well for starters, your forum is showing a big database error... you need to get that fixed.. an editor might of checked your site out and it was down, so the submission was deleted and 2nd, if you do make it to your forum, you have 1 thread and 3rd, if look at the google cache, you have a bunch of stolen hacks.. why would anyone want to list you is beyond me...
The only thing I know about shoemoney is that he was offered an opportunity by AOL Staff lawyers to back up his unsubstantiated claims with proof and he wouldn't or couldn't. After investigating, Aol Staff concluded that he was a liar, and stated so publicly. There's not really much more you could do, and believe me, if there was anything more than smoke there, the Directory would love to take action but there just wasn't anything there to take action against. Are there corrupt editors? Of course there are, I've seen them get the boot, and I was personally involved in getting one of them booted, but it's not done on a whim, there has to be some kind of trail to follow, no matter how tenuous the evidence is. You don't just hang somebody because someone has made an accusation, there has to be some real proof of wrongdoing. A lot of accusations turn out to be nothing at all, other than wishful thinking. I think those are a couple of common ones. I'm not a meta, but those kind of claims are very easy to check out, and others are just as easily checked out. Any editor (including new editors) can investigate the activities of any other editor, it's not an exclusive right for metas only. The editing records are permanent, from your first edit to your last edit, nothing can be hidden. If an accusation is made, it's very easy for any editor to check out, but only meta or staff can remove the editor, and that's almost always done through a concensus of metas (unless it's a real emergency and time doesn't allow it), it's not a decision made by just one person. And that includes any activities a meta is involved with. Meta editors are not exempt from removal, I've personally seen it happen on one occassion, and it was a very painful decision for the whole editing community, but no one is exempt. So, from an insiders view, these unsubstantiated accusations of corruption are pretty ridiculous because it takes very little evidence to get an investigation started, and it's very easily proven to be true or false, and from an editors view, you are doing us a great service by putting us onto any real abuse. Do you really think the editing community would hesitate for one instance in getting rid of a corrupt editor? That would require that all 7,000 editors be equally corrupt, and I can assure you that that is not the case.
Sometimes it's hard to give a picture of the overall situation. For some editors, in smaller categories, it would be predicting which of 20 marbles might be picked up first. My first category was a city, and it had exactly 4 sites listed and no submissions (marbles). I had to hunt down the other 130 sites one at a time out on the Internet. Many small towns are like that, they just aren't very sophisticated, Internetwise, but they have some very charming sites. I suspect that the Regional section of the Directory has as many potential sites to list as all of the Topical areas of the Directory put together. For every site we do have listed, there are probably 10 more that haven't been discovered. The enormity of the job is mind boggling. I know for a fact, that we just can not keep up with all the submissions we receive in just the larger states of California, Florida, New York, and Texas, and there are 50 states just in the USA. There are many other countries. Just imagine what will happen when China breaks through and can no longer be controlled by their government.
New York State always needs new editors, owning a site or two doesn't disqualify you from becoming an editor, just be totally honest and upfront about it.
Which category is is site listed in again? He certainly has unique content that would help out the end user...according to the post of yours I quoted it SHOULD be listed. I could care less about who did or said what, though when I keep seeing editors (and ex-editors) say that its all about the end user, then I wonder just how true that is...