Confessions of a Dmoz grunt

What do editors talk about on the internal Dmoz forum?

2009-11-10T08:00:00.000-05:00

Again, what a good question! You're becoming very good at reading my mind.

Generally, anything and everything. We talk about certain sites, forums, and blogs. Sometimes it's a question of where it should be listed, if it should be listed, and even if it should be deleted. Sometimes editors talk about random daily or personal stuff. We also talk about categories and whether they should be deleted or merged with similar category. New categories are also discussed. So, if an editor is new to creating categories then they can propose it on the forum and get other editors opinions on it.

Guidelines are discussed. As you can imagine, Dmoz is pretty diverse and editors hold a wide-range of opinions, so it's not uncommon to have editors disagree. In fact, it's hard to get a 100% of editors to agree on something.

These are just a few things editors discuss on the internal forum.

This post isn't proofread because I'm too freaking tired...

What I do while I'm logged into Dmoz?

2009-11-03T08:00:00.000-05:00

What a great question! I swear, you're just reading my mind when it comes to what I want to write about.

Well, it goes a little something like this:

1) I turn on my beautiful cotton-candy pink Gateway laptop.
2) I log onto the Internet via dial-up.

Oopps. You don't want to know the gritty details.

When I log into Dmoz, I log into the dashboard. I have it as a favorite on my computer so I can go straight to it. Same with the internal forums. I look at the numbers for the categories in which I edit and decide what I want to do. I also look for update request. I used to like processing those, but not anymore. I've seen update requests site in the queue for as long as nine-months.

I then decide whether I want to look through a few random categories. I have my favorites that I visit every so often. Sometimes I might go through unreviewed listing sites that are listed elsewhere in the directory. Those types of sites are easier to list because they've already been reviewed by a, hopefully, competent editor, though not always. Sometimes I might go through and pick a random site or two to review and list, or delete. Then, I might go through the unreviewed and delete all the Red sites unless I feel they need a re-review. I usually clunk out if I try to review more than one site because it just takes too darn long. Then I might go to the internal forum and read one or two threads that catch my attention and then back to my dashboard. Lastly, but not leastly, I might look at my profile and think of ways in which to improve it, or look at it just because it's so beautiful. Hahah. Obviously, this is pretty boring, but it's a typical schedule for me as of late.

This post isn't proofread because I'm so darn tired.

Taking a break from Dmoz/ODP

2009-10-27T08:00:00.002-05:00

Okay, so I've decided to take a break from Dmoz. I've been an editor for close to four years and I'm almost burned out at the moment; I've been editing less and less lately.

What have I been doing with my time if I'm not editing at Dmoz, you ask? Well, many things. I'm usually working on a personal project, playing one of my favorite games, or lurking on one of my favorite forums. Or, heck, even chatting with one of my fellow editors over IM. Doing these things takes up a lot of my time, especially the game playing. I'd like to get back to some console gaming, but my Xbox360 is kinda clunked right now - thanks to me. Bleh.

Don't get me wrong, I still log-in to Dmoz everyday except on rare occasions. I visit the internal forum and read a couple of threads, I usually skip 99.9% of them out of disinterest, then I look at my editor dash...wait, I'll explain all this boring stuff in my next post, hahah.

Next post: What I do when I log into the Dmoz. - because I know you're dying to know, hahah.

This post isn't proofread because I'm just too darn tired...

SEO Specialists talk about Dmoz.

2009-10-20T08:00:00.002-05:00

I did a once-in-a-blue moon search for "Dmoz" and found this interesting blog post. A few SEO specialists held a conference to discuss the SEO industry. I found the answers...interesting, to say the least.

Q: What do you think about DMOZ?

Debra: I have an interview with DMOZ this week and they seem committed to fixing the directory. [Really? Interesting, I might say. I wonder how it went. BTW, AOL staff are working on releasing Dmoz 2.0 soon, *fingers crossed.*]

Eric: A link from DMOZ is not something you have to have to rank. It'd be nice to see them return to their former glory, though.

Danny: Google recently removed their suggestion that sites should try to get links from directories.

Rae: That doesn't mean that they don't still value links from directories. It's probably meant to help sites from getting scammed by anyone who throws up a site and calls it a directory.

Eric: You can see the last date edited and find out which editor did it. Search for that editor's username and you can find out how to contact them privately. They'll appreciate you took that extra step. [Some interesting remarks. Nearly false, but interesting nonetheless. For starters, no one other than an editor can find out which editor made an edit to a category. The only information available to the public is the date and time stamp at the bottom of the page, not editor name. Secondly, I don't know about the last sentence, but some editors don't appreciate being asked about submitted sites. I usually don't give much thought about a submitter contacting me, so I can't say that I "appreciate" the effort, though I'm not opposed to giving site status checks.]

(source: http://www.bruceclay.com/blog/archives/2009/10/ask_the_linkbui.html)

Current Stats:
6490 [total edits] / 2084 unique adds / 1718 deletes / 1193 unreviewed

Remembering 9/11

2009-09-11T07:00:00.000-05:00

Part 2: Dmoz and its editors

2009-06-22T08:00:00.001-05:00

Editors who post unsubstantiated facts is one of the things that annoy me.

Take for instance a common "fact" I see posted by editors, senior and lowly alike. It's the "fact" that 50% of listed sites are not suggest. Now, where did this factoid come from? Someone's mind? Out of thin air? I've been an editor for over three years and I have never seen any evidence that this is true, and I've searched for it on the Internal forum. This seems to be made up or conjecture at best. I'm wondering how someone can even compile this information. How can you, as an editor, possibly know whether or not other editors are searching for sites on their own or have relegated their editor activities to the submitted sites? I mean, just because you, as an editor, love finding sites on your own doesn't mean most or even all editors do the same. It seems a bit deceitful to put this unsubstantiated information as fact based only on what you, and possibly a few editors you've talked to, do.

There are many editors, mostly new, or those who don't have a lot of edits to their credit, who don't even know that you can go out and add sites you find via search engines. Plus, being that most editors are not senior editors and do not have a lot of privileges and are stuck with smaller categories, leads me to believe that the opposite is true. I can't count the number of times a new editor mentions the fact that they check their category once a month looking for new submissions.

Editor Stats:
6327 / 2022 unique adds / 1669 deletes / 1176 unreviewed

Part 1: Dmoz and its editors

2009-06-12T11:16:00.000-05:00

Hello, again! I didn't even realize it has been so long since my last post. I've been very busy lately with several things, including graduate school.

In this post I'm going to write about one thing I just absolutely can't stand. Okay, not just one; this will be a multi-post series.

What irks me most about some Dmoz editors are those newbie's who've been on the job for only a few months and think they know everything there is to know about the ODP. Their "knowledge" that they feel the need to pass on to the rest of us lowly editors, you know, those of us who have been there MUCH longer than they, comes from what they've heard/learned from other senior editors and spread it around as gospel. In fact, they say it almost verbatim from the senior editor who told them that it's almost easy to figure out who gave them that advice. Getting advice and knowledge from senior editors is great, but also realize that the guidelines are just guidelines and not policy. There's a difference. The guidelines give leeway to common sense and editor discretion. Policies are hard and fast rules that everyone must follow. Dmoz doesn't have policies.

As you get more experience as an editor then you'll become more knowledgeable about the guidelines and you'll be able to use your discretion wisely instead of being afraid that you're "breaking the guidelines." In one of the categories in which I'm a listed editor I used to get several requests from people asking for their site to be removed from the directory. As a new editor I was told that sites shouldn't be removed as long as they're working and meets the guidelines, thus making it into an absolute rule. During that time I rarely obliged the request. As I came into my own as an experienced editor, and become more knowledgeable about the guidelines, I realized that they are just guidelines and that I do have some discretion. I was then able to make a decision on my own based on the information in front of me about whether or not to oblige the "remove my site" requests. Some of those sites I did remove from the directory, but that was not without first going to the website and sending an e-mail and advising them that, generally, sites aren't removed if they still meet the guidelines.

My reason for sending this e-mail wasn't to inform them that their site wasn't going to be removed or just to happily communicate with website owners, but it was to make sure the person sending the request was the person actually connected with that site. Sometimes I would get an e-mail back and sometimes I wouldn't, so that meant that sometimes I would oblige the delete request and sometimes I wouldn't. If I did oblige a request then I would leave a note with the URL giving the reason I was deleting it and that I was using my editor discretion. Simple.

Well, it's not really that simple when you're a new editor because you take other editors' opinions as truth and the guidelines as hard and fast rules that must always be followed. The actual truth is that editors have different opinions and interpret things differently. You ask an opinion of 5 editors and you'll get 6 different opinions. So, you have to take it for what it's worth, and that's someone's opinion. Don't get me wrong. I was once a very confused newbie. I only became confused because of the many different opinions on everything imaginable. I would see a senior editor write one thing as a fact in one place, and then I'd go to the internal forum and see six different editors with opposite opinions. Who's right? Eventually, I got to a point in my editorship that I didn't need anyone's opinions in order to interpret the guidelines. I used my own knowledge from lots of editing and reading of the guidelines to make a good decision about a site.

Those newbies with only a few months experience will eventually come to realize what I realized: that there are no hard and fast rules in editing, and you are free to use your editor discretion when it makes sense. This isn't getting into the issue of major changes, which need to have editor "consensus."

Editor Stats:

6324 [total edits] / 2019 unique adds / 1669 deletes / 1176 unreviewed

AOL/Dmoz is now listening to webmasters. Yay?

2009-02-27T14:38:00.005-05:00

I decided to do my tri-annual visit to the official Dmoz blog today (http://blog.dmoz.org/) and came into a bit of a surprise posting: AOL is actually fielding questions from the general public and webmaster community. Yay! I'm very excited about this. There's nothing more encouraging than to know that your voice is being heard, even if your suggestions aren't acted on. I applaud AOL for doing this and for trying to open the door of transparency. http://blog.dmoz.org/2009/02/27/have-questions-about-dmoz-let-us-know/

As an editor, I have always thought Dmoz should open the doors of communication with those who submit their sites to the directory. In a way, they do make my life easier as an editor because that means I don't have to spend hours wading through spammy search engine results to find good sites to list because those good sites are already being suggested by their webmasters and owners. I think it would be a great idea for Dmoz to at least provide status checks for those who request it. Although, I'm not sure how this would work. Maybe after submitting a site the submitter is given a reference number that he can enter somewhere on the site and it will give him the status: waiting/deleted/added. Sure, I can see the concern, and even anger, of those who find out that their site is deleted. Maybe they'll direct their anger at the resource-zone.com, hahahah.

Yes, you'll hear individual editors say Dmoz doesn't provide status checks and the resource-zone.com tried it and it was found to be worthless information and a waste of time, and more blah blah. Well, only AOL can make that decision regarding the ODP. Personally, I wouldn't mind something where after I've reviewed a site I will have the choice to send feedback to the e-mail address submitted with the site, something along the lines of added/deleted/moved to another category for review and, if I choose, I have the choice to leave personalized comments.

Whatever the outcome of this initiation by AOL to get general public and webmaster feedback and try to be more transparent is a step in the right direction and I welcome it. Wherever it goes from here is yet to be seen. Even if AOL cannot act on most of the requests I applaud the effort to actually listen to the concerns of webmasters. Hooray for AOL!

**************************************
Editor stats as of this post:
6189 / 1967 unique adds / 1631 deletes / 1159 unreviewed

12 things I like about Dmoz/ODP....

2009-02-14T12:00:00.004-05:00

HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY!

Well, I wouldn't be on my third year as a Dmoz editor and reviewing people's boring websites if I didn't like something about it, right?

1) I can edit whenever I want.

2) I can choose which of my designated categories I want to edit for the day.

3) The official Dmoz blog is updated regularly and there are dedicated AOL employee(s) behind it.

4) A new Dmoz model will (hopefully) arrive in a few months.

5) I don't have to review every site I come across.

6) I can choose to review and list only submitted sites and love it.

7) I can also list sites I find elsewhere if I wanted.

8) I can respond to feedback if I so choose.

9) I can send e-mail to submitters letting them know their site rocks.

10) I can respond to submitter feedback if I wanted to and love it.

11) I can give someone a status check on his/her website if I wanted.

12) That ugly green lizard/dinosaur thingy.

Editor Stats:
6124 / 1943 unique adds / 1613 deletes / 1149 unreviewed

My 3rd year as a Dmoz editor....

2009-02-08T12:25:00.000-05:00

I officially reached my third year as a Dmoz editor a few months ago. What can I say about this. I'm still a category editor - boo! I'm overwhelmed with my university work and, well, not working, hahah, so I don't have much time to edit. Okay, truth is, I do have a lot of free time, but I don't spend as much time editing as I used to mainly because I'm reaching burn out again. Plus, many of the sites that get suggested are boring to look at and read, or too time-consuming to review. Sometimes I'll click on a website and look through it for a few seconds and change my mind about reviewing it because I just don't feel like taking the time, or, because it looks like it's going to take too much time to review.

Sorry, but if you have one of those ugly sites (subjective, I know) then I will not be reviewing those anytime soon, lol. Those sites tend to turn me off and make me less likely to finish the review. I don't like reviewing boring sites, either. Sites that have a very good design and are entertaining to read will catch my attention and make me want to look further. Yes, yes, I know, editors should not base a listing on site design or aesthetics. Well, the keyword is "listing." I don't base site listings on those things, only content, but I do base whether or not I will take the time to review a site based on how it looks and reads. This, I am completely free to do because, according to Dmoz guidelines, I do not have to review a site that I don't feel comfortable with reviewing, and ugly sites I don't like reviewing.

Well, not only have I reached my third year of editing, but tomorrow is also my birthday, yey(!)...another year of getting older, but I can always lie about my age - and get away with it. So, for my birthday month I will resolve to add 50 websites in my favorite category. Heheh, that's more than I usually do per month and this is a spammy category, so it's also time-consuming. Well, anyway, I'll see how that goes, and I'm already off to a good start.

Some mistakes I've made in the past:

I'm sure I've made many editing mistakes in the past. Lets see...I've accidentally deleted sites; I've accidentally added sites that shouldn't have been added; I've added sites that I now know weren't listable to begin with; I've given horrible descriptions to sites because I didn't feel like taking the time to write a good one that would have made the site stand out; I've misspelled words; I've forgotten to use spell-check; and I've misspelled people's names, and, even worse, described them as the wrong sex....as you can see, those are a lot of things I've done wrong, but overall, I've not made too many crucial mistakes. These are all small compared to what can really be harmful.

What I've learned since becoming an editor:

I've learned a lot since becoming an editor. I've learned how to properly describe and title sites; I've learned how to spot affiliates, mirrors, and fraternal mirrors; I've learned how to give a quick and easy description to a site without much effort; I've learned a way of finding better categories for misplaced sites; and I've learned reasonably good site placement skills. Of course, these aren't the only things I've learned over three years of editing, and all of these things combined has made me a more efficient editor.

EDITOR STATS:

5940 [total edits]/ 1856 unique adds / 1560 deletes / 1126 unreviewed

12 Things I've wondered about the ODP, or, DMOZ.

2009-02-03T15:17:00.002-05:00

I've *sighed* much lately over these very taxing questions I'm wondering about Dmoz. Here's what I've begun to wonder over the years about Dmoz when I think about it....

Why does Dmoz sometimes leak like a washing machine?

Why are editors sometimes bitter?

Why is there a whole lotta anger in some ex-editors?

Why do some people, er, editors like arguing so much?

Why are editors sometimes like broken records?

Where do they get all this darn free time from?

Why do they like "reviewing" other people's boring sites?

Do editors try to "stick it" to some web sites by adding that dreaded [only available in IE] tag to the description?

Are editors truly nice or are they just faking it?

Do editors think it's funny to click on a website just to add a referral and then don't list it?

What in the hell is that little logo? A lizard? Dinosaur?

What is up with that ugly puke green color?

Um, Dmoz....How Do I Submit My Site?

2008-12-01T17:27:00.000-05:00

I've begun to notice a trend in the type of e-mail I get from submitters. The first type of e-mail is from people who are basically asking for a status check. The second type of e-mail has come to surprise me. I get e-mail from people who are unable to submit to the category and want to know where the Submit URL link is. What I have noticed is that this is for categories where Dmoz has turned off the Submit URL function. This usually happens when very few sites, if any, will ever be listed in the category. In this case, the submitter should submit to one of the sub-categories in the area.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how inattentive people are when they don't do any research or read any of the material available to them to help them better understand where to submit their sites. It surprises me, but I know that I shouldn't be. Submitters rarely read the category description or FAQs to see if the category they want to submit to is actually the best category. If you run into a situation where the Submit URL link is missing then that is your queue to find the appropriate subcategory in which to submit.

Another thing that boggles my mind is when people submit to the obviously wrong category. If your site's name begins with A, then why are you submitting to the letter Z? Sometimes I think people have nefarious reasons for submitting to the wrong category. Maybe they already have a site listed in the correct category and they are trying to get a mirror listed by submitting to a completely different category, thinking the reviewing editor will just move and list the site without actually taking a look at the correct category. I caught at one point someone doing just that - submitting a mirror to the incorrect sub-category and that same site was already listed under another URL in the correct category. Since then I have always been suspicious of people who submit to the number 0 instead of the letter K; I wonder what scheme they are trying to pull.

Just remember before you send an e-mail to the editor asking where the Submit URL is that you've actually read the category's FAQs and description where you will most likely find out that you have to submit to a subcategory.

$4,500 for an ODP/Dmoz listing????

2008-11-14T18:33:00.000-05:00

I found this thread at the resource-zone recently where someone apparently paid 20% of $4,500 for a Dmoz listing. Poor sap! Here's brief summary of the conversation.

Poor sap: Why isn't my site listed? I was charged a management fee of $4,500 with 20% upfront to have my website reviewed and it's been two weeks already and still nothing. This is too much for a "management" fee and too long to wait for a review. How can I get a refund, and is it possible to get a refund after my site has been reviewed? In fact, I'd like my money back and my site reviewed for free since I've waited so long. I was also told that I'd get a few million hits from the directory within the first month. How can/will this happen? Also, the Dmoz guidelines states that inclusion is FREE, so why am I being charged this exorbitant "management" fee?

Editor 1: You're such a fool. You've just been scammed! We don't offer a paid listing service. Good luck getting your money back.

Non-editor: Looks like you've been scammed by someone who's not an editor.

Editor 2: You're such a fool. You've just been scammed! But, just in case this person is an editor why don't you fill out an abuse report and give us all the information you have so we can look into this and remove this person if s/he is an editor. While your at it, include the website that you paid to get listed so we can make sure it's banned for trying to pay for inclusion.

Me again, okay, I'm alway taken aback by those who are desperate enough to pay for a FREE Dmoz listing. The first question in my mind is 'who in their right mind thinks Dmoz is worth a freakin' $4,500!!!!!' You can buy a listing in the Yahoo! directory for 15 years for that amount of money. Or, you can buy a years worth of listings for 15 of your sites in the Yahoo! directory. At least with the Yahoo! directory you might get some hits and some conversions. With Dmoz, you're lucky if you get one hit a year - and hope it's not from one of its link checking bots or an editor checking current listings, haha.

The guy completely missed the obvious, maybe out of desperation to get listed. Hint #1: A Dmoz listing is NOT worth $4,500! Hint #2: If the Dmoz official documentations tell you that a listing is FREE, but someone wants to charge you to be listed, then it's most likely someone looking to part a fool with his money - the fool being you and the money being yours! Hint #3: If it sounds too good to be true then it is! The guy is now asking how Dmoz will generate one million hits for him within the first month? Um, isn't this something he should have asked when this deal was first initiated by he or the "editor?" I don't know of any website that can generate a million hits in a month via referrer. That notion alone should have made him think twice and run the other way!

Why do I think this guy has been scammed by someone who's not an editor? Well, lets see, an editor who's trying to make a part-time job out of scamming gullible Dmoz submitters AND keep his editing position would take the money and list the site, because not listing the site would bring unwanted attention to himself when the scammed speaks up. A corrupt editor would have to list the site if he doesn't want to get caught and removed from Dmoz for breaking the editing guidelines, thus relinquishing his part-time job of scamming desperate people. Once the site gets listed then the webmaster most likely won't say anything because then he risks his site being removed for paying for a listing, and, he probably wants to stay quiet so he can pay to have other sites listed in the future by the same corrupt editor. This is just my presuming what a corrupt editor would do, as I don't know any. Also, most editors are probably decent and won't accept bribes or try to scam you out of your money. You're more likely to get your site banned for trying to bribe an editor than actually finding a corrupt editor.

The poor sap's initial post at the resource-zone should have went something like this:

Poor Sap: OMG! I've been scammed by someone pretending to be an editor! I paid $900 to be listed in the Dmoz.....even though the Dmoz documentation says it's a FREE listing; even though he promised me that I'd get at least one million hits during the first month; even though this is an exorbitant amount for a Dmoz listing; even though this deal is too good to be true.....I was still foolish enough to put down 20% of $4,500 for the listing! Now, I'm out of $900 and my website is still not listed. I'm not posting at the resource-zone to bitch and complain about corrupt editors for my foolish mistake of believing anyone who tells me he's an editor and will list my site for some money. A word to other webmasters - DON'T BE A FOOL LIKE ME!

Source: http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52582

I'm Baaaak....with a few Dmoz/ODP tidbits.

2008-11-14T16:33:00.000-05:00

OMG! I cannot believe how long it's taken me to get around to posting again. I've had this post hidden away for awhile waiting for the right time to publish. Yeah, yeah, I've been that darn lazy that I couldn't find that time to publish a post that has been waiting for about 6 months, haha. I might begin to take interest in blog once again and post regularly. I already have some post waiting in the wings for me to push that "publish" button. I'll start this post off with a few things I finally want to mention.

Firstly, I receive e-mail from submitters, and non-submitters alike. In fact, my editor profile used to encourage feedback. Hey, if I had a question then I'd want to find someone who was willing to answer them, or, at least, point me in the direction in which to find them. I don't mind getting feedback from the public and will answer any questions as best I can with my editor-dedicated e-mail address, but I don't answer them all. In fact, I might post another round of the feedback I've received.

The most type of feedback I get is regarding status checks. Is my site listed? I submitted 4 months ago, did I do something wrong? I've submitted my site several times, and I'm just wondering if it was ever received. Well, I'm happy to provide status checks. If I were in their shoes then I'd want to know whether or not my site was received also, especially when submitters most likely do not know what causes the long delay before listing/rejection/no action; sometimes I also take the time to explain this. Keep in mind that many editors don't like to be contacted, so if it says in their profile not to contact them or that e-mails go unread, then heed the warning.

The second most type of feedback I received caught me a little by surprise when I started receiving them. Where is the submit URL link? Huh??? Oh, they must be trying to submit to a category where the submit URL function is turned off. This happens when most sites would easily fit into a subcategory. Lets take a look at a random category that does not accept submissions: Games: Video_Games: Shooter. Now, if you go to this category in the Games section and look at the top then you will not see the submit URL link. Why? Because a majority of sites should be submitted to a letter/number category, or one of the other categories available. So, to keep submitters from wasting editors' time from having to find the proper category for their sites, this actually forces submitters to make the choice themselves. And, please, follow the guidelines!

An uncommon type of feedback I get is by the directory users asking that I create a subcategory, not because they have a site to submit, but because this is the type of information they are looking for. I'll be honest, I have no interest in their subjects, but I do let them know that I will look into creating the category if there are enough sites to be added there; I also let them know that I'm not interested in finding such sites. But, hey, if you ever feel a category should be created for your favorite subject then by all means find some sites on that topic and submit them to the most relevant area, an editor might come along and create the needed category. Unfortunately, there is no official way to request that a category be created.

Editor Notes:

I've gained some additional categories lately, some spam prone, hmmm, might be the topic of my next post, and others that I applied to because I was bored out of my mind. Some categories that I've had for about two years and haven't edited in for the last year I decided to drop. Also, after 2 1/2 years of editing I have finally made it over the 5,000 edit mark. Yey! Took a heck of a long time to achieve this. In fact, I've had some kind of renewed energy in editing over the last month. Before this I felt burned-out where my number of edits was slowly dwindling from over 200 to less than 20 per month. Hmmm, whatever.

Editing Stats

I'm very close to three years as an editor, so here are my stats. I swear, I think I saw an editor whose been editing for a whole two months have more than 10,000 edits, haha.

5774 [total edits] / 1765 unique adds / 1543 deletes / 1087 unreviewed

Wow, it's been such a long time since I've posted.

2008-01-21T01:03:00.000-05:00

Okay, so I've been away for awhile. Okay, I was actually too "busy" with other things to write. Okay, truth is that I didn't care to post anything, haha. I've been neglecting my blog and have possibly lost the one last reader that I had, lol. Anyway, I've been editing as much as I've been posting. I had fewer than 30 edits for the month of Dec. 2007. I've noticed that my average edits per month is slowly declining, I used to have approximately 200 edits per month average, but now its under 180 edits per month.

I've been kind of burning out the last couple of months, which is why I haven't edited much. Even though I had about 27 edits for Dec. 2007, I think about 5 were actually added sites and the others were moves, deletes, or editing the text. I'm trying to get back to editing more, but I just don't feel like it. Ha! I don't really feel like posting in this blog, but I'm doing it anyway, even if it is out of reluctance. I don't think this post will be proofread. Well, I'll talk to you in another 4 months, hahah.

STATS:
4433 / 1338 unique adds / 1126 deletes / 840 unreviewed

Where to Find Sites for Your Dmoz Editor Application?

2007-09-14T17:43:00.000-05:00

I know how hard it is to find sites for an ODP/Dmoz application. You search the search engines for some relief only to find the results less than desirable. You waste your time searching pages in the double digits only to find one site that might be listable in your chosen category, and by the time you find that possibly listable site a good chunk of your time has gone by. What a complete waste of time you wonder. Or, you scourer message boards looking in signature only to find most of it unlistable affiliate junk. Well, I have some quick ways for you to find some sites for your Dmoz/ODP application within as little time as possible. This will work for editors and non-editors alike, but of course, if you're already an editor then you have the upper hand.

Where to find sites for your ODP/Dmoz editor application:

1) Directories
--This is a very good place to mine for links. Just make sure you're not mining an ODP clone, though, because then you'd have a problem. The good thing about directories is the links are cataloged by topic so you're able to find many links on any given subject in the same place. Keep in mind that every directory doesn't have the same listing guidelines as Dmoz so make sure you check the links carefully before putting them on your application. The Yahoo! directory is my first stop when looking for sites to add to my categories or put on an editor application. It's also more easy to drill down and find the correct category than Dmoz, so the Yahoo! directory is definitely more user friendly than Dmoz. As a side note, you'll probably run into more unlistable sites than listable ones, but it's a much better use of your time than simply search a spammy search engine. Oh! I can't forget, you should also search niche directories because you're more likely to find listable sites there than in general directories like Yahoo.

2) Blogging sites
--Take advantage of it. There are millions of blogs, although most probably aren't worth listing, but there are many that are worth listing but aren't. Dmoz lists sites by topic first, so see if you can find any blogs for your topic of choice by doing a thorough search of some of the major, or minor, blogging sites on the 'net. A good place to start is Blogger.com.

3) Message boards.
--Message boards and chat rooms are some places to find listable sites. It can be sometimes time-consuming but it could be worth it depending on if you look in the right place. Look for message boards that are dedicated to your topic and you'll have a much better chance of finding listable sites. You'll have a much harder time finding sites on message boards that allow affiliate and spammy links in signatures. When I look for sites on message boards I usually pull them from people's signature or seek out those that are asking for a site review.

4) Links from other websites.
--Yes, you can also find sites from the links section of other sites. Go ahead and scroll Dmoz or Yahoo, or any other directory and find sites that have a links page and check out some of those links. You'll find that many legitimate sites also link to other legitimate sites along the same topic.

These are just a few suggestions to get your search for listable sites for your Dmoz editor application off to a good and less-frustrating start. You shouldn't stop at only these suggestions because good sites can be found anywhere. Always make sure that for any sites you find you take the time to make sure they're not already listed in the directory, even if it's a different category. You can always use the search feature of Dmoz, but it's not always current. Current editors have a much easier way to check to see if a site is already listed.

-------OTHER NEWS--------

Okay, the categories I can edit are becoming boring. Especially the last category I was approved for. I feel like resigning it because it's so uninteresting. Plus, all the mis-titled sites, some of which look like spam, that are submitted to the category; and that's not including the misplaced sites. Maybe I should begin preparing for another category this time? Hmm, I don't know. I'm beginning to not enjoy editing in the same old categories with the same old types of sites. It's becoming so boring to me. Well, I have been preparing for any future categories by dumping any relevant sites in my editor bookmarks category. Maybe I should look through them to see if I have at least two sites that belong in the same category then apply for it. Or, maybe not.

Current stats:
3977 [Total edits] / 1174 unique adds / 1018 deletes / 734 unreviewed

NOTE: Surprise, surprise. This post isn't proofread.

ODP, or, Dmoz, Feedback I've Received.

2007-09-07T22:20:00.000-05:00

In this post I'll go over some of the feedback, or, e-mail, I've received from submitters. Now, I don't receive much e-mail, but I do read, and sometimes respond, to e-mail from the public. Here is just a sample of some of the public feedback I've received and my response, if any, to them. These messages are not word-for-word from the e-mails I've received, but are instead a summary of them. My comments are after the fact.

1) Did I submit to the correct category?
---No. Your site's not in English, but here's a link to the proper category in World.
My comments: I think he was secretly asking for me to list his site, but there wasn't even an English version for it. I'm online most of the time so I responded to him within minutes. In fact, the subject line of the e-mail was "please add turkish (tÃ¼rkÃ§e)".

2.1) Dear editor, I'm checking the status of my submission. I submitted an update request and just want to know if it was sent to this category (Health/...) since the content has changed and is waiting there.
---Dear sir, according to Dmoz guidelines sites have to have unique content and unfortunately your site no longer meet those guidelines. Oh, and here's a link to resource-zone.com in case you need further explanation of unique content.
My Comments: Why in the hell did I refer him to Resource-zone? Ah, never mind. It took about 5-10 minutes to find out his content wasn't original, but was instead stolen from more official health sites. I took 5-10 minutes verifying just to make sure I was making the correct decision before deleting his site. He didn't even bother to cite the stolen content, so hence my use of the word stolen. He responded to my e-mail, so read 2.2.

2.2)Dear editor, thank you for your response and I understand what you mean. Had I known that my site would have been removed then I would have never submitted the update request in the first place. Please consider relisting my site [link and proposed description]. Thanks for your time.
---No response.
My Comments: Now, I did take a peek at the site again. He had added the previous content back plus the stolen content. I wasn't going to relist the site because over half was still stolen content from other sites. Plus, the part I highlighted is what tipped me off that after I re-add the site then he might change it back to having only the stolen health information. So, I intentionally sat on it for a few months then checked it again, and, viola, he changed the site back to the stolen content. He did resubmit the site after the major server crash and I promptly deleted it with the same message as before - stolen content from several health sites.

3.1)Hi, I submitted my site in your category [link].
---Your site is already listed in the above category [link to above category].
My Comments: I went to my favorite message board and begged people to submit their sites to the category or to at least post the links in the thread I created because I needed sites to add to the category. Now, most people probably posted a link to their site in the thread. I never promised a listing, but that I would review it and add it if possible. Most of the sites were recently created message boards with nearly no content and couldn't be added anyway. She responded, so read 3.2.

3.2) Yes, I know its listed, but we just added a section dedicated to this topic. Please consider adding it.
---No response
My Comments: I thought it over. There were other sites in the subcategories that were listed in the above category, so why not this one I thought. Most of those deep links were listed before I became the active editor of that category. Unfortunately, the big server crash wiped out the suggestion and I had a lot of time to think about the suggestion through the server restore and eventually decided not to list the deep link. Unfair? Maybe - but it wasn't anything personal against the webmaster because I'd never communicated with her before she sent the e-mail. Also, keep in mind it was already listed and she wanted it deep linked in an immediate subcategory.

4) Dear editor, I submitted my site last year and its not listed. Is there something wrong with my site?
---No response.
My Comments: (Uncontrollable laughter) That is probably the oldest ploy to get a site reviewed/listed - but it worked! Dmoz had just come off the major server crash and anyone who submitted sites before the crash had to resubmit, and that's still true in present time. So the guy mentioned he had submitted last year so his site is most likely no longer in review. Even though I wasn't actively editing at that time the e-mail did pique my interest and I took a look at the site. I was actually a pretty good site, so I added it along with some sites on the links page. No response needed.

5) Hi, I've been trying to get my site listed in your category. Is there anything I can do to speed up the review? Possibly for other sites?
---No response.
My Comments: Subtle bribe request. Lets just say that his domain will never be listed in the directory. I did look at the site and I did check and verify that it was in the category. Too bad, because at the rate in which I was editing and with the types of categories I was interested in his site would have eventually been added on its own merit. Patience is a virtue.

6) I've been submitting my family's site to the directory for awhile. Is there anything you can do to help?
---No response.
My Comments: I can't remember if I checked to see if the site was in the category or not, but I did take a look at it with no intention of reviewing it for a listing. I just wanted to make sure it was listable because if not then I'd delete it from the category. No response needed. This is a category where, like e-mail #5, some people might ask for bribes, so I'm not really interested in reviewing sites for this category when I receive an e-mail. Plus, you never know when the person has offered a bribe on a site you don't know about then e-mails you asking for help getting listed (with or minus the bribe offer).

7.1)Hi there. Why was my site removed? I was an editor for several years for a few subcats and I added the site myself. The site is better than most of the sites in the category. The category no longer exists but my site wasn't moved into the upper category with the rest. Why not? [link to Google directory where site is listed]. Ignore this if you didn't remove my site. And to whom did remove my site, Google is now updating their directory and my site won't be included for another few months or years. Thanks for nothing.
---No response.
My Comments: She sent me another e-mail a couple of hours after this, read 7.2. I'll say that she's lucky I read the second e-mail before I read this one. I don't know if it's luck that she picked me as the editor that removed her site or if she sent an angry e-mail to other editors, too. Funniest part of this e-mail: 'I know my site is one of the best in the category'. If you know which category it is then that alone will make you laugh, but the biggest laughter came after I looked at the site. Sorry, but don't we all think our sites are the best there is, the best there was, and the best there will ever be? But, anyway, there wasn't anything "better" about her site than the rest in the category. The part that made me angry: 'Thanks for nothing.' I have no obligation to list or review anyone's site. It's that simple. I did re-review it and add it back to the category that same day as the e-mail. Fact is that I was the editor that removed her site when I deleted the category and didn't add it back to the directory. When I quickly glanced at the site its content and Dmoz description didn't match. I didn't have time to re-review it so put it into unreviewed with a message to myself or any editor that happens upon it that the content had changed and it needed a re-review. Most of the time I don't go back and re-review the sites myself. But, the reason why her site was removed from the directory was because the content had changed and I didn't have time, at that time, to give it a re-review. I wouldn't recommend sending an angry e-mail to an editor when you want them to review or list your site.

7.2) Sorry if I was mean in my e-mail. I was pretty mad at the time.
---No response.
My Comments: This is the e-mail I read first when I was on break at work. I couldn't figure out who it was from or why they had sent me an apology. I didn't have time to read the rest of my e-mail until later that day, which, of course, is when I discovered the angry letter. Her site eventually got re-listed that same day, although, as she mentions, it's probably not included in the most recent Google update. Plus, what kind of person would I be if I didn't re-review a site I removed because it needed a re-review? :-D

8) I've submitted my site. Can you check the status.
---It's waiting for review.
My Comments: I spent a few hours searching to see if this person had offered a bribe anywhere. I couldn't find anything. I didn't spend every single minute of those few hours researching this because I like to multi-task. But, eventually, I made the choice to respond with a status check. It was a hastily written e-mail, but it was still readable. So much for my research on this issue because after I responded I found a post by him on a forum asking for a status check. People intentionally skipped over his message, but it's smart to actually ask someone who has the ability to look in the category's unreviewed to make sure your site made it to the category than to ask someone who obviously can't. No harm here; just some curious webmaster who wanted to know the status of his site.

Now you have a glimpse on what an individual editor is thinking when an e-mail is received via public feedback and the types of e-mail that are sent. Some editors don't read them, some editors read them and don't respond, and some editors are like me and don't mind corresponding with the public. It's an editors choice on what they want to do. It is discouraged by other editors though, but I'm capable of making up my own mind regarding these types of matters.

Current editor stats:
3922 [total edits] / 1150 unique adds / 1010 deletes / 721 unreviewed

NOTE: Sorry, again, this post is not proofread. There might be mistakes, but I might have time to correct them later and to make sure things are as clear as possible.

The Google Directory Has FINALLY Been Updated From Dmoz/ODP.

2007-09-07T19:55:00.000-05:00

The Google Directory has been updated!!!!!! Can you believe that! The Google Directory hasn't been updated since maybe 2005, although I've seen on other websites where they say it hasn't been updated since early 2006. The copyright on the Google Directory before this recent update was 2005 and the copyright now is 2007. One thing is for sure and that's that it's about damn time! Some editors have been following this Google outdatedness closely and some even taking it personally, although I think they try to hide their frustration through certain types of proposals on the Internal forum.

So, you're probably wondering why after over one year of not updating that Google finally decides to update their directory when it seems like they were going to let it die into oblivion? Well, editors got fed up and began throwing sticks at AOL, yes, the AOL, and someone within AOL began prodding Google with one of those sticks. Thank you AOL/Dmoz staff!!!!! Great job and persistence indeed.

It seems Google took the Dmoz RDF, RFD, anyway the Dmoz "data dump" to begin parsing it sometime in August, some websites have the approximate date as sometime in early August 2007. According to an editor who has been following this update closely, the update began on a few of Google's data centers in Europe and over a span of weeks most, if not all, data centers were eventually updated. It was taking so long to update all the data centers that I thought Google had just abandoned the update. But, no fear, with AOL/Dmoz staff we now have an updated Google directory.

If your site was included in the Dmoz directory before Google downloaded the data dump, sometime in August, then your site will appear in the Google directory. If your site appear after they downloaded the database then your site won't appear in the Google directory, so I guess you'll have to wait for the next Google directory update, hehehhe, there's something sinister about saying that.

What This ODP/Dmoz Editor Is Up To? Well, since you asked....

2007-08-29T18:50:00.000-05:00

Alrighty, I think it's been a long while since I posted anything of relevance of what I've been up to. I know you, my faithful reader - okay, even I can't say that with a straight face - have been wondering what I've been up to, right? Well, I don't want to keep your worried selves wondering and thinking the worse. Have I resigned as editor because I got tired of it? Was I removed for some weird reason? Am I not interested enough in the ODP to talk about it? Am I not interested enough in this blog to write anything? Am I just plain lazy and don't feel like bringing my fingers to the keyboard and push down on the keys and move my mouse to the publish button? Am I,...wait, wait. I think the last question might be the answer to the question of why I haven't posted in awhile.

Yep. I've been too lazy to post. It's bad enough being too lazy or tired to proof read my post, but I've been too lazy to write in my blog. I've never been interested in blogs anyway and think they're boring; so boring that I don't even want to read my own blog! Okay, getting back on topic as to why I haven't posted in a while. I have created a couple of posts since my last "real" post (not the one regarding the ODP announcement) but was got bored too quickly to finish them. Maybe I'll finish them another time. I know one post I'm really interested in publishing, and its almost finished, but, ah, I don't feel like it. Okay on to the news you all have been waiting for.....WHAT HAS THIS ODP/DMOZ EDITOR BEEN DOING SINCE HER LAST POST?

Well, since my last post I've accumulated 100s of edits. Reached over 1,100 unique adds! Added more categories and higher permissions to my editing privileges. And, last but definitely not least, have added a new favorite category who's sites I like reviewing and adding. Right now, I'm able to edit in 7 separate categories in 4 different sections of the directory and with over 24,936 listed sites and thousands more awaiting review between those categories. Doesn't seem like much, but you don't think I'm going to take over the Dmoz in less than 2 years do you? Right now it's a Dmoz takeover and tomorrow its the world, muhahahahah. See, I have very high ambitions :-).

I've focused my editing on mostly adding sites since I want to increase my number of adds. My current goals are to increase my unique adds some more, especially in my new favorite category; maybe spend some time looking for some dead links or high jacks; and, of course, apply for more categories and possibly higher permissions.

My editing stats at the time of this post:
3826 [total edits]/ 1124 unique adds / 964 deletes / 708 unreviewed

This is becoming a standard disclaimer over the last few posts, but: I have not proof read this post and the only time I will read it is when I'm actually writing. It's possible there will be spelling errors and sentences/words that don't make sense, so keep in mind that these errors are there because I haven't proofread this post. Hey, I'm too lazy!

ODP ANNOUNCEMENT: Editor's won't be able to edit for approximately 72 hours.

2007-07-27T12:25:00.000-05:00

An announcement by ODP staff on the internal fora, which they have agreed should be made into a public announcement, is that AOL staff is upgrading the IT infrastructure and while its taking place the editing side will not be available for approximately 72 hours. They don't think it will necessarily take this long, but this is the time-frame they are giving. That doesn't mean that editors will be completely cut-off from Dmoz while this is happening; they will still have access to the internal fora. The editing side, new editor applications, new permission requests, and things of the nature most likely won't be available during this time span. All of this will begin on Monday, July 30, 2007.

Reds, Greens, and Purples, oh my! - DMOZ

2007-06-03T19:20:00.000-05:00

Okay, so since I'm mostly likely the ONLY active editor in one of the categories I edit I've reluctantly taken care of most of the update requests, most of the greenbusts, and even a few reds.
What do all these colors mean, you ask? Okay, I'll happily tell you.

Reds are the sites that have been removed from the live directory by an automated tool. An editor has to hand check the site to make sure its working again before relisting. Usually, a site will become a red if its a parked page, 404, 403, or one of the many other numbers :-D. They are referred to as reds because of the color they will appear on the editor's dashboard.

Greens are the unreviewed sites. Sites that are suggested by the public will appear green on our dashboard. Greens also include sites that other editors send to the category's unreviewed. To appear as a green a site must be in unreviewed. But, not all sites in unreviewed are greens. ;-)

Purples are the update requests. Whenever you send in an update request for a listed site, such as to request a change in category, title, description, or URL it will appear in a purple color on our dashboard.

Greenbusts also appear in a separate color on the dashboard. It looks like a form of green. In fact, its hard to tell a greenbust from the greens if there are no actual greens in the category and only the greenbust awaiting approval.

Update requests, reds, and greens will all appear in the unreviewed section when an editor enters the category. Greenbusts are not in unreviewed, but are listed, but hidden from the public. I actually realized that I was unreviewing a greenbust when I moved it to a different category.

So, any way, I didn't feel like dealing with the update requests and had hoped that another editor would come through and take a look at them., but I was wrong. What was I thinking when I'm the virtually the only editor who's actively editing the category. There were about 16 update requests waiting for review. I managed to handle all of them but 3. Some update requests asked for removal of their listing, some for updates of descriptions and URLs. Most I probably granted, and I did turn down an odd number, propably around 2-3. Most of the times the update requests for this particular category are reasonable.

Greenbusts are a funky area for me. I don't like reviewing them, but if I were a greenbuster, which I am, then I would want someone to approve/reject my greenbusts as quickly as possible. Eventually, I reluctantly reviewed the greenbusts, too. I think there were around 7 for the category and now there are two left.

Even though I admit to loving the submission and working through them I also have to admit that I haven't been reviewing them lately. I've been listing sites I come across on my own. Sometimes through unrelated searches and other times from forums I visit or stumble upon. I mainly haven't reviewed submitted sites because I'm tired of looking reviewing sites that have nothing to do with the category, plus, I'm looking for something that has a near guidelines compliant title and desciption. Most don't, and those I overlook. Now, I did come across a site that I listed yesterday that was written very well and guidelines compliant. I only had to change one thing and that was a couple of words that shouldn't have been capitalized.

Okay, this might seem like an abrupt stop to my post, but darn I'm tired! Work and finals tomorrow and I'm getting some sleep.

Current stats:

3118 / 922 unique adds / 811 deletes / 545 unreviewed

Ha! I just realized while posting this that I'm getting closer to 1,000 adds. Now, that's something to work toward! Plus, the gap between my adds and deletes is steadily getting bigger. ;-)

This post isn't proofread because I'm too darn tired.

Dmoz, ODP, and Resource-zone, Oh My!

2007-05-25T21:17:00.000-05:00

*sigh*

I did take 8 days off from editing, but I did log in every day to read the sometimes interesting internal forum. :-D What can I say? Fights, arguments, and flaming - Oh My! Ahahahahhahah. Other than that it gets boring pretty quickly. There use to be a regular interval of posts pre-crash, now, post-crash, posts aren't as abundant as they used to be. It's actually kinda boring reading the Dmoz internal forum except when they're arguing with each other, hehehheheh. I think there are a bunch of drama kings and queens within Dmoz that love nothing more than to argue none stop.

Arguing non-stop I say? Doesn't that remind you of another place on the Internet full of editors who love to flame, fight, and belittle? Geez, I can't think of the name of it. Oh, yeah, its the boring place called Resource-zone (R-Z) where editors go to post when they want to feel powerful and special. I've noticed one of the Resource-zone regulars isn't posting their anymore. Suffice it to say he/she is still posting on other webmaster forums but not at R-Z anymore. R-Z has actually become more peaceful and bearable since this editor left, most likely not on his/her own! Maybe forced out by other meta editors? Maybe given an ultimatum to ship up or shape out? er, Shape up or ship out. Maybe the editor chose to ship out? Maybe the editor was banned? I haven't bother to log-in in awhile. I'll give you a hint of what they do behind the scenes of R-Z in their little private editors' only forum: they talk about posters behind their backs.

Hey, I've tried to get my membership on that forum removed for the longest but was told I can't without a good reason and because its an embarrassment to me as an editor isn't good enough. So, now I'm wondering what in the heck do I have to do as a member/editor (it's even harder for an editor to get their account banned) to get my R-Z account banned, erased, removed, or whatever. The editors that post there don't represent Dmoz or other editors very well. In fact, I think its similar to the infamous and editor-hated Digital Point forum, except on DP webmasters are b!tching and complaining, while on the R-Z its the editors who do the b!tching and complaining and talking about posters behind their backs. There might be one or two editors that have some class at Resource-zone, but that's about it! The rest would fit in very well as members of the Digital Point forums.

Oh, and what can I say. So what if an editor that regularly posts at R-Z doesn't like what I have to say. Resource-zone has definitely earned its reputation, too bad the rest of the Dmoz editors have to suffer the consequences of their under-socialized attitudes!

---------------------------------------

I've resumed editing again after my 8 days of inactivity; I don't think I've ever went that long without editing! Heck, I even edited when I had a bronchiospasm and bronchitis! I called into work sick, missed school, and even called my chiropractor and told her I couldn't make it, but I had time to edit! Okay, okay, I went off topic a little bit....

I've looked at some sites that were submitted and have decided not to edit them at all. I know how much people love seeing those hits in their web stats from Dmoz.org and then go to Dmoz and don't see their site listed. Muhahahahahah. I love toying with you people! I'll click on a link to leave a Dmoz referrer in the web stats then don't edit the site at all. Hahahahah. Okay, I don't do it intentionally. But, I did click on a link and I got an e-mail from that person asking for their site's status a few hours later. Man, some people are quick! I didn't respond because I already listed his site and eventually he'd find it somewhere in the directory.

Latest Dmoz Goings-on.

Okay, I did do a lot of editing and adding sites and then I got so worn out I had to take a few days off. I have to admit that I don't feel like editing too much right now, but I am editing some. Have I said lately how much I dislike reviewing greenbusts? Yep, there are a few greenbusts in the category, but I don't really like reviewing them. It's kinda funny when an editor greenbusts his/her own site. Now, there's nothing wrong with it, but it is kinda funny. In fact, I talked with an editor who did that same exact thing! We both laughed at the thought - greenbust your own site and then have someone else approve it. Anyway, enough about greenbusts. Plus, those sites that are being greenbusted takes two reviews. One from the person who greenbusted it and another from an editor who approves or rejects the greenbust. I don't like greenbusting. I'd explain it in a little more detail what greenbusting is, but I don't have time. Suffice it to say that I won't be reviewing too many greenbusts.

Another thing about the categories I have privileges in are the update requests. Now, I've said before that I like handling update requests. It just so happens that there are over 15 update requests in the categories I can edit. Yep, they've built up; some of them duplicates. Some of the update requests will be approved, other rejected. Some have been submitted weeks/months ago, while others were submitted recently. I did go through and handle a couple of them. One update request I e-mailed the webmaster for more information. The other update requests I don't feel like handling. I have looked at some of them, but have decided not to do anything, mostly because the site needs a re-review which I'm not doing at this time. Maybe another editor will get around to them.

By far the easiest thing to do right now is to take a quick look at a site and send it to the proper sub category. I don't know why I'm still surprised that people don't bother reading the category guidelines that tell them to submit to the lowest category in that section. It's like they submit it just to be done with it because the editor will do most of the work....well, okay...that might be true. I will take the time to either sort them to the correct category or even review and list them. But, I don't recommend submitting your site to the top portion of the category when it will easily fit into a sub category. Most likely it'll stay there for a very long time, hehehehehe.

Here are my current editor stats. I'm happy to finally have over 900 adds. I'm a little under 100 shy of reaching 1,000 adds! I'm also happy to have made it over the 3,000 edits mark. It's not easy accumulating edits, especially adds; too much time involved reviewing boring sites - if I review a site then it has to be a thorough review, not a quick glimpse, I like to read the content and describe it accordingly and in detail.

3062 / 905 unique adds / 794 deletes / 538 unreviewed

Compare my stats to the ones in my previous post and you'll see that I've done a lot of editing since I published the last post.

Lets see, what could I write about in my next post?

- Things I like and dislike about the Dmoz?
- Editors I like and dislike?
- Sites I like and dislike?
- Webmasters that I like and dislike?
- How to handle disagreements with other editors in an effective way?
- Some good Dmoz insider tips for submitting sites?

Hmm, the last one seems like a good idea. Well, I cross that bridge when I get to that point.

Disclaimer: I haven't proof-read this post because I'm too darn tired. Maybe I'll get around to it before I decide to post again, or maybe not. So if something doesn't make sense or is misspelled then its because it hasn't been proof-read.

The REAL Reason Your Site Isn't Listed On Dmoz.org

2007-04-24T20:00:00.000-05:00

Okay, here's the real scoop on why your site isn't listed, and believe me, this is something juicy and devious. You're not going to believe your eyes when you read this! I tell you IT'S A COMPLETE CONSPIRACY. BUT...first a message from Yours Truly...

***Ahh, never mind.

~Your's Truly***

Okay, so now I can see your mouth watering and your thumbs twitching just waiting for the REAL reason why your site isn't listed, and, nope, it's not because it's a crappy site, na ah, it's not because it's low on unique content, either. The REAL reason your site hasn't been listed is because it's TOO DARN BORING!

Yep, you've heard it from me first. I'm the first Dmoz editor to break her silence on this issue - hey, I wanted to spare your feelings! I really did! But, the time has come for me to speak out and say that you all, yes YOU(!) create some very boring sites. I've litterally fallen asleep at my computer while reviewing a site, and it's happened more than once!

Do this quick test of your site to see if your site is too boring to be reviewed by...some...editor...who...hates...boring...sites. READ THE CONTENT. Yes, if not even You can get through the boring content of your site, then it's too darn boring! If you find yourself skipping words, sentences, and paragraphs then it's TOO DARN BORING! REMEMBER, these are Your written words, and if not even you can stand to read it, then why should you expect someone else to?

If you have one of those sites that you, as its author and owner, don't even want to read then spice it up. I'll tell you what this Dmoz editor likes to review:

Flash, it's fancy and will always keep my attention. Just make sure you keep the load time to a minimum because I'm not in the mood to wait 10 minutes for your flash to load, okay, not really, I am actually willing to wait for a reasonable amount of time for flash to load - I like flash, what can I say?

Colorful, I'm a sucker for a site with nice blending colors on it. PLEASE don't make them clashing colors, I'm BEGGING you.

Interesting, If you can't even keep your own attention when you're reading your site then how are you going to keep mine? It is Your content right? All written by you, right? Then spice it up!

Content, which kind of goes along with Interesting. You need interesting content to keep my attention, and most likely yours, too! If I can't get past the first paragraph on your site then that means its too boring. No, wait, I wrote that incorrectly...If YOU can't get past the first paragraph on your site then it means its too boring! I'm one of those editors that will actually read the content on the site rather than just browse through it, so PLEASE make your words Interesting.

Okay, so now you know what I, as an editor, like to review. Which means, if I like to review it then I'll review more of it, which, consequently, means I'll review more sites - maybe.

EDITOR STATS

2791 [total edits] / 836 unique adds / 737 deletes / 494 unreviewed

Notes of interest

I've been editing a lot lately. Yes, renewed engergy in editing! More ambition to apply for more categories! MORE ambition to want to take over Dmoz. MUHAHAHHAHHAHAHA! And, it was just a month or two ago that those boring sites became so mundane that I wanted to stop editing for awhile.

Anyway, I'm back and full of energy and ready to take over Dmoz, I mean, tackle more categories. Sorry for the Freudian slip!

I've been collecting sites for future categories and have already decided on two categories I'm going to apply for at the same time.

I have FINALLY(!) gotten my total adds to come close to equaling my deletes. That has been bothering me for a long time. Seriously! My deletes always outweighed my adds by close to 100 edits. It's less time consuming to delete a site than add it. So, I'm going to try to focus on adding sites for my next series of edits. I can't promis that though, because I can easily turn into a deleting bug, or, at least an unreviewing bug - which, uncoincidentaly, adds to the number of sites deleted.

Right now, I'm focusing on my current categories and bringing those categories into tip-top shape: re-writing desciptions and making sure the titles and URLs are correct. I'm not going through the whole category to change every description, only the ones that look like they could be updated or the ones where the content is different.

Oh! I had to delete my favorite site that I added to the directory. It was such a hard thing to do. I think I actually cried...HAHAHAHAH, no I didn't. But, it was by far my best acheivement of editing so far, and it was adding a deeplink to the Yahoo! directory. So much for that. I found out other directories shouldn't be deeplinked. What a shame, Yahoo! makes a good deeplinking directory.

It's Baaack!

2007-02-22T23:19:00.000-05:00

New editor applications that is. Yep, you can now apply for Dmoz editor once again. I have checked the editor application link and it's working because I don't get the error page that was once showing. Here are my editor stats since I'm too lazy to really post anything about them, hahahah. But, I'm still working on cleaning up the categories I got right before the crash. They're almost done. Hopefully, I'll be able to begin adding suggested sites to those categories soon. I'm looking forward to it. I really don't like looking for sites on my own. Okay, psss, here's a secrete. I haven't been actively looking for sites to add to the directory. I've mostly been doing some quality control and cleaning up titles and descriptions of already listed sites. I have found a site or two in my usual places, and I have run across one site by accident that I listed when I visited a forum. Not too much happening. I'm eagerly waiting for those site suggestions to come rolling in! I'm still deciding on which category to apply for once I have my categories clean up. I haven't set a time frame to have my mission complete, but whenever that happens.

Here's my states, and I have been doing a lot of cleaning up on my categories since my last post. BTW, I've tried to increase the gap between the number of deletes and unique adds I have. Too bad it's going in the opposite direction. I have noticed that when I send an already listed site to the unreviewed of another category that it will count as a delete. I haven't worried about the number of deletes I have in a while.

2505 [total edits] / 744 unique adds / 682 deletes / 401 unreviewed

Editing after the Dmoz crash: The same or not?

2007-02-01T19:52:00.000-05:00

Well, there are some obviously different things since Dmoz was opened for editors to commence editing again, some of things you might have heard a lot about. So, no, it's not the same. One thing is the same though: some of those sites are still boring! But, of course I'd never tell the webmaster that. Of course we'd all like to think that we're not the only ones reading our on sites and there are plenty more taking an interest in what we have to say or offer. Well, yeah, maybe you and the Dmoz editor who has to read it.

Well, my 1 year Dmoz anniversary has come and gone. I was tempted to write a post about about 2 weeks later, but, darn, I was just too lazy. I actually began typing the post and decided to quit because I wanted to browse the Internet instead. But, now, I'll say it: My 1 year Dmoz anniversary has come and gone. It certainly doesn't seem like I've been editing for Dmoz for 1 whole year. I'm still very much a newbie editor. I'm also very disappointed to see that after 1 year I only have a little over 2,000 total edits. How pathetic! And, this is coming from someone with big plans to take over Dmoz, oh, I mean to move up the Dmoz editor ladder. I guess I'll have to edit more than 3 sites a weeks to reach my supreme Dmoz goal. Hahah, all the time I have to spend over the Internet and very little of it goes to editing. Not to mention that post crash I'm editing even fewer sites. I'm less enthusiastic of editing since the editing was restored. I blame it on those boring sites I have to review. Sometimes reviewing sites is just plain boring. I'm actually thinking about taking some times off from editing then coming back with new, improved editing energy. Those damn boring sites!

Anyway, back to my editing statistics. It looks like I'm going to have to reevaluate my goals and make them a little more realistic based on how much I edit. Unless I get more enthusiastic about editing, then I'd say it'll take me about 3 years on a more conservative scale to reach editall status. I'm banking on about 2 more years at my current rate.

STATS

2314 total edits / 699 unique adds / 615 deletes / 387 unreviewed