“Seriously, what chance do any of us have of becoming editors of gambling categories?”
Approximately 99% if you do it right. If you apply to the top of the Sports gambling section, you’ll get rejected. Apply to a three or four site category, or one outside of gambling to start. Really, you make this sound like its hard. Anyone with half a brain can get accepted to edit a schools or churches category for their own hometown and go from there.
But most people are too lazy to bother to do the work and would rather aimlessly complain.
“why don’t the give a few more a chance at editing.”
That’s like saying why don’t they let you breathe. They do. They simply require people to start small, and most people are too selfish or too lazy or too dumb to understand that concept.
“I tried contacting a category editor once through the link at the bottom of the category and it just bounced.”
And that’s it? LOL. So do it again, and then again, and then again — if you care. If you don’t care, then there isn’t an issue here, but if you do care, then get off your ass an do something.
“Businesses shouldn’t allow that to happen even if they are volunteer operated.”
It’s not a business.
“Either note on the category page that they are not accepting submissions or make sure there are people to review them.”
They do, so this comment is nonsense.
“I don’t know about anyone elses experiences but I would be surprised if anyone without visible experience was allowed to edit a gambling related category.”
Even if true, that just means you have to pay your dues and get experience in a non-controversial area. Duh. I’m sorry but these comments just don’t make any sense. Editing is a privilege. Earn it.
“The non-commercial categories on the other hand are painfully easy to get into. But what’s the point of that?”
That just says it all. Such a person should not be an editor.
“we have received no response and have not been readmitted.”
Nobody gets a response so why mention that? And you were not readmitted probably because your site didn’t deserve or because no on one, including you, took the time to volunteer to edit that category.
“So.. my question is: What constitutes a quality site with original content?”
What kind of question is that? If you don’t know quality content in a niche, why would you submit anything or even talk about editing?
“Anyways, why work for free?”
And of course again this is an example of a person who should never be allowed to edit. Selfish people without a clue as to the mission of the Directory won’t make the Directory better.
“But accusing islandmaan of bribery because he wants to pay someone who may be able to pick the right sites and descriptions is a bit out there.”
That’s not what he said, no matter how many obtuse comments pretend otherwise. People need to learn that actions have consequences. Paying people to get you accepted is a statement of a bribe, either intentionally, or more likely in this case, out of ignorance. The lesson to learn is his statement was inappropriate and could get him and any domain associated with him in trouble. No petulance please.
The bottom line is this industry has a lot of unprofessional, selfish people, and that poisons the well for professional, generous people. Again, if you don’t care about dmoz, fine, don’t care. But the only way gambling sites will be added to a Directory of quality content websites is if people make such sites, then VOLUNTEER to fairly and honestly list such sites, including competitors and their own.
Sorry if any of this sounds harsh, but as I’ve said before, my interests are in seeing a more professional attitude about all things from the non-casino element of gambling webmasters, because the quality folks do battle with the lying, content-thieving, blog-comment spamming trash peddlers (and I don’t mean a blog spammer is a liar or theif, just that these are three types of junk peddlers).
Our aspect of this multi-billion dollar industry will only mature when the people in it act maturely and take responsibility to improve its quality. Of course many people give no crap about quality, but those who do need to do work to encourage it, not aimlessly complain about a lack of it. be the change you want to see.