Looks like the 90% of corrupt ex-editors who get kicked out, act like they don't know what they have done wrong, and then complain on forums may have Dan as new friend: http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?p=221951#post221951 LMAO, this "playing dumb" thing is so typical for a lot of these guys. I wonder how long until he comes and complains about dmoz on digitalpoint
What does that has to do with Dan, or my post? What, are you offended? LOL you rant all the time about dmoz/editors and it doesn't bothers me, yet I come once in a while to post, and you get all worked up and negatory, ridiculous Notice I said "corrupt ex-editors", so what does your response shows?
What do you expect? The poor guy was a junior editor, so he couldn't make many web sites and then list hundreds of deep links to own sites like "senior" editors do and make money that way, so it is possible that he decided to charge for the listings.
No I just wish that DMOZ won't be hypocrite and do something about corruption among senior editors. The day that some of the Metas and Admins join this guy as removed ex-editors, I will applaud DMOZ fight against abuse, until then such actions have no effect.
Well, if you know any corrupt Metas or Admins, why not just state their names along with proof of their corrupt like Strum4life at Webproworld has done about Dan http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?p=319813 If you are a editor at dmoz then you know you have tools/methods to check on the work of editors, Metas, and Admins. Stuff Strum4life doesn't have. A good list will be more than enough
I think it is very clear who these people are, here is an example: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=1304674&postcount=205 I am not that naive to think that something will actually happen. Reporting "senior" editors abuse will just provide them with a map to cover up their tracks. The only way to deal with this situation is to force AOL to get involved and clean up the house.
Gworld I just gave a quick look at those urls/domains, they are dead/unregistered and have been unlisted quite some time ago. (Once again with the adult cat?) If there is a serious problem, then I would think AOL would have done something about it by now, since: 1) Webmasters that are angry at Dmoz have been making negative statements about Dmoz for years (Done a search on google) 2)Some admins are AOL Staff. They have the most power and I think they would have made drastic changes if the problem was so "huge"
Don't worry, they have replaced every removed domain or link with a new one, that is the reason abuse reporting is such a good map for covering up the tracks by senior editors. What happened to those editors and Meta that were responsible for abusive editing? AOL staff are well know for being involved in funny businesses, just make a Google search for AOL and SEC.
That is a slight off the mark. Not unless its money generating it doesn't matter. There is a financial gain somewhere along the line that is why AOL is holding to it and just ignoring the serious problem as of now. If it has no value anymore and a burden to AOL finance they would just drop it anytime. It's a simple corporate policy.
If you consider a few listings of a old dead site, which were added by different editors who arrived at the site at different period of time and years, as proof of wide spread corruption, you might want to do better. Some are not even editors anymore.
1) it is not that old and new ones have been added. 2) I have mentioned the multiple identity problem before, the main thing is that owner of those sites with multiple deep links is still editor. 3) For a Meta is very simple to ask editors why a certain site is not listed and editors take it as an order to list. You can see such behaviour in DMOZ forum in adult section. If you want to believe that it is all a coincidence that different editors will list sites that belong to the editor and Meta for no good reason and only because they think one page "sites" that are cookie cutters with no real content, are of extreme value to Internet users, either you must be very naive or you think it is more convenient for you to act stupid and naive.
Two times in one session appearing to agree in part with gworld. I need a psychiatrist. AOL staff are very well aware of a situation in the Adult branch that make it appear, to the rest of the world apart from a small handful of senior editors none of whom has ever given an answer any normal person would consider credible, to be corrupt through and through. They have chosen not to treat it as abuse or take action against the editors concerned. The branch is a disgrace and a festering sore DMOZ should rid itself of as a matter of great urgency. Not because there is anything intrinsically wrong with Adult material on the Internet, but because that branch brings the whole of the rest of the project into disrepute and it is unsalvageable despite the sterling efforts of a brave few to at least try and clean it up. Dumping Adult tomorrow would be the best thing DMOZ has ever done and who knows what other positive benefits such a radical and brave move would bring.
It doesn't appear, it is corrupt through and through. They should not only dump the adult, they should also dump the senior adult editors since such move will be of a great help in cleaning of gambling and pharmacy section.
Oh good, tell us the URL and it will be banned and you can save the $100. It is for your own good, you are wasting your money if you think it is worth that.
^^^^^^^^^^^ Funny post of the week. You are a Good Samaritan, brizzie. Not only is the listing not worth that, but not having the listing makes no noticeable difference.