You misunderstood what we were saying. No one said editors will sit back and do less work. Rather they prioritize so they can get more done. There's no sitting back involved. I agree that this is bad if they have the time to take on the work of their peers but simply choose not to. However, if they already have so much work that they'll never finish their own and they're always very busy working on it, isn't it at least understandable if they prioritize and pass on taking on extra? Sorry, no amen for you this time.
haha fine I need no pats on the back Annie, But to me, from all this talk of corruption, DMOZ failing, etc... it sounds like the people who have the ability to influence change (not necessarily make it themselves), but YES influence it, perhaps by banding together as all should and making a stance that the site was started with a humane goal in mind and not for profit, then I believe the end result would be far better. Now I feel like many have just given up and are trying to float up rather than sink with the ship... It makes sense, don't get me wrong, I mean I wouldn't want to go down with a sinking ship if I lost hope in the cause as well. However I do feel like it will be a shameful day when DMOZ is gone and something else replaces it as good source of rank, authority, and all around quality of websites.
The structure of DMOZ is such that it is more or less impossible to get the kind of radical change that would be needed to do something about it. For instance killing off those parts of the directory that take a disproportionate amount of time for minimal gain - porn, gambling, hotel booking services, etc. No, quality websites are not rejected, but because of the huge amount of spam that editors have to process to get to the quality stuff, those websites may not be reviewed. The amount of work, and the editor resources available, are so mismatched prioritisation, preferably aimed at benefitting those submitters who help themselves by following guidance on category selection, titles, and descriptions. The DMOZ problem is that webmasters/submitters view themselves as the customers, as they would be at Yahoo. They aren't. Editors offer webmasters nothing in terms of a service and webmasters should expect anything in terms of a service! The general viewing public do not get to see the work an editor has done in tracking down quality webmasters very often these days. The Google directory clone has been demoted off the main search page and DMOZ categories do not come up in search results as they once did. The number of people using the directory direct is therefore far less than it once was - plus other sources are now more reliable in many areas where once DMOZ was king of original content.
You prove very strong and valid points. I guess when approached this from that side of it, it does make sense. Well then carry on business as usual I suppose. Again I'm happy to see all the past/present editors rising to assist me, and shedding light on the issues at hand. Definitely appreciated
Sorry to rain on your parade, but I was witch-hunted out over a single listing, which a thinking meta should have realized was an honest mistake. Maybe there were no thinking metas at the time, or maybe they didn't want to butt heads with a fruitcake paranoid editor like kctipton, who brought the whole thing up, and against whom I had a pending mediation request. So I am no longer and the ODP trying to be helpful, I am persona non grata. Still, I would take my chances and submit to some "live" categories in addition to the one you think is most appropriate. It does increase your chances, especially given that an editor might be better at finding the actual best category for your site, than you.
The trouble with that approach is that along with many other editalls, I spent a lot of time scouring through categories removing duplicate submissions, *leaving* (not reviewing) just one for a review at a later stage. Because multiple submission is specifically against the guidelines any site so left would get my absolute lowest priority when it came to actually reviewing sites. I would always pay highest attention to those who showed they had read and abided by the submission guidelines - helping those who help themselves. So first of all thousands of man hours wasted weeding out the duplicates, time that could otherwise have been spent reviewing and adding sites. Secondly, discrimination in favour of those who follow the rules. My advice would be (a) select the most appropriate category - if there is more than one that might be appropriate then an editor is likely to be sympathetic, otherwise if it looks like a scattergun most will be very unsympathetic. (b) Title and describe the submission precisely according to guidelines. Check other listings in the category to get a feel for the category "style". Check spelling, grammar, and capitalisation. What you then have is an easy add for any passing editor, even if the site is 200th in line it will stand out like a sore thumb. Editors have to change 99% of submissions - many would absolutely love to get one more edit on their stats without having to do any work other than check the site and submission match.
I wouldn't suggest submitting to a million categories, but maybe 3-4 in categories that are frequently updated. I personally think it's a waste of time, but if you really want that dumb link, it's the fastest way. Description and title? Submitters shouldn't waste their time. Any old gibberish will do. I re-wrote 100% of all descriptions, they were always "off." As for titles, I checked them all. I had no way to discirimate, in the queue, which sites had a compliant title, and which didn't. So it makes zero difference. Don't write your descriptions in all caps. That's my only advice.
I would have said 3-4 submissions would have been enough for me to relegate the surviving submission, after removing the duplicates, to the bottom of my priorities. When your editing realm includes thousands of unreviewed sites being bottom of the priorities probably means never getting reviewed. I saw plenty of evidence of other editalls and metas doing the exact same prioritisation and since they do 95% of the listings it is a dangerous game to play if you are after that link.