I recently was looking into the submission status for our website at DMOZ so naturally I came across www.resource-zone.com which seems to be the forum for the (volunteer) editors of DMOZ. Nice little forum and seems to work well. However once I posted my question about the status of my submission I decided I would look around. I came across this post. I am removing the responses not directly on topic.
Again, some of the posts were left out to read in full look hereDonaldB(DMOZ Editor): It looks like your application was reviewed and denied. I think it may be time to find a different hobby.
Cooleditor2(Applicant): Could you give the reason(s) i failed? it will help me for my next application.
I read the submission guidelines.
The category i chose had 2 links only.
Experience: editor for zeal.com, musicmoz.org, and editor for dmoz.org about 2 years ago.
Titles and descriptions were fine to me.
Motsa(editor): I would take donaldb's suggestion that "it may be time to find a different hobby" literally and not apply again.
Cooleditor2(Applicant): You are right Mosta but
1 It was a suggestion
2 This is the OPEN directory, open to volunteers from all around the world
DonaldB(DMOZ Editor): Two thumbs up for the effort, but I think it is time for you to forget about the ODP
Now this seems to be the type of attitude you find riddled thruout DMOZ. The "Because I said so." It is almost impossible to get a straight response. The concept of ODB seems pretty straightforward and a good one. However I am wondering if better checks and balances should be in place for submissions for not only websites but editors as well. I think if your application for either one of those items is turned down an email should be sent explaining why. I would even write the script(for free!) that would make this as easy as cake.
I guarantee that there would be a lot less frustration about the ODP and you would have a LOT less resubmissions thus cutting down previously rejected websites that these volunteers have to go thru. It may even decrease unethical SEO practices.
For example I submit site A. Site A has some masked text. An editor reviews the site sees the Maked text. The editor uses the a generic form letter that has a box checked explaining the rejection (possibly even a small text area for custom text). The owner of site A gets his letter decides to either fix the issue or not. Then resubmits if the issue gets fixed.
In many instances if the problem cannot be fixed or the owner will not fix the problem the site will never be resubmitted relieving the pressure on the volunteer editors. The system works MUCH better.
What do you guys think? Sorry bout the long windedness!