak that you will not sign your name. I talked with numerous editors (on one particular forum) and they all say I am the perfect candidate to be an editor. If this is true, which it is, sign your name so I can find out why the real reason why this has been rejected. Thank you and hope you will respond and if not, which is suspect, will be my new mission. What do you think? What do you think they will say?
Basically you are being accused of lying. Presumably you made multiple applications each with different details such as affiliations, who you are, why you want to be an editor. An application that contains a obvious untruth is a red flag and raises questions as to the motives of the applicant. What I would love to know is why people lie on these applications. For example they are applying for a commercial category, have a really good application that would get approved in a moment, but they supply some BS story as to their affiliations. It is very demoralizing from this side of the fence. Why not tell the bloody truth?.
If you suspect that an editor is acting inappropriately submit an abuse report. It may take a while to get a response but I believe that there are successes when there is a valid case provided. Any idea what the "inconsistencies between your various applications" are?
Can I just point out that only meta editors and catmods evaluate editor applications. Line editors, cateditalls and editalls (who might or might not be your competitors) can't see them and aren't involved in the process at all. Most meta editors who handle editor applications have learned the hard way that it's best to remain anonymous. We do want to recruit new editors but we don't want to get into long and unpleasant conversations (or worse) with people who have been declined.
Actually, I do apoligize for my angry rant above and do understand why this response was given (anonymously) and why I was rejected. I did two. One with being a website owner and one with not. The first one was kicked back so fast I thought it was computer generated. That's why I made that change the second time which was looked at by a human. I still think this would be fun (and I would be excellent at it). One of the reasons that I tried to become an editor is total frustration. I really do believe that the editor to my particular catagory is direct competition. Proof? Legit site in operation for six years. Non super-competitive catagory. Submitted once or twice every two years (for six years!) and still no listing yet my main competition is there and a ton of small, non competitive sites listed.
I was browsing other threads and came across My direct competitor rejected my DMOZ listing by NightOwl888. This is total luck that we posted on the same day. This guy is in the same exact industry as myself and he actually has server tracking proof that the guy editing our catagory is direct competition. Check it out for yourself. I new it. According to that thread, he did file a report and I will do so as well.
What for? To tell us that you have competitor? Come on, abuse and abuse suspect are different things.
Budalata, Are you an editor? So what you are saying is this and tell me if I am wrong: If I am fortunate enough to be accepted as an editor (and list my own site) to a certain category, I now have the power to reject any applications that I see as a threat to my business? That's what is happening. Is that abuse? Why are there thousands and thousands of sites trying to get in your directory. Simple, you have power to make or break a site especially in your directory. You know an editor has (especially in smaller catagories), huge power to one of the top engines (directories) out there and until all the search engines stop using DMOZ as a resouce, it will continue to be so. Of coarse it is abuse. Abuse of power.
- Yes, I am. No fortune is neede, just reading and following some guidelines. And - honest. Sure, especially if you have a good reason to do this. Some reasons are needed. Probably. Please, make a difference between "rejected" and "awaiting evaluation". And dont forget that we also have internal control, and that editors activities /non-activities/ are watched. Huge power? Doubt. Of course is something not enough to report. "Report abuse" is something important, and our metas like evidences. Saying - "volunteer editor in this category do not edit and list every single site suggested"is far from enough. Regards
Budalata, That is the most honest answer I ever heard from you guys at DMOZ. Thanks (and at DP instead of DMOZ forums. But, please don't downplay the "power" thing. Google and Yahoo take results from DMOZ. That is huge. Frankly if this wasn't the case, DMOZ would just be one of the other ancient ones but it isn't. Why not just rotate editors? Maybe every three months, six months etc? Or only give them a certian amount of time and "retire". That will solve all of this. I know that sounds simple but it really is. Once rotated, that editor can choose or not choose to take on submissions to that catagory (and wait until the next one comes up). This gets rid of the people doing this, adds credibity, and weeds out editors that are only do this to control their nitch. It also gives fresh perspectives and there can be no arguments from people like myself that our niche is hijacked.
Talis, Have you tried sending a message to an editor in a higher category. In other words if you are in: Computers: Programming: Languages: Garbage Collected: Object-Oriented look up into Computers: Programming: Languages: Garbage Collected or Computers: Programming: Languages. Click on the editor listed at the bottom of the page and you should be able to send a message to him/her. Some people might rant at the suggestion but the message form is out there and the higher editor might be a reasonable person. You could also use that form to contact the offending editor and CC the staff.
I catch your point...but this is impossible. Probably this advice can be usefull in case we were listing service. But we arent. We are building a directory, and the main point is that editors are helping with their knowledge. In fact I have some in History - how to "rotate" and to start to edit under Computers, or Religion? I can edit under many cats, but I am still avoiding Real Estates - dont feel myself prepared to edit there. To repeat again - we are volunteers. Some of us edit once in month, or rare. How to motivate them to edit under category they have no experience? About the controlling of the niche - well, there are senior editors watching the quality of our edits. And - there are tens of cats with two listed editors. The fact that one category has listed editor doesnt mean that you cant apply for. So - our doors are widely open. Regards
Thanks Budalata, I started thinking about it last night and you are totally right. An expert on "Dogs" might not know a thing about "Cats" even though they are kind of related. Anyways one of the editors checked into that catagory yesterday and I am going to resumit my site (again) and hopefully get better results. I will give it a year or two before I resubmit to become an editor. Next time with a full explaination of why I BS'ed on that last request of not being a site owner and beg for forgiveness.