Resigned -

torunforever and debunked are editors? I didn't know that.

But I do like puppies. I'd be lying if I said I didn't.

 

Shame on corrupt DMOZ editors who damage the reputation of all the honest people who volunteer for good causes by pretending to be volunteers.

 

Yeah, shame on the corrupt ones.

ACK, I agreed with gw, do I have to poke my eyes out now!?

 

Now that you agreed, you can move to the next phase and instead of supporting the corruption, start fighting it. I think it is clear by now that stopping corruption in DMOZ is an easy task if editors really want to and won't declare every procedure that fights corruption as unacceptable.

 

This thread is quite hilarious, but I do have one question and that is if the thread is targeted towards corrupt DMOZ editors why are so many dmoz editors (if they are not corrupt, and I'm not saying that they are corrupt) taking the role of defending the corruption that is happening in DMOZ if it is or isn't?

What I have seen is a former or still editor who has posted screenshots that where aimed to prove corruption being discussed at DMOZ, and because of the existing corruption that he claims to exist he chooses to resign.

So if your a Good DMOZ editor and not corrupt why do you even take the time to respond to this thread, if your not doing anything wrong, just don't worry about it (and yes my website is in DMOZ and no I'm not an editor for DMOZ).

But here is my final question for DMOZ editors only, and answer with a simple yes or no!

Do you think there is corruption within DMOZ?

 

Been fighting it for a long time so nothing changes there buddy. The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that most editors are not corrupt. It's not a matter of all or none as you would have us believe.

@Red... yes, I think there is corruption in DMOZ, it would be stupid to say otherwise. Corrupt editors are in the minority, we watch for them and they are weeded out. It's pretty much impossible to have an organization, government or business that never, ever has a dishonest person sneak in, isn't it?

 

Yes it would be pretty stupid to say otherwise and that is what keeps this thread going, which is other DMOZ editors who would like to pretend that the corruption does not exist lol.

But you said these two things that tend to cancel each other out.

So what is it DMOZ can't handle the corruption, or are they able to handle the corruption, either way you have admitted to the existence of corruption and that's big coming from a DMOZ editor because most just make claims that it does not exist?

 

We are on page 31. No ODP editor, and you know who they are, has claimed that there is no corruption. The point being made is whether this corruption is rampant and if it is being dealt.

 

How is it being dealt with? If the corruption is not rampant then why any kind of suggestion which stops corruption is being declared unacceptable by DMOZ editors?

 

That comment was not targeted towards just this thread but several threads from several forums over serveral years.

And gworld I must agree, whenever a thread is made saying there is corruption in DMOZ a group of editors are so defensive in trying to silence the thread, but if your not corrupt you have nothing to worry about lol.

I for one have not accused any of the editors in thread of being corrupt, but have said there are corrupt editors in DMOZ, is that so wrong to discuss?

 

Nope. That's basically what this forum is for

 

lol Minstel!

 

Again, corruption exists but it is not rampant. If corruption was rampant, then there would be a need for drastic measures. Bad editors are caught and thrown out; why do you suppose there are so many ex-editors? (Including the original poster to this thread.)

You could take any profession and point out corrupt individuals. It doesn't make everyone bad.

For example, there are a small minority of doctors who commit insurance fraud. Do we bring down the entire medical profession because a few are corrupt? No. It makes more sense to keep it simple and deal with individual cases as they come up. In fact, I'd trust my doctor with my life. Literally.

Now, can we please get back to the topic of orphan puppies?

 

Those aren't the only choices. There's also nachos or poutine...

 

My post was deleted lol, but as I said corruption vs rampant corruption what an option.

 

The difference is that insurance companies spend millions of dollars every year to fight the fraud and implant procedures that stops insurance fraud, they don't go around defending insurance fraud and declare any kind of suggestion to stop it as unacceptable.

Those "few" corrupt editors must be very popular to have so many "honest" editors running around in different forums defending them and their right to be corrupt.

 

Great point!

 

Here's an oversimplified issue with why we're still fighting corruption (with totally made up numbers):

500 applied to be editors
100 were denied for spelling mistakes
100 were denied for hype in descriptions
100 were denied for not disclosing affiliations
100 were denied for self promotion
100 were accepted

Of the 100 that were accepted, 15 should have been denied for self promotion but managed to wiggle in. 5 of those 15 potentially corrupt editors give themselves away almost immediately by deleting all the good sites in a category and listing their site and a few badly described sites - they're removed and the categories are fixed.

This leaves 10 potentially corrupt editors - three get into flaming wars with other editors and start posting internal discussions on external forums, they're discovered and removed.

7 left now. Four of these seven discover that they have been bitten by the editing bug, and don't give self promotion another thought.

3 left now. One of those still only has one category - and makes sure that no new additions are made. Someone files an abuse report - after looking into the situation, the editor is removed.

2 left now. One of them gets a number of categories - and they start editing against guidelines - other editors notice discrepancies - an investigation ensues - another ex-editor.

1 left from that original bunch of applications. But there have been more applications, and more applications, and more applications.

Corrupt editors are a minority and we've been fighting them a long time, because we still keep accepting applications. But, we have to keep accepting applications, in order to get new editors.

 

And totally made up story, too. On the positive side, you didn't ask us to believe in flying pigs.

 

The numbers may be all made up, but the scenario described is not far from reality.