Is this how you treat your editors, DMOZ?

I recently applied to become a DMOZ editor.
Now, my application was rejected which was disappointing.
What was very unfortunate, though, was their reason for rejecting.
I mean...is this how you treat your editors DMOZ? If so, just forget it.

 

I agree, that is no way to act towards applicants.

 

I too absolutely agree. Were it true, It would be disgraceful.

I processed Quiver's application a few hours ago and this is what I actually said.

The comment was prompted by his proposed website descriptions which were:-

I'm well used to misunderstandings here and outrageous claims too, but this is the first time I've seen such a gross distortion of actuality.

Good idea Zachary (if that's your real name).

<added> Reference for other meta editors and catmods - 173000

 

I don't mind the fact I was rejected. But the reason you gave for rejecting me was not the reason I received. I would have much rather received the reason above than what I actually received. Thanks for accusing me of lying. Are you saying google is a liar too?

 

I am saying YOU are the liar. Whatever anyone else has said, whatever search results with "hearsay" that you can scrounge up, they have nothing to do with the crock of garbage you have clearly made up.

Anyone with common sense should just think for a minute and ask themselves "Why would a person reviewing an application say something like that"? It obviously does not make any sense at all. They dont know you, its unprovoked and obviously not very nice. Its also too far fetched to believe.

Its a cut & paste job and a blatant lie. I have read many claims from rejected applicants, but this is without doubt the lowest of them all. Quiver....you have shown what a pitiful human being you really are.

For the record - I am a Catmod Editor for DMOZ and I can see the full application review and it is exactly as Jim Noble states.

 

I agree, its more likely a cut n paste from the OP

 

Now that I'm awake in the middle of the night here, here's some more info.
The applicant's claimed real name is Zachary Roberts.
The requested category was Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Hosting/R
Linkedin shows the same name is Chief Executive Officer at Rat Hosting.
If it's the same bloke, and I don't believe in coincidences, he 'forgot' to declare that in his application.

 

Apology to jump in:

The description above is not bad. However, it only suitable to be used in paid ads. In directory it should be:

or

Advertisement: 0% (the description has no advertisement but sound just like advertise the listing)
SLA: 20% (SLA=Sound Like Advertisement)
Clarity: 90% (description clearly describe the listing)

 

LOL...Rat hosting in his signature.

I hope Google index this thread so that everyone can see the lack of integrity held by the operators of Rat Hosting. What a wonderful advertisement for his services (NOT.)

Would you want a person that blatantly lies, does cut and paste jobs and "forgets" to disclose information....hosting your site? I would be moving hosts immediately

 

That's doubtful; he was obviously trying to deliberately deceive DMOZ .... he got busted.

 

Hah! I didn't notice that
He wasn't busted for lying; he was declined with constructive advice for having poor grammar and failure to understand our objectives. Had he heeded that advice and tried again instead of ranting here, he'd likely have been an editor by now.

 

You guys are disgraceful. You only have to take one look at Google to find how much of an asshole you all are.

 

So you endorse the scam that the OP was trying to pull over DMOZ?

 

Nah, it's obvious how you guys take every single opportunity and twist it round to suite your own needs. I mean seriously dude, really think people will fall for this?

 

I not one of "you guys" and not an editor. Do you even realize what this guy was trying to pull at DMOZ and sneak in as an editor? Don't you think those that try to pull a scam should not be called on it? It is doing exactly what this guy was probably going to try and do that people complain so much about DMOZ for --- they finally stop one before it happened and you are complaining about that ... go figure!

 

No mate, what I'm saying is, these "editors" (or how I like to call them, assholes) are in the wrong. That is why people hate DMOZ.

 

Care to explain how are they in the wrong in this case? They kept out someone who was not being honest in their application.

 

I'm saying the response was poorly handled, regardless of the contents of the application. Someone was being rude at DMOZ and now the editors come and back him up making baseless claims against the OP.

 

What baseless claims are they? He lied in his application! He deserves to be treated with contempt and ridiculed. He opened the door for this to happen.

 

So what if he lied, telling someone to go f--k themselves is out of order, or are you saying that's an acceptable response?