Editors are these people that live in remote areas of the world and deny my the right to opinionated definitions of certain words.
Me: I hope the UD editors will let me associate homework with anal penetration in my new definition.
Editors: DENIED!!
Me: Nooooes! *Huddles in corner and makes a face like this--> D: *
Editors: DENIED!!
Me: Nooooes! *Huddles in corner and makes a face like this--> D: *
by iowngod May 22, 2007
Some of them are noobs that just reject every submission that comes their way. Others are actually intelligient and choose the right definitions to go in and reject the absolutely stupid definitions.
by Freakin' Sweet! October 15, 2006
by Moiraa April 15, 2008
The news is of the people, by the people, for the people. Urban Dictionary is of the people, by the people, for the editors.
This definition, however, is by an editor, for editors... and for anyone else who cares.
Editors, in a general sense, are individuals that check and double-check the works of other people, to make sure those people don't come off as sounding like complete fools.
Editors on Urban Dictionary are an interesting breed. There are a number of things that separate them from the generic editor:
1) UD editors cannot actually edit the content of definitions that people submit--they only have the power to accept or reject.
- This means, unfortunately, that many definitions will be a little bit incoherent because they otherwise adhere to editing guidelines. There is nothing that can be done about this. They probably hate this fact as much as you do.
2) UD editors have ABSOLUTELY NO MEANS of contacting people who submit definitions.
- This means you have no right to feel miffed when your definition is rejected 'for no reason'--there IS a reason, we just don't have the means to tell you.
3) UD editors unconditionally hate it when people use full names when not referring to popular culture. This is something that you won't find with editors of other things.
- This means that when you submit a definition that solely consists of how much you hate someone or how awesome somebody is, the editors want to kill you. Being an editor does not change this. Disguising it as a legitimate definition does not change this. JAMieE IS BeIGN A FAGGGGOEt does not change this. GTFO.
4) UD editors get a sizable amount of hate for doing what they do. The very idea of this is absurdly hilarious, because it is the editors that keep this website from degenerating into a cesspool of interpersonal issues.
- This means (to keep it simple) that editors do NOT hate you... unless you write your definition like you're on fifty narcotics.
5) UD editors do not have absolute power.
- This means that a submission must go through MULTIPLE EDITORS before it is finally accepted and published! We are not lazy bums, we are not overworked--we just require consensus to do anything. Don't be pissed because it takes a few days for your submission to be reviewed.
6) UD editors are not perfect. Some are worse than others.
- This means that YES, there are stupid editors who will not publish for equally stupid reasons. See number 5, and keep in mind that the good ones hate them as much as you do.
tl;dr version:
UD editors know what it's like. If you are not a UD editor, you don't know what it's like. I am a UD editor trying to get you to understand what it's like. I will probably fail.
In other words, this is my attempt to get non-editors to get what editors are and what they do, and (for the most part) what they think about YOU. Whether it is effective or not is entirely my fault--so don't hate the editors.
This definition, however, is by an editor, for editors... and for anyone else who cares.
Editors, in a general sense, are individuals that check and double-check the works of other people, to make sure those people don't come off as sounding like complete fools.
Editors on Urban Dictionary are an interesting breed. There are a number of things that separate them from the generic editor:
1) UD editors cannot actually edit the content of definitions that people submit--they only have the power to accept or reject.
- This means, unfortunately, that many definitions will be a little bit incoherent because they otherwise adhere to editing guidelines. There is nothing that can be done about this. They probably hate this fact as much as you do.
2) UD editors have ABSOLUTELY NO MEANS of contacting people who submit definitions.
- This means you have no right to feel miffed when your definition is rejected 'for no reason'--there IS a reason, we just don't have the means to tell you.
3) UD editors unconditionally hate it when people use full names when not referring to popular culture. This is something that you won't find with editors of other things.
- This means that when you submit a definition that solely consists of how much you hate someone or how awesome somebody is, the editors want to kill you. Being an editor does not change this. Disguising it as a legitimate definition does not change this. JAMieE IS BeIGN A FAGGGGOEt does not change this. GTFO.
4) UD editors get a sizable amount of hate for doing what they do. The very idea of this is absurdly hilarious, because it is the editors that keep this website from degenerating into a cesspool of interpersonal issues.
- This means (to keep it simple) that editors do NOT hate you... unless you write your definition like you're on fifty narcotics.
5) UD editors do not have absolute power.
- This means that a submission must go through MULTIPLE EDITORS before it is finally accepted and published! We are not lazy bums, we are not overworked--we just require consensus to do anything. Don't be pissed because it takes a few days for your submission to be reviewed.
6) UD editors are not perfect. Some are worse than others.
- This means that YES, there are stupid editors who will not publish for equally stupid reasons. See number 5, and keep in mind that the good ones hate them as much as you do.
tl;dr version:
UD editors know what it's like. If you are not a UD editor, you don't know what it's like. I am a UD editor trying to get you to understand what it's like. I will probably fail.
In other words, this is my attempt to get non-editors to get what editors are and what they do, and (for the most part) what they think about YOU. Whether it is effective or not is entirely my fault--so don't hate the editors.
Prima: "My editor must hate me or something. I'm on the sixth draft and he still isn't happy with the manuscript."
Secunda: "Haha, I know the feeling man."
Prima: "Well, I guess it IS their job..."
Secunda: "Truth."
Prima: "OMG those dumb editors rejected my definition again! i hate those guys! WTF!"
Secunda: "...I'm sure they hate you too. Write better definitions."
Prima: "I'm an Urban Dictionary editor!"
Secunda (et al.): "FLAAAAAAMED!"
Secunda: "Haha, I know the feeling man."
Prima: "Well, I guess it IS their job..."
Secunda: "Truth."
Prima: "OMG those dumb editors rejected my definition again! i hate those guys! WTF!"
Secunda: "...I'm sure they hate you too. Write better definitions."
Prima: "I'm an Urban Dictionary editor!"
Secunda (et al.): "FLAAAAAAMED!"
by ReySquared May 05, 2009
The best new feature on Urban Dictionary. Finally we can have a dictionary without personal crap, circular definitions, racist opinions, partisan politics, advertising, pointless drivel, and impersonations.
by I'd rather not give it March 13, 2005
by sammykinzandabster June 27, 2009
On urbandictionary.com, the people who are responsible for approving or denying definition submissions but take WAY too long (at least weeks) for one or both of two reasons: they're lazy and don't really care, or there aren't enough of them to handle all of the submissions, of which I'm sure there is an overwhelming amount.
I think it's been almost a whole month since I submitted a few definitions, and it still says "Your submission is under review by editors" for all of them. I doubt they were denied because they didn't include anything that could possibly offend anyone, advertising, names, even personal opinions, or anything against urbandictionary.com's guidelines.
by annoyed with November 03, 2007