We feel overwhelmed here... think how they feel over at http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/ the dedicated DMOZ forum...
Thanks for assuming I am a complete idiot. Of course I didn't submitted that blog to DMOZ, but original content and professionally designed websites, real contact info etc.
If it is that important for you then pay "senior" editors to list you. They do business on scriptlance. If you have more questions, I have answered it here.
haha, and they just made fun of me because I said it was corrupted. Stop covering your asses with cheap sarcasm.
On the other hand, you could help us to rid the directory of corrupt editors, though I don't believe that to be more than a small minority, by baiting with who would list for how much and then after discovering who they are openly post their names. Some of us will gladly see that they are suitably named in the ODP forum.
How are you going to do that? You can hardly make any money if you are corrupt but you are not Admin, Meta or at least editall. Just look at my previous posts in this forum and you can find enough names to list in the ODP forum. How about an Admin who is involved in commercial web sites, weren't they suppose to be free of such involvements?
Just ask orlady and the other guy who imagined he was important, they had to run away when I started to post names.
Sadly there are corrupt people who get into ODP, some are thrown out, some lay hidden. Serious names with proof will be investigated. But as you were told in another thread, smearing and innuendo is usually more your style.
I am suspect on that, as you should be...unless of course you can some how see through the non-transparent system. Almost yearly a popular editor is "let go" and the only "proof" shown is nothing but "smearing and innuendo" with little to nothing left to back up such claims. That also seems to be the tactic of most meta editors. Nothing needs to be said here...but it's nice that you feel the same as the rest of us.
What a grand tactic for proof of innocence in a system built to protect those doing such things. There is a STRICT policy of confidentiality that encompasses such proofs and it's also the same system which is used to ban editors for otherwise unprovable slights as well. Get the doors open, look inside, you may be amazed at all that comes to light.
right...back...at...ya... Why is it that DMOZ can use confidentiality, but I can not? ALL of these ex-editors that were let go for various reasons are innocent, and were let go because of the evil Meta community. If you do not believe me, then have them show you proof otherwise. Your demand for proof works both ways... proof was asked in why Compostannie was let go. Check the threads and see your proof. Till proof is given, there was no other reason then she was friends with the Ex-editor community and actually helped people make it into the directory. Though honestly, with a directory that has no issues with keeping pediphile sites, a massive porn list, cooled viagra sites, excessive ringtone submissions approved, real estate sites out the yazoo and other things of such a nature are you really saying that those in charge are moral and above being corrupt? Nah... get those you are backing to show some dignity and maybe have the directory as a WHOLE show some signs of improvement, and maybe, just maybe, people will start not believing the ex-editors.
Here some threads to get you started: Phone sex business More fun with DMOZ More fun with DMOZ II Why do admins who suppose to be middle age women from middle America support the worst kind of porn? Why Admins who suppose to have no commercial web sites, are involved in commercial web sites?
You are the one worried about DMOZ corrupt editors, so you are the one who needs to name names and offer proof.
Well, you for one. Why otherwise you should cover up and defend corruption if you are not benefiting from it?
Sorry don't talk to liars who try and blacken my name in the same way that you smear others with no proof. I can prove you are a liar with this last post. You must be very corrupt and bitter inside, perhaps you should see your doctor and ask for a referral to a psychiatrist.
I can not give you the names because it would violate the confidentiality agreement that I agreed to when I became an editor. Though, I bet you could find a few hints in the editor logs... start in the adult cats and work your way down into real estate. Dig deeper and see who OKed those child porn sites, and then see who defended them staying in once they were discovered. You are an editor, you have access. So the only proof of corruption I really need to give is all contained in one link: http://editors.dmoz.org/]
What rubbish you try and put into people's minds. You know very well as I do that editors are under obligation to report abuse or suspected abuse. Your claim to confidentiality is a load of tosh and you know it. You also know that you have no proof just trying to squash people who are hard working honest editors, but who probably threw you out. Care to tell us what you did? No lies please.