Tanoro Posted February 4, 2007 Posted February 4, 2007 Salutations! I am the webmaster of a Pagan website. I submitted my site to the following category well over a year ago: Society: Religion and Spirituality: Esoteric and Occult I checked back a few months later and found that it has not been added there or anywhere else on ODP. I made a note to check the other links in this category. Of the 7 links here, one was not functioning and another goes to an off-topic spam site. I can only assume that the editors for this category have not been around in a while. I tried to contact the editors of this category numerous times with no response. I recently submitted my site once more (about a month ago) and I am once again awaiting a response that doesn't look like it will ever come. I am a professional web designer, using a website platform that I designed myself. My site has videos, music, photos, and numerous articles on my topic. I know it will be accepted if it would just get reviewed. In short, I have submitted only twice, each over a year apart. I have received no correspondance and noted that this category seems to lack editor activity. Is there any advice for someone in my position?
jimnoble Posted February 4, 2007 Posted February 4, 2007 Please be patient. Some volunteer will volunteer to evaluate your listing suggestion in time. This forum's FAQ provides further information.
Meta Eric-the-Bun Posted February 4, 2007 Meta Posted February 4, 2007 Of the 7 links here, one was not functioning and another goes to an off-topic spam site. Could you use the 'update url' facility in that cat to report these bad links? Thank you Though I am a volunteer editor, my opinions do not constitute an official Curlie statement. :o I reserve the right to be human and make mistakes. :o Private messages asking for submission status or preferential treatment will be ignored.
Tanoro Posted February 4, 2007 Author Posted February 4, 2007 Of course, I can certainly report them, but if the volunteer editors don't come around, the links will still be there months from now.
Meta Eric-the-Bun Posted February 4, 2007 Meta Posted February 4, 2007 Updates are usually dealt with fairly quickly as they usually indicate something broken or not right. Our FAQ covers the commonly asked questions about site suggestions. regards Though I am a volunteer editor, my opinions do not constitute an official Curlie statement. :o I reserve the right to be human and make mistakes. :o Private messages asking for submission status or preferential treatment will be ignored.
Tanoro Posted February 8, 2007 Author Posted February 8, 2007 Yeah, I noticed. The links that I pointed out have been removed, but the editor couldn't do some reviews while in there?
Meta pvgool Posted February 8, 2007 Meta Posted February 8, 2007 > but the editor couldn't do some reviews while in there? Maybe he could, maybe he didn't want to at that moment. probably he only wanted to look at the update request. All editors are volunteers and do only what they personaly want to do at a certain point in time. Nobody, not even the owners, can tell them what to do. I will not answer PM or emails send to me. If you have anything to ask please use the forum.
Meta nea Posted February 8, 2007 Meta Posted February 8, 2007 I often go on update sprees in branches of the directory where I don't normally edit. Many (not all) update requests can be taken care of by a reasonably experienced editor who isn't familiar with the subject at all - that is often not true about site reviews. And in addition, many (not all) update requests can be dealt with very quickly: I can take a five-minute break from my work and do 10 update requests, but in that time I probably wouldn't even have had time to review one site. Curlie Meta and kMeta editor nea
jimnoble Posted February 8, 2007 Posted February 8, 2007 I often go on update sprees in branches of the directory where I don't normally edit.Me too. It's a fun and productive way of sightseeing other parts of the ODP planet.
crowbar Posted February 8, 2007 Posted February 8, 2007 I try to do it at the US level, but, I've been slackin off the last couple of days, I'll get on the ball today, .
Tanoro Posted February 8, 2007 Author Posted February 8, 2007 I understand that editors are volunteers, but perhaps ODP should arrange some sort of incentive program (monetary or not) for active editors.
Meta pvgool Posted February 8, 2007 Meta Posted February 8, 2007 Certainly not. That would be against one of the most important aspects of DMOZ. I guess that as soon as we get payed in one sort or another for the reviews we do most of the current editors would immediately stop their work for DMOZ. Voluntering for DMOZ means that you and only you determine what you will do and when you will do it (ofcourse within the DMOZ guidelines). Getting a reward would mean that others start to determine what you must do. No way. I will not answer PM or emails send to me. If you have anything to ask please use the forum.
Tanoro Posted February 8, 2007 Author Posted February 8, 2007 That must be why the topic on ODP to which I submitted my site has only 4 links in it now. Seriously though there is nothing wrong with a little motivation that is not your own or being rewarded for your valuable effort. Your employers value your effort enough to reward you, do they not?
Meta pvgool Posted February 8, 2007 Meta Posted February 8, 2007 Yes, my employer does. But my employer is not involved with DMOZ at all. I am prety sure he even does not know it exists. AOL (the owner of DMOZ) is not my employer and most probably never will be. For me DMOZ is just a hobby like others might collect stamps as a hobby. I will not answer PM or emails send to me. If you have anything to ask please use the forum.
crowbar Posted February 8, 2007 Posted February 8, 2007 I'm self employed, and I get nowhere near enough money, but it does no good to complain to myself, I'd just make myself work harder, . pvgool is right on the money (no pun intended), I edit for the satisfaction I get from accomplishing something worthy for a faceless worldwide community of websurfers who will never know what I've done. Giving without receiving anything in return is it's own reward, giving for the sake of giving. No amount of money could motivate me to do this, I would leave immediately. Also, as pvgool said, the freedom and responsibilty we have, as I also have in my business, is very appealing to many of us.
Meta Eric-the-Bun Posted February 8, 2007 Meta Posted February 8, 2007 Your employers value your effort enough to reward you, do they not? Oddly enough no I've always worked for job satisfaction and the money is incidental. Looking at company structures cynically, usually the more people earn, the less they actually do. There is actually an very good incentive program - the rewards being the respect of other editors, the sense of achievement and, tangibly, being given more responsibility. As your interest is in an unconventional individualistic area, you should perhaps appreciate the unconventional and individualistic nature of the ODP in a conventional world. Tut, tut, tut, a pagan suggesting that we should be more corporate rather than organic.... regards Though I am a volunteer editor, my opinions do not constitute an official Curlie statement. :o I reserve the right to be human and make mistakes. :o Private messages asking for submission status or preferential treatment will be ignored.
motsa Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 I understand that editors are volunteers, but perhaps ODP should arrange some sort of incentive program (monetary or not) for active editors. Think about that for a second. The editors who are currently active are active for no compensation beyond the pleasure or satisfaction they get from editing. So, if our active editors are active without compensation, what exactly would giving compensation do beyond encouraging people who aren't in it for the pleasure or satisfaction a reason to edit? Generally speaking, those would likely be the kind of people we don't want or need.
Tanoro Posted February 9, 2007 Author Posted February 9, 2007 Tut, tut, tut, a pagan suggesting that we should be more corporate rather than organic regards That is not so unhearof, actually. Even in Paganism, effort and hard work is naturally rewarded in one form or another. This is not unlike the concept of Karma which is shared throughout the occult. Whatever you give out comes back to you 3-fold, so says the laws of Wicca/Paganism. I am not so unintuitive that I don't realize the immaterial benefits of being an editor for ODP. I applied myself once, but was turned down because I chose a category with too many links for a beginner to manage (so said ODP admin). I find it admirable that there are so many of you who have found their purpose as an editor and are still humble enough to refuse further benefits of it. However, I am suggesting that such a humble reward may not be enough. Again, I am not suggesting that ODP pay their editors. There are plenty of nice things an establishment can do for volunteers to show appreciation for hard work. They could offer special events, contests or drawings, sources of entertainment, access to sites with special content, partner up with another site to offer editors discounts to services or merchandise, etc. etc. Simple little perks like these would help. By the way, I didn't know AOL owns ODP. I thought Netscape did. Was this a reason change or what?
The Old Sarge Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 I think an incentive plan for active editors is an excellent idea. DMOZ/ODP could give out foil hats. (I still think the copper models are better though.) The Old Sarge War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stewart Mill
Meta hutcheson Posted February 9, 2007 Meta Posted February 9, 2007 I have nothing against members of the community coming up with ways of making editing more enjoyable (with the motive of making it more frequent). That happens already, in some of the ways you suggest and in others you haven't imagined. But it is important to remember that these incentives will be aimed at getting people more active at reviewing sites that surfers think should be reviewed -- and this will not necessarily serve any particular webmaster's purposes. An incentive to serve a particular webmaster's purpose, is called a "bribe", the offerer receives the disincentive of a permanent place on the Hall of Unspeakably Unlistable Shame, and the recipient receives the disincentive of removal of editing privileges. In practice, this disincentivizes many incentivatory schemes proposed from outside.
crowbar Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 What would motivate me to edit more would be great, creative, one of a kind type sites that are nice and clean looking, get right to the point, and have something unique to offer or say, no matter how simple and unsophisticated they might be in design. What unmotivates me is all the cookie cutter garbage sites, with either the same old thing on them, or so much unclear information on them that's it's a real chore to find any kind of useful honest nuggets of information. Professional webmasters have about as much creativity as my banker. And then, there's all these sweethearts that go to great lengths to try and hide their real locations, so they can get listed where they don't belong. I despise dishonesty. Some of the most enjoyable sites I've seen have been created by amateurs. No unneccessary, useless information, just charming, innovative sites that tell you exactly what it is you want to know, without a lot excessive hype, or sticking to "industry standards" for website building. So, that's what would motivate me more, more originality in sites, more honesty, and less meaningless junk, .
simonjq Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Since you said that you're open to suggestion of how the editor should be 'rewarded'. I have a suggestion to introduce 'points' for editors (that appears anywhere the editor name/nick does). It works well for some online experts forums, the experts are motivated to give right answers to gain points. How can it be fair to the site owners? The points should be given in proportion to the importance of the site being reviewed, we can consider that higher google page rank is more important than the lower ones. This way, the editors will prioritize more important sites, which consequently deserve to be reviewed first to be listed first. I am a site owner who failed to get my site listed in the past one year. I somehow feel that it's not very fair if dmoz can list my competitors and can't list mine, but again I have no one to blame as editors are all volunteers. I recognize that it's in no way a favoritism, but purely lack of editors in the category that i'm applying to, but I was rejected when I applied to become an editor of the category even though the category is relatively small. DMOZ is a great mission with great people involved. It's unfortunate that some people are abusing it that left it in the state it is now.
Meta hutcheson Posted February 9, 2007 Meta Posted February 9, 2007 I think you've it on the fundamental problem with pursuing "rewards" -- who decides what's worth rewarding? I'm not sure you've thought out the ramifications, though. Is what you really want an official announcement to the ODP community that looking through Google for high-ranking sites is better than looking for relevant sites? And -- speaking as to a site suggestor, is it really better for us to look in Google than to look at suggested sites? Is it fair to systematically bias the system against new sites that haven't had time to develop page rank, in favor of heavily SEO'ed sites? In a word, is it fair to set up ANY arbritrary mechanical irrelevant quantum as a control over human judgment of human achievement? Well, a challenge from an adherent of another religion often helps to clarify one's own thoughts. It's clear enough to an editor that what you propose is very far from the ODP spirit. But what would the ODP spirit be like? If one thinks generally meaningless statistics help motivate people (and I don't doubt they sometimes do), what would the cooperating-volunteer-community approach be? Certainly, in opposition to "setting goals for the editors" it would be something like "helping editors to create, clarify, achieve, and celebrate their own goals" -- by providing tools, suggestions, and social support" So, how do you do that? I can think of one or two things that have been done that count as partial answers to that question. But we could very likely do better.
simonjq Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Thank you for the reply. I take this as a constructive conversation/discussion towards a better dmoz. Please tell me if you think otherwise and think that this is waste of time. In my opinion the most difficult part is to get the right editor with the right ODP spirit. There are many editors who's serving this 'unpaid job' with passion relentlessly without looking for rewards whatsoever, but... they are minorities of the editors community... The biggest pool of editors are being editor for the sake of having their site listed, they are sleeping editors who leave many site owners of relevant contents waiting endlessly and feeling lost. That is not the spirit of ODP i believe. Nobody is to blame, the editors are selected based on their linguistic skill and sample site, nobody interviewed them. But i don't think you can "help THOSE editors to create, clarify, achieve, and celebrate their own goals". They came with different motive at the beginning. How to address this issue? penalize those sleeping editors by removing them from being editor? They wouldn't mind, they have had their site(s) listed, and dmoz can't remove the sites they listed together with them. We can only motivate them (the sleeping eidtors) to do more. Pardon me for being direct, let me say it again, please let me know if you think that this discussion is meaningless and a waste of time.
Recommended Posts