1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

DMOZ Scandal of the YEAR

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by popotalk, Jun 2, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #341
    I think they were correcting you Minstrel. It would seem that they were telling you that you were wrong in that "no, they did not find the leak yet". *smirk*

    I had no idea they had so many German visitors...

    The drop does not look so bad if checked over the last 3 or 6 months. I think a lot has to do with the roller coaster effects of it being broken and all the publicity it's gotten due to that recently. However, look at it over the last 5 years, and notice how it's not been this low since 2004!

    That should be enough of a sign that they are doing something wrong...
     
    Qryztufre, Jun 26, 2007 IP
  2. Ivan Bajlo

    Ivan Bajlo Peon

    Messages:
    1,288
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #342
    With Annie gone no wonder traffic has dropped she alone was making at lest half of daily visits to DMOZ - remaining traffic are only meta editors. :D
     
    Ivan Bajlo, Jun 27, 2007 IP
  3. Lisa White

    Lisa White Peon

    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #343

    ROTTEN DMOZ That is the right things to say to get listed on Dmoz such a big deal i have a site that i tried to get listed and its very good site have been 3 Years around and guess what you have to have someone that you know that is an editor at Dmoz to get listed so how good of directory is that do i have to lie and become an editor to get my site listed a lots of scammers are editors for Dmoz and lot's of them making money by listing sites of people that they know, what do i have to do to become a liar to get listed on Dmoz, sorry i rather not get listed on ROTTEN DMOZ
     
    Lisa White, Jul 23, 2007 IP
  4. estate agent

    estate agent Active Member

    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    73
    #344
    Before fired can you submit me here. :)
    Regional/Middle_East/Turkey/Provinces/Antalya/Business_and_Economy/Real_Estate/
     
    estate agent, Aug 3, 2007 IP
  5. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #345
    This topic seems to make its way into many many threads (I am partly to blame) so in many ways this topic remains current on several levels. One of the main things that has been brought up recently is that editors seem to be claiming that much of what was quoted in this thread from internal DMOZ forums has been quoted out of context. As much of what is quoted in here from there is from newer Digital Point members I was hoping that they could come in and clear up any misconceptions that these 'out of context' quotes may have caused.

    I figure that if the quotes in here are cleared up, then maybe some of the issues in this thread could be cleared up so that those that have read them within the context of this thread will have a greater understanding of how quoting from an internal DMOZ thread about the same topic can be somehow wrong.
     
    Qryztufre, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  6. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #346
    Looking for new members for the ex-editors club, Q? :D Discussing leaked internal forum posts might do it, so I'll pass, if you don't mind. ;)
     
    crowbar, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  7. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #347
    It's a little late for that, don't you think? You were the one who in another thread made the claim that the published portions were quoted out of context.

    I will repeat my statement here: I still have copies of the transcripts of those internal DMOZ threads and the portions published here were NOT out of context and did NOT misrepresent what was said in the threads.

    Seems to me it's a case of put up or shut up now...
     
    minstrel, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  8. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #348
    Clearing up any misquotes posted by yourself should not be against the rules, as such information is already leaked, and the posts were originally made you.

    Alternatively if you feel that that is against the rules still, then posting your thoughts on the matter based on your own views would be fine if you don't mention anything quoted in previous posts here, or otherwise break the confidentiality guidelines.

    Either way though, to say that something is out of context, then saying "I can't talk about it" makes the previous point rather useless and inconclusive. Especially when the context of this thread and the internal threads is pretty much the same. Most people reading the quotes here, and then seeing people say they are out of context would do little more than make them scratch their heads and say "how?"

    (note: I'm not saying you said they were out of context, I'm not bothering to check, but I am saying that such things were said)
     
    Qryztufre, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  9. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #349
    Good advice, minstrel, which also applies to this:
    I'll repeat this also:
    @Q
    Which part of this statement don't you understand:

    I know you boys would like to drag Annie through the mud again (bein as how's you're her friends an all) ;), but, I will not discuss any internal forum posts one of you had the courage to break a trust and steal, because those are still private communications you not only have no right to possess, you most certainly don't have a right to discuss either (though I'm sure that won't stop you) :D.

    As an editor, I do have all of the complete posts, in context, in order, and not cherry picked, I understand the procedures that are used, and that not just 5 metas, but the whole meta community can get involved in these cases, and it only takes dessent from one meta to stop the procedures. In this case, there apparently were none.

    So, I have every confidence in our meta community, our administrators (who also have to be involved), and the complicated procedures that are used. No mistakes or miscarriage of justice have or will ever be made, and you know I speak nothing but the truth as I know it. End of story.
     
    crowbar, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  10. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #350
    If you recall, I told you in the other thread that your questions about Annie and "what was so special about her removal" were answered in this thread. If you are still asking the same questions, I can only conclude that either you still haven't read the thread or you didn't understand it - if the latter, perhaps try again, reading a bit more slowly and carefully.

    And so do I. So what's out of context in this thread? Come on, crowbar. You've made a claim that I know to be untrue. Now have the guts to admit it.

    Nobody, not even you, can be that naive, and I don't believe you are that stupid either. Cut the crap.
     
    minstrel, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  11. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #351
    Not according to the guidelines, all of which are supposedly public. If there are rules and regulations of the ODP that are closed, then you must admit that there is no transparency within the system which you are supporting.

    Furthermore, if there are closed guidelines that the public can not see, then it stands to reason that you, as a non-meta would not have access to them either. Unless of course you were given such information by a meta, which would be a breach of the guidelines, but also would have been given to you out of context.

    The rules state that it takes only 5 metas to oust an editor, any editor. If that is wrong, you are publicly admitting that the guidelines shown to the public are only there for show, and that they do not apply to this case (or any case for that matter).

    None of us has dragged her name through the mud. The ODP did that just fine...though they are not willing to talk about it...only to say that she was a 'rule breaker' person that didn't deserve a warning or second chance (or means of appeal). And if you have not noticed, this thread is in defense of her, which is exactly what her real friends are doing. Unlike so many others that have chosen to defend the system which ousted such a nice person without proof other then some mysterious evidence which can not be talked about ~ some evidence indeed!


    Either way, mind explaining how defending her and her honor is dragging her name through the mud while what you doing and what DMOZ did is not? I personally would love nothing more then her name to be cleared... Can you say the same? (keep in mind, you are defending her getting fired)
     
    Qryztufre, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  12. nebuchadrezzar

    nebuchadrezzar Peon

    Messages:
    645
    Likes Received:
    59
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #352
    Often as is the the case you are wrong in general, and wrong in this particular situation. Metas do not have the ability to remove Editalls and above, the ability to do so lays with admins and staff.


    You are not defending her. You are using her to score petty points in a Qryztufre style brain numbing conversation.
     
    nebuchadrezzar, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  13. threebuckchuck

    threebuckchuck Peon

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    97
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #353
    Just Fucking Stop ! There is absolutely no point to this going on any further!
     
    threebuckchuck, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  14. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #354
    Do either of you seriously think that an outsider could ever help her case? Especially the way you're trying to help? By bashing the Directory and it's editors? :)

    You do that in a rational manner, from the inside, not by marching out the door and slamming it behind you, Q.

    No, I haven't read this thread, minstrel, and don't intend to. I don't make any judgements about Annie, other than I know she was a good editor, more knowledgeable and experienced than myself, liked by many editors (including metas and myself), and very passionate about the Directory. What more needs to be said.

    Her situation is sad to a lot of people (including the whole meta community), but it's none of my business, and without all of the facts available, unfair to engage in a public trial, or to form any opinions about.

    Do you seriously think the meta community wanted to lose such an experienced and active editor? Who probably would have become a meta herself someday? I can assure you it was not an enjoyable or easy decision, but one that apparently had to be made under the circumstances. (Whatever those were) With not one dissenting voice among all of those metas.

    So, what am I to think? That every single meta and administrator was wrong or that they all had it in for her? (for some mysterious reason?)

    I choose to trust the meta community in their decisions, and not to form any opinion, one way or another, personally, because I just don't and never will have all the information. I choose to respect Annie as a former editor and a nice person, and just let it go as that.
     
    crowbar, Nov 30, 2007 IP
  15. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #355
    • Before proceeding with a removal, at least 5 Metas must agree on the vote to remove. Except for extreme cases of abuse, Metas should wait at least 24 hours from the fifth removal vote before removing an editor's account (or reducing the editor's permissions).
      http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/meta/abuse.html
    • Meta editors and ODP staff may revoke an editor's privilege to edit one or more categories or otherwise limit an editor's editorial privileges at their discretion.
      http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/accounts.html#removal]
    I do apologize if I am wrong, I'm only going by the guidelines. While it does take the hand of an admin or staff to actually click the button, the decision IS up to the meta community in most cases. If there is no Meta vote or involvement, then why was that not brought up ages ago?

    And I am giving you a chance to clarify some wrong doing that seemingly is only valid in dmoz world. Is there really a difference between what I have done and what you are doing? After all, I am quoting directory from dmoz.org. What's your evidence?

    I'm sorry threebuckchuck, but there is. If such a thing can happen to Annie, then what is to stop them from doing this to any other editor?

    I seriously do not mean to offend you, and certainly not Annie herself, as I do adore her. However, an injustice was done, and that injustice is still hanging out there waiting for another victim.
     
    Qryztufre, Nov 30, 2007 IP
    guerilla likes this.
  16. jimnoble

    jimnoble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    123
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #356
    What threebuckchuck said.

    Most folks here aren't posting from knowledge and the conversation has become a pointless playground pissing contest. Nobody is going to have their opinions changed by the petty rhetoric and nobody is going to gain any kudos or ascendancy by continuing.

    Just to add that my comments are aimed at damned near everybody taking part. Just grow up OK?
     
    jimnoble, Nov 30, 2007 IP
    robjones likes this.
  17. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #357
    That pretty much says it all. You are full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

    Aim your paternal advice at the little puppy, crowbar, jimnoble. And get the background before you jump in next time. Crowbar launched this by claiming that anything that had been quoted from the internal forums was quoted out of context. This was in another thread where it was off topic and he was informed that there already was a thread discussing this. So if you're looking for someone to blame for reviving the thread, look in his direction.

    You are hardly someone anyone would hold up as a paragon of virtue yourself.
     
    minstrel, Dec 1, 2007 IP
  18. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #358
    Funny how all of my posts were in response to something that either you or Q said. You must have missed all the quotes in each post.

    In any case, my time in this forum is over, I'm not accomplishing anything by being here, and you guys seem to thrive on hate and misinformation, and once again, you've dragged up a dead issue and hurt the person you call friend.
     
    crowbar, Dec 1, 2007 IP
  19. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #359
    More spin, crowbar. YOU made the statement. You couldn't back it up because it wasn't true. The implications of what you said would have been harmful to Annie's reputation had they gone unchallenged. That's why we challenged them.

    You're right, though. You're not accomplishing anything here and never did and now you've been exposed. Go back to DMOZ and continue sucking up to robjones and others over there, and leave Annie the hell out of it. :mad:
     
    minstrel, Dec 1, 2007 IP
  20. Anonymously

    Anonymously Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,939
    Likes Received:
    74
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    215
    #360
    Firstly if you had quoted the whole of the posts on the thread they would still have been out of context. Because the correct context was in another forum in another place and that forum is in fact a private forum. So by definition you quoted them out of context.
    Secondly you cherry picked them and it may be your opinion that that represented the whole of the discussion but it is not mine and I saw more of the discussion than you did.
    Thirdly, do you not believe that what Threebuckchuck said was not a comment which Annie was party to or out of despair from TBC that you continually drag up a saga it is clear they would sooner leave in the past?
    You claim to be helping your friend can you honestly say you are doing that when you continue this after that heartfelt plea?
    Sorry but you are both following your own selfish agendas, Annie does not feature in them except so far as they further your own ends. I think that the actions of both Q and Minstrel on this thread have been despicable before TBC made his post and have only gone downwards since.
    I have said all the time I have been on these boards that this topic I will not discuss, unless or until Annie ever wants to raise the matter and I doubt that. Until then I wish, for her sake, that you would both purchase and use two mouth zips on yourselves.

    You will not read any further post from me on this thread.
     
    Anonymously, Dec 1, 2007 IP
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.