I still have hope that the more people get online the more editors we will get. If we signed up a million editors (not a big proportion of the World really) - the UK alone probably has 10million internet users. Then unreviewed queues would indeed last minutes.
In order for this to happen though, more SEOs and webmasters have to be positive in their approach to us - if you guys support dmoz - more people will sign up.
JohnScott wrote:
Quote:
I think you will find that there are thousands of potentially competent editors here on the Internet. I often wonder about all the rejected editors - what tiny mistakes they made to be rejected....
I applied to become an editor for the English as a second language category. First I went to the category and clicked the "apply to become an editor button". Then I spent some time finding quality sites that weren't already listed and writing descriptions and all that. I submitted.
A few days later I got a response: English as a second language is "way too big a category for a new editor". OK, then make me an editor of a sub-category. And remove the "apply to become can editor" link from the English as a second language page. I mean if no new editors will be accepted is that link just there to get people to waste an hour or so applying?
Still waiting on a response from those two suggestions. It's been about 6 months so any day now...
I applied to become an editor for the English as a second language category. First I went to the category and clicked the "apply to become an editor button". Then I spent some time finding quality sites that weren't already listed and writing descriptions and all that. I submitted.
A few days later I got a response: English as a second language is "way too big a category for a new editor". OK, then make me an editor of a sub-category. And remove the "apply to become can editor" link from the English as a second language page. I mean if no new editors will be accepted is that link just there to get people to waste an hour or so applying?
Still waiting on a response from those two suggestions. It's been about 6 months so any day now...
Again I am not a meta, and I know absolutely nothing about the English as a second language cats, so take any of this with a pinch of salt.
1) Save your applications - either use alt+print screen and paste a screenshot of your app into a word document. Or copy and paste the text from it into a text file. That way if you get a rejection because the cat is too big or the app gets lost in the ether - its easy to resubmit. I do this every time I apply for a new category internally (which is a similar process - because I lost one once and was gutted!.)
2) The first cat I applied to had 1 site in it at the time :-) Seriously pick something small - that you can find at least three good urls to add to. We don't turn off the apply button in many categories really - only really big ones. But you are almost invariably best off to apply to a category at the bottom of the structure - with no more than 30 sites in it.
3) Declare any sites you are affiliated with. This is critically important if one of those sites is likely to be listed in the cat you are applying to.
I didn't say that the two sites weren't worthy of separate listings. I said that only one of the urls should be submitted.
so you are saying that only one should be submitted and then the other will magically get listed too? or what does this contridiction of statements mean?
What he implied is that the pages of one site shouldn't be spread around to different domains ...
As is, DMOZ has to deal with a lot of spam ... If IMR or some other site with pages in different domains is listed, than you can bet your life on how some webmasters and seo's will start creating a site with every page in different domain and try to get those individual pages listed in DMOZ! ...
What he implied is that the pages of one site shouldn't be spread around to different domains ...
Yep understood, However where is that the case with V7 and IMR though ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by andysands
I didn't say that the two sites weren't worthy of separate listings. I said that only one of the urls should be submitted.
If you didn't say they weren't worthy of separate listings then are you saying they are worthy? In which case why should only one be submitted? As awall19 said that's a contridiction of statements.....
I laughed so hard I cried. Thanks, by the way. Feels good - haven't laughed that hard in a long time.
These webmaster forums predate V7 Inc by quite some time. Most of the people who read and post here are not V7 Inc customers. And, most webmaster forums are owned by either a web design company, a web hosting company, or an Internet marketing company.
"V7 maintains several support options for your convenience.
The V7 Support Forum is a great place to get help from other V7 users and V7 support staff alike."
As you can see, the link to 'V7 Support Forum' goes to IMR.
LOL. sfxmystica, are you a V7 customer? Is this thread about V7 Inc hosting?
Yes, the support is handled within this site. Does that make this forum a "support forum for V7"?
The fact is, less than 5% of the threads on this board are about V7Inc. Anobody with a modicum of common sense is able to see that, and thereby recognize that the forums are not support forums for V7.
Yeah, you are right. Anyone with a modicum of common sense can see what this is all about.
sfxmystica, cute. But why not continue the debate. Answer me this: Do the majority of threads in this forum and articles on this site look, to you, to be V7 hosting support?
Yeah, you are right. Anyone with a modicum of common sense can see what this is all about.
sfxmystica, cute. But why not continue the debate. Answer me this: Do the majority of threads in this forum and articles on this site look, to you, to be V7 hosting support?
Simple question.
No need to continue debate. Hello, I am The Helper. I am a dmoz.org editor. I am also in SEO. I have reviewed your sites, I know your history, I know your dmoz.org history, I don't care about it. I am about building the best directory possible. I don't care about competition, hard feelings, or whatever, if you got a good resource on the net I am about listing it - enough said about that.
I am giving you a freebie on this - normally you would have to go to Resource Zone to get a status report but I give it to you here so you know that you are NOT blacklisted.
Please note this - I don't know what you know, who you talked to in dmoz.org, or anything about your dmoz.org history except that you are an ex editor. As far as your submissions are concerned nobody is doubting that http://www.internet-marketing-research.net and http://www.v7inc.com/ are seperate sites. Trust me - I have looked into it and know they ARE seperate sites.
Case closed about that as far as I am concerned. Now, you are now waiting, you have dmoz.org compliant titles and descriptions on your waiting sites - because that is what I do. Eventually you will get listed or maybe you won't - I don't know - I don't edit in SEO or Web Design categories outside of Regional - but suffice it to say that your sites have not been discriminated against - they were just not waiting in the right categories - that is fixed.
I am personally impressed with the content of your sites and if I were editing those categories I would probably consider your site (the non-commercial one) for deeplinks, however, we do not encourage submitters to submit deeplinks rather we as editors submit or list them when we come across high content sites, which is what you have. Welcome to the new dmoz.org my friend - where content is king. Dmoz.org has changed greatly since you were an editor - trust me - 2 years ago I would not have posted in this forum....
I am not an idiot - I don't consider your two site mirrors. Please note one thing though, the places you are waiting are not that actively edited and your free resource site is in with... I hate to say it... an assload of other sites which is a damn shame because I consider your Resource site a good resource.
Who knows, maybe I will take on the backlogged category, but it will be a definite challenge as high speed internet is required and a certain amount of skill and knowledge of editing without having to wait 10 mins after an edit for stuff to reload.
As for the people here that are dmoz.org bashers - the ones that say all editors have there noses up or only care about their own sites - eat me. It is not true and I actively look for those types of editors with an aim to correct that attitude or try my best to get them removed. Most dmoz.org editors care about one thing and one thing only - building the best directory we can for web surfers. We are not a submission service, though we gladly accept site suggestions - but our ultimate goal is building the best web resource we can and imho, we could do that with or without public submissions.
1) I wasn't privy to the relative ages of the sites.
2) I was looking for reasons why only one of the sites might be ok for listing, rather than both, I found a link from one to the other that seemed to indicate that a chunk of IMR was basically to support V7.
Sorry if that was dumb of me.
But look again at the way you phrased your comment, you effectively stated that dmoz editors rejected your sites for duplication across domains. I looked for the same thing and found content relating to one site apparently hosted on the other. Hence my conclusions.
You can berate me all you like, but it was an honest mistake.
As cray pointed out:
Quote:
If you didn't say they weren't worthy of separate listings then are you saying they are worthy? In which case why should only one be submitted? As awall19 said that's a contridiction of statements....
I've basically said I would probably list both.
I don't think I've contradicted myself though because I thought from my cursory review that the site was a pseudo-deeplink hosted on another domain.
Since the deeplinking guidance editors are given basically gives editors leave to deeplink quality content. Therefore - I could list both.
But the same guidance does not give submitters the right to submit deeplinks. Because they submit lots, and we get even more spam.
-
In this case - My considered view is that IMR is not a deeplink and the rule should not apply.
Edit - delete end of post - irrelevant due to overlap post.
But look again at the way you phrased your comment, you effectively stated that dmoz editors rejected your sites for duplication across domains. I looked for the same thing and found content relating to one site apparently hosted on the other. Hence my conclusions.
You can berate me all you like, but it was an honest mistake.
Please reread the thread. I did not berate you. I find the DMOZ perspective amusing and contradictory, but I did not berate you.
And yes it can seem contradictory. That happens when you get lets of guidelines, ask the guys who are trying to write an EU constitution to formalise hundreds of different treaties.
Have a great day!