Interesting info about editing and becoming an editor

My mom always thought me trust goes both ways - if someone doesn't trust you with absolutely anything and is constantly checking on you looking for your mistakes to make you look bad how can you then trust anything coming from such person? Building trust is very long process which is easily destroyed and meta community seems to be champions of distrust.

That is fine but when editor ask for category which has grand total of two website listed and zero subcategories it really sound silly to reject it, even if editor somehow managed to screw something up it would take few seconds to clean it up.

Oddly they seem to wreak havoc on a regular basis, someone might say they do more damage then good.

 

I think the rules that are created and the methods used are probably based on past experiences that have been learned from.

I've never seen any editor treated harshly or haughtily by a meta editor, just the opposite, I've seen extrordinary patience at times, and a real willingness to be helpful. Some are better at it than others, but I've never seen the power mad, heavy handedness that is sometimes refered to on outside forums.

There are breaking points, I suppose, where the only possible answers left are cold, hard facts, but it takes quite a lot to get to that point, usually a refusal to learn.

Some are better communicators than others, and I suppose that short, abrupt answers might be misconstrued as unfriendliness or coldness, I've done it myself, but that's true of anyone.

 

I believe you when you say you've never seen it. It would be done in private and would be confidential.

 

Then that would be a sad disappointment, and against all of the editor rules of conduct, and taken up with AOL staff and admins. It's out of my league, I'm afraid.

 

Like not bothering to give warnings and to not have an appeal. Nice life lesson learned there.

Are you the same crowbar from RZ?

it's also possible you are confusing unfriendly or cold answers as simply being short or abrupt. Which would explain you not seeing such heavy handedness.

When the AOL practically forgot that DMOZ even existed, and when the founding ADMIN are self professed to have broken the rules themselves, who again should these issues be taken up with? But you are right, it does need to go to a higher authority, and no it's not out of your league, unless of course you are simply not willing to try.

Maybe you'd be willing to help find the contact information of people that can help? http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=356817

 

Yes, of course you are correct. This has been one of the points Q has been trying to make for a while now if I'm not mistaken.

Q, please don't blame crowbar. The contact information of admins and staff is considered confidential. If he were to pass that on it would be grounds for his removal. Contact can only be made via the ODP feedback system and I believe it's widely known that they do not reply to non editors who contact them that way. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Fair enough, but then, that does feed the "Senior Editor" community secrecy conspiracy theories

Though, maybe if we are lucky enough editors with access will take it upon themselves to contact them.

 

Get real Ivan The removal an editor who is poncing around various forums boasting to every one who is prepared to listen how he is abusing his privleges to get maximum benefit for his own sites is a fait accompli.

 

So what your saying is that me listing over 300 competitors in order to get two extra deeplinks to my unique content multilanguage multitopic website is abusing privileges????

Guidelines only says that I have to treat all websites equally, not my fault there isn't another crazy Croat with similar website to list all over the place.

If only all other DMOZ editors did the same imagine what a great directory it would be?

BTW how many competitors did Skrenta list to get over 10000 Topix listings?

 

When you become the Founder of something as large as the Directory, come on back and we'll discuss whether your judgement should be trusted in adding a bunch of sites enmasse, whether you have the right to, and whether you have the knowledge to make such a decision.

In any case, I notice that AOL staff and the admins have not removed those Topix sites, so presumably, they must agree with the action, and as AOL is the owner and paying the bills, they'd certainly have the right to object if they wanted to.

Why can't you do the same? Wellll, think about it......

Or, you could take up the matter with Skrenta himself, and voice your displeasure. He does have a blog, you know, .

 

Brizzie aka oneeye give plenty of info on entire scandal, admin resigned over it so that says everything how welcomed moved it was.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/search.php?searchid=8358612

Read brizzies posts, it is AOL fault in the first place it got listed they forced it, admin resigned in protest, and robot listed all those crappy links!

Same AOL editors are looking up to do changes to DMOZ! They probably list more Topix links and whatever other junk they can find.

I've listed grand total of TWO deeplinks, one of which passed meta approval when I asked for that category, both links had unique content, I could have easily listed dozen more links but never did because my pages had zero unique content and would get list only once I created something unique (i.e. my own game modification).

Please, I don't want to get 10000 links (all my website have barely 2500 anyway) in DMOZ to pages that have zero value, I do have some minimum of integrity I want to keep unlike some people.

 

Ahhh, so it's clear where your stance on the matter is. You support the listings of THOUSANDS of sites for one person, but feel it's self-serving for another. Yeah, well Crowbar, thats favoritism any way ya look at it and IS against the rules.

How is an editor supposed to know that listing his own site is somehow taboo when senior editors are allowed to do it en masse through an automated system. That would make doing one or two sites by hand "no different then any other site".

As for bringing it up to him, he feels that DMOZ is corrupt, and continues to use it. Ya think a post from me will change things? It's not like I can get him fired for favoritism... that's "above my pay grade".

So in the end any new editor signing up will see this thread and know that the rules may only apply to them sometimes. The other times it's another set of rules, unless of course you are one of the special editors that get additional privileges. Yeah, that's keeping it consistent!

 

Actually, I have no opinion, one way or the other, and know very little about it. I've never looked into it because it doesn't really interest me, personally.

I can tell you one thing with certainty, even the least of editors, like myself, can delete any site from a category if it doesn't add value to the category, whether it's been added by a minor editor, Skrenta, a meta, or AOL staff, and I have.

A Topix listing has to meet the requirements that any other site has to meet, if it doesn't, it's toast. I've run across some that don't meet the requirements at the city level, and I've deleted them.

I think a bunch of weather sites might have been added to the Directory enmasse at one time, but the same holds true for them, if they don't fit the bill, and there's a better site available, they're toast. It's up to the editor.

I guess my opinion would be, if the higher ups (who know much more about the Directory than I ever will) decide to add sites enmasse, who the hell am I to tell them otherwise? None of those sites are protected from the delete button of ordinary editors, so I don't really see a problem.

To say that, well they did it, so why can't I? is just kind of laughable, . The answer would be: Because you don't have the authority to, plain and simple, and neither do I <G>.

 

It's not so much about the quality of link in this case, it's how they got there. If any other editor treated their sites like that editor has they would have been removed LOOOOONG ago. Now that has yet to happen, and likely never will happen, but what is happening is that other editors are showing preferences to their sites and are getting removed. That type of double standard does not shine well on the project as a whole.

To some it says "hey, be an editor, add your sites! Senior Editors do it, so it's OK!" Of course those editors get fired...

To others it shows a double standard, and as such, opens the door to other assumptions being true as well. If the top is willing to ignore one rule, it's generally OK to assume the other rules do not apply as well.

I have an 'esoteric and occult' forum which has boards for a wide range of topics. I chose to submit it too one cat because there was one cat to submit it too that was broad enough to cover my forum. Yet I do have a board dedicated to pagan beliefs, which fits well within another category. Another board that deals with Chaos Magick, which again, fits well within a cat specifically for chaos discussion boards. Do I qualify for multiple listings? Likely not... but a site that lists world news not only gets put into it's best category, it gets put into each and every category that it fits into.

Fair? Only if you are a senior editor!

 

Skrenta, one of the founders of the ODP, doesn't equal "Senior Editors", he was the top dog at one time, who has since left the ODP and also left Topix, I believe.

He is a current critic of the Directory, I've personally talked to him one time during the last 6 months through his blog, (he was kind enough to answer the pm I sent him), and I really don't think it's my place to criticize or berate him in any way, just like I do my best not to form any opinions about ex-editors.

 

Which is why his last login was Oct 2007 (25/Oct/2007 02:25:47 EDT) right?

And you are right, he has left topix, though that is not the point, the point is, that while he was still with them, they got over ten thousand deeplinks in multiple categories.

 

He left as official staff back in 2002. Access to an editor account is something I don't understand, but as a founder, I certainly don't question it if the powers that be want him to have it. That would be an AOL staff decision, I imagine, and if they don't object, I don't think I will either, .

These are all things no ordinary editor, like myself, needs to concern themselves about, I don't know why it should concern you, . It sort of goes way beyond getting a site listed or how editors work, I can't imagine what interest you might have in corporate matters.

As far as the 10,000 listings go. So? If AOL staff has seen fit to leave them, then they must see that they are beneficial to the Directory, or they'd have removed them in a blink of an eye, would they not? They can do that.

If you think AOL staff are corrupt, well ok, think that. They own it, games over again. Where you going to go from there?

 

So if AOL support corruption and rule breaking, then so do you...unless of course they don't, then you don't either. Its a case by case basis, where some people get special treatment, while others get let go without warning or means of appeal.

It's nice to know you support such a system. It says a lot about your character.

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.​

The difference is you are not remaining silent, you are actually supporting the actions!

 

I bet his favorite movie is Fahrenheit 451.

The Captain: By the way, what does Montag do on his day off duty?
Guy Montag: Not much, sir, just mow the lawn.
The Captain: And what if the law forbids that?
Guy Montag: Just watch it grow, sir.

BTW how many TV's do you have? I got four.

 

As soon as they make me the head of AOL, I'll act immediately, . Be patient, it may take awhile.