DMOZ Scandal of the YEAR

DMOZ creates addiction and if your not careful your brain is gone we should notify DEA to bust this narco operation.

 

I am always getting this message, we decide to not approve you.) The first auto reason is promoting your site.But i never do this.They always beware of webmasters but this is a stupidly thing because %70 of person are webmaster who interested in dmoz.I am deleting their database from my site, do not use them.I will make my own big directory

 

I am at a near total loss trying to understand what you are talking about within the topic of this thread...

 

I'm having difficulty understanding it even as a stand-alone post outside the context of this thread.

 

It makes sense (not within this thread) if related to an editor application. That is the only time you get told you are not accepted, and promoting your own site isn't likely to result in an application being accepted. If the application was for an english language category then I can think of another reason for a rejection.

 

I don't see any names here that I recognize, but it's been a few years since I've been an editor at the ODP However, I had been an editor since near the beginning, before it became known as the Open Directory Project. I was one of the early metas, and I haven't the slightest idea why my account was suspended.

I'm not interested in reopening any ugliness, and especially those that I may not even have been aware of at the time, but there has always been infighting at the ODP, and it has always gotten in the way of what some of us thought we were supposed to be doing.

 

This is characteristic of the group dynamics of "organizations" (sic) like DMOZ, which tend to cultivate an adversarial ingroup versus outgroup us-against-the-world mentality. Those in the inner sanctum hold on desperately to their perceived "power" (sic) by denigrating and despising those not in the ingroup... it's how they define and derive their self-esteem. They will continue to do so while the towers crumble around their ears.

This is nothing new. That doesn't make it any the less reprehensible or pathetic, but it's nothing new.

 

Maybe they don't like editors from Maine - especially if they came from Texas? J/K, of course!!

 

Thank you for adding your 2 cents to help dispell the myth that "all ex-editors know why they were dismissed" because "what they did was so unequivocally evil as to be beyond redemption, and therefore, it is impossible that they were not aware of it."

I happen to know the reason why I was dismissed: a pending mediation request against kctipton and a vocal opposition to deeplinking Rubylane "stores." The metas argument in favor of deeplinking was "because we say so" - which was quite surreal. Nothing to do with which sites I listed.

Two strikes.

Also, thank you for showing your support for Annie, another dismissal that was undeserved.

Welcome to digitalpoint. And BTW, I was... dmoz.org/profiles/uroboros.html

 

You weren’t concentrating when you read the gentleman from Maine's comments. He said that was of the earlier metas and that made him part of the "inner sanctum". He and his wife were certainly not on the outside of any "in group". They were about as “in” as you could get

Your double standards are astounding. Metas who remove editors are obviously corrupt and trying to protect a perceived power base but when a removed meta posts they are also obviously an innocent victim. If metas do not follow the rules what would minstrel propose be done with them? Obviously removal is out of the question.

 

Your capacity for intentionally misunderstanding the issue and spinning it until it fits your worldview are quite impressive. Do a search for "Social Identity Theory" and "Social Comparison Theory". Perhaps that will help you to understand my earlier comments.

 

There is no contradiction. That's what infighting, power wrangling, personal vendettas do. A group of people that should be working together, ends up eating each other alive.

The "eaten alive" are victims, regardless of their previous status in the group.

Show me the contradiction.

Oh, and, neb, nice try trying to defame a couple of nice honest people, years after they haven't had a thing to do with ODP, and suggest they have done something egregious. This sort of propraganda doesn't wash at DP. Annie didn't do anything justifying what you did to her; my dismissal was kctipton's vendetta over a mediation request; and I am perfectly willing to believe kfander here, his wife, over the likes of you and motsa.

 

He couldn't be meta without it! It is number one requirement since otherwise it would be impossible for them to fake enough evidence to remove any editor.

 

The ODP has fewer and fewer editors, which can be charted from the monthly report data (there has been no monthly report since september 2006... so things have probably worsened at a faster rate).

Here is a chart that illustrates the continuous decrease in active editor numbers:



You can see the the downward trend is quite steady. Extrapolating from the chart, no even considering the devasting effects of the 3 month server crash and associated software failures, they have at most, at this time, 6500 active editors.

This begs the question... when is editor number expected to be "ZERO" - let's take a look:



And the answer is... 2017. There will be no more editors in 2017, if the curent rate of editor attrition goes unabated.

That's where the kind of paranoia that lead to Annie's dismissal, and other editors' dismissals, is going to get them. Ten more years of internal and external witchhunts, and it will be finally over.

Declining editor numbers isn't going to help keep up with the growth of the web. If AOL has any brains, they will pull the plug like Zeal did.

 

Now your an optimist...

As my little math lesson few threads ago has show they have barely listed 15,000 website in four months, with annie's removal several good editors were also lost so I wouldn't be surprised if productivity drops even more drastically.

Considering that robozilla has yet to do sweep for dead and hijacked websites number of listed website will drop so instead of growth DMOZ will start to shrink.

Also my little math lessons shows that if there are still around 7000 technically active editor it means they are doing work below minimum of 1 link a month, so three month inactivity removal is probably off and if they were to turn it on they would probably lose half of editors over night.

Also with community practically dead it is doubtful remaining editor will have motive to continue pointless work... just check http://dmoz.org/edoc/editall.html , annie is gone but there are many people which haven't logged in for weeks and months!

Since no reports are being released we can only guess how bad things really are.

 

Yes, a lot of people criticize me for my unshakable cheerleading for the ODP, mindless optimism, and refusal to think anything is remotely amiss with the near-extinct lizard.

The internal forums are pretty much dead - it's almost just metas now, and they're running in circles. They have a thread going called "Never mind" where they take turns posting different versions of... you guessed it... "never mind."

As you correctly point out, during the blackout, although they couldn't go on witchhunts, I bet many editors timed out and never returned, not wanting to risk wasting their time on a link farm that could go down the drain any minute. Add that there were no new editors, and that the new editor applications were off for quite some time... I am sure they are currently well below the 6500 active editor number projected by the graph.

I am sure the reports have ceased for good reason.

 

That's an overly estimate of 700. Theres no such thing as 6500. Do you count as EXAMPLE: Jim Noble, Martty, DPLurker, copperdrum. or As like Me, me, me and me in which case yes you'll achieve that count.

 

New editor applications are going to be undermined by the ODP becoming pretty much invisible to web surfers. The only people that know about the ODP these days are webmasters stuck in a 2002 mindset, and a growing army of disgruntled (and proud) ex-editors. They're not going to get new blood.

 

They are getting new blood but these editors are probably treated as possible spammers or are more usually completely ignored and left to themselves so after edit or two they will never do anything else in DMOZ since Wikipedia is way more fun and somebody has actually heard of it.

 

Why don't you just gzip and encrypt this thread, it'd make more sense to me....

So tell me please, why are Resource Zone moderators and most posters so unfriendly? It seems they are in a constant state of stress and disgust.....