Interesting info about editing and becoming an editor

Less trash talk and the constant interruptions of posters who really know very little, or like Minstrel, nothing at all about the real workings inside of the Directory would benefit all readers.

I suspect it's because of this lack of knowledge that they have to resort to such tactics, and keep people who really do want help from getting it. Anything a real editor does say gets buried in a mountain of garbage by non editors.

You're a clever manipulator and commentator, Minstrel, but you know nothing about the topic of the ODP, so why do you insist on speaking out about something you know nothing about?

Where's our moderators? Why are these thread hijackings being allowed to continue? A little off topic slack is ok, but these guys are so off topic because of their lack of knowledge that it's just a trash and burn attempt at keeping those who do know from speaking.

 

Again, when someone mentions something that is true, editors say it's false then change the subject. Yeah, that's backing up what's said...now lets hope this gets locked so no further proof can come to light.

Sorry to bring this up again in yet another thread, but click back a few pages, you'll once again notice that it was the current editors that brought it off-topic.

As for where the mods are, feel free to report any post you feel that breaks the rules here.

 

I haven't checked the other areas of this forum to see what the norm is, I was just curious about why moderated threads are allowed to go so far off topic, no matter who does it.

 

Terrific. Another ambitious editor toeing the party line. All sound and fury signifying nothing.

I don't have to be schizophrenic to know quite a bit about schizophrenia, and in fact more than those who actually suffer from the illness. I don't have to work at the vehicle licensing bureau to know what's inefficient about the way they run that office. I don't have to be an employee of our municipal government to know that there are a lot of things wrong with the way they allocate manpower and spend our tax dollars.

Robjones' argument that anyone who is not an editor cannot understand what's wrong with DMOZ was flawed from the outset. If you think you'll score any points by echoing what your "superior" (sic) has said, you're mistaken.

As for your complaint about off-topic comments, I would suggest you look back over this thread and reexamine where those off topic slurs and personal attacks originated. I'd also suggest that if you don't like the moderation here, go spend some time at the Resourcelesss Zone and see if you like it any better there. You certainly weren't asked to enter this thread or even to register as a member, and I can assure you you won't be missed when you grow tired of playing little dog to robjones' Spike and leave.

 

Yep, DMOZ is actually cover for top secret government intelligences agency and all senior editors are spies... that would explain all the screw ups, paranoia and secrecy.

 

Actually, you guys cover up your lack of knowledge and real facts about the Directory by running around flapping your arms and proclaiming the sky is falling. The truth is you know squat about the Directory or it's operations, so you have to make up theories about why it's so awful.

The reason you don't like the party line is because there's only one answer to each question, the correct, truthful answer, which never changes whether you ask it here, at the RZ, or you hear it directly from AOL staff.

I really think you should analyze why you have such a big hole in your lives that you feel the need to be fixated on a matter that you have little or no knowledge of, instead of believing what real editors, who have actually spent their time building, instead of whining, have to say about the matter.

Neither of you have any investment in the Directory at all, in either time or work, yet you persist in attempting to tear it down and disparage the people who have freely done the work, by playing on the feelings of those who wait patiently to be listed, or the dissatifactions of those who got caught breaking the rules for self gain, and banned from the Directory.

You do a great disservice to all of the truely honest webmasters/seo/site owners by feeding them misinformation and lies, and then you have the cojones to call editors corrupt and dishonest. Go look in the mirror.

 

How can I be feeding misinformation by quoting from the guidelines of DMOZ itself? If what I've said is nothing but lies, then what does that make my source?

Are you saying that it's a lie that Skrenta has 10k++ listings? Are you saying that Dashboards warnings ARE mandatory or that there is an official means of appeal?

Come on Crowbar, I've used nothing but the the ODP as my point of reference. If what I've said is untrue, then it's DMOZ that is lying not I.

What you are doing however, is untruthful, as you are trying to cover up the injustices, lies, and corruption of the ODP by doing nothing more then SAYING we are unknowledgeable. If we are in fact clueless, then by all means back up your claims...I bet you can't.

 

I'm looking you both right straight in the eyes and speaking the truth, and any honest person who reads this thread will see the truth in my words, and maybe ask themselves, "Who has given me more real knowledge about the inside workings of the Directory, the real editors or the wannabe experts?"

 

If you asked a terrorist if what he was doing was wrong what would his answer be? At least a terrorist could back up his claims by using a book.

What are your references?

Show me that Topix does not have 10K listings...
http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=topix]



Show me where they have changed in the rules that SEO/link builders can not list sites and get paid for it.?

Do I really need to go on being "untruthful"?

 

You boys are all clever posters, but not a single one of you has a working knowledge of the Directory, so your credibility is zero, you have none.

 

So creating two new categories from scratch (plus two more which never left my test folder despite request) and maintaining half a dozen other which haven't been maintained since I was removed was zero investment? Thank you for giving me answer on how does DMOZ views my work - and they wonder why I'm so pissed.

 

As DMOZ and its guidelines are my source, if I have no credibility, then neither does the ODP. If me quoting from their guidelines is false, then those guidelines are false. If those guidelines are false, where does that leave you, as a "credible" editor?

The way I see it, the more you bring nothing to the debating table, the less you are showing you have to offer. Give something substantial other then "I'm right because I'm an editor" ~ As that truly proves nothing.

So come on, show us your credibility, it must be FANTASTIC if the ODP guidelines and listings themselves are not worth looking it.

 

How do you know? Everything seems to be over your "pay grade".

 

How true. I've really spent too much time here yacking, and I've got a Chefmoz cat that I need to start paying attention to, and a bunch of fishing charters sites that need reviewing. I think my time would be better spent doing that than trying to get somewhere here.

gbye, Ivan,(sniff), I'll miss ya bro.

 

I couldn't agree more. Bye.

 

I see why you had to settle for sniping from the wings. The editor app requires one be able to construct legible sentences.

 

Not true, you keep pointing out flaws in my posts, yet I was accepted

Though seriously, do you have something constructive to share, or is the only thing you can do is make personal attacks? It's amazing that, that is not a DMOZ requirement. As you wish to maintain the directory as a reliable source, yet are unwilling to provide any sources for your side of the story.

In fact, as I've pointed out several times, all you can do is knock on fellow members here. It should be clear to any outside source where the "credible" sources are coming from...and sadly it is NOT the editors in this thread...with of course the exception of Anonymously in his first post where he linked to the blog and then later to a follow up blog post.

The only things out of you and crowbar have been "I'm right because I'm an editor" and "You are wrong because you are not an editor". Well, if that is your argument and you want people to believe you, then maybe put out some sources for your side of the story.

As it stands, you've proved two things. 1) You are an editor and 2) You are a troll without a source to back up any claims.

Thread after thread in this forum is ruined, and sadly it is NOT the fault of the Ex-editors. It is the editors that are still within the project that are the ones taking things off-topic time and time again. And this is sad, as whether you all want to be spokesmen for the directory or not, you are, and people are seeing just what it does take to be an editor.

 

The idea that someone with experience is a better source than someone without didn't originate with me or at dmoz.

If I have a question I ask someone with a clue. If you'd rather ask someone like yourself, ok, just isn't how the rest of the world works. Sorry you don't like it.

 

So are you also saying that my source is incorrect?

It's really not a matter of WHO says it, but rather what that persons sources are. As my source is the ODP guidelines and the listings within the project, how can I be all that wrong?

But again, you are saying that I am wrong because I have given sources, and saying that you are right "because you said so". I'm sorry, but backing up ones claims didn't start with me either, so regardless of who says it, it always falls back on what they have said...and as I can back up my claims, I win.

 

LOL. I THINK the topic was something about the newletter and becoming a dmoz editor.

No idea what you just declared yourself winner of, but I'd award your gold medal if I were on the board of the Special Olympics.