DMOZ - A four letter word for arrogance?

Spirit walker is just a title depending on the number of your posts. It does not give you any organization power in this forum. Admin,Meta, editall,.. have organizational role. It seems to me that you don't know very much about DMOZ, are you really an editor or only trying to be funny?

If by any chance you are an editor of category like girls playing with cabbage dolls in Tibet, go back to your friends and tell them how important you are because you are an editor since obviously you do not have the knowledge to discuss the issues here. Why do you think those who know, like pagode, sidjf don't even try to discuss my questions? Because unlike you, they know what they are talking about.

 

No, we know that answering your questions is of no use. You won't listen to what we have to say as you are only occupied by your own thoughts.

 

I am sure that is the reason you try to answer everything else in my posts, except the parts you are well aware that I am right about the problems.

Anytime you like we can discuss how easy it is to have multiple editor accounts and how toothless the abuse detection "tiger" really is.

 

You have as large enough pool of sites that are suggested. Why waste time going out finding other sites till your category is reviewed. I know you are going to say we want to find the best sites, well please dont insult me by saying that. Dmoz has plenty of the best sites for multiple categories.

Dmoz no matter what you say, is not looking for the best sites, you are looking for sites that wont be able to compete with your own, family members or paying customers. I challenge any of you to just make a point to show me a better site than mine for the real estate agents category for Las Vegas. Please go ahead prove me wrong. Find one that has more unique information, more tools that are of use to consumers and one that offers almost every facet of Las Vegas. Prove me wrong, be sure if you suggest one that is better to post it here.

 

At the very least, please stop saying ANYTHING about DMOZ only wanting "the best" or "quality" sites until this has been resolved - it's just too laughable and hypocritical.

 

Which of the large amount of sites you own, and most of them have been suggested to DMOZ, are you speaking about.
I think in your case this rule on http://editors.dmoz.org/add.html is what keeps your sites out of DMOZ.

As far as I can see (I don't edit in real estate categories) your are a good example why real estate categories are disliked so much by editors and why only a few are willing to do any work in these spam magnets.

 

I can tell you none of thse submissions were done by me. There have been only two I can think of in 3 years I have approved for submission. One was by a friend of mine who was an editall over a year ago, the other was by another webmaster Morgan Carey / Seo Guy who submitted a Atlanta site of mine. So how many do you show?

 

Even if what you say is true which I hardly doubt it, at least he has not been cheap and bought different domains for his sites and technically he should be able to submit all of the sites. What is your excuse for having 200 deep links to a lousy adult site, I forgot, you have explained this already:
"corruption is the norm in adult section and poor adult web masters can not offered to buy 200 domains, so DMOZ editor will help them with their profitability by giving them 200 deep links to the same domain."

 

Where did you get those numbers...? I've never seen those stats.

In retrospect, it is a bit funny - it wasn't at 2 this morning though...lol

 

The better question is what is the stats on doorway affiliate pages that some how according to pagode are "sites" and not spam and deserve a listing according to "norm" in adult.

May be if all the sites send a naked picture with their submission, those sites could sail through the "filter" too and get listed.

 

The point is - you volunteer to post - and they volunteer to edit and in that specific context DP organization expects nothing more from you beyond what you specifically volunteer to do and DMOZ is much the same way.

You make some interesting points however,

The simple fact that you attempt to command a discussion at all about Admin, Meta, Editall and you are none of these, and know absolutely nothing about the topic kinda places you in a league of ignorance.

 

There is a big difference that you seem not to understand. I have no organizational power in here and I am not financially benefiting by establishing a corrupt environment in this forum.

I am open to discuss anytime you like the procedures and the organizational structure of DMOZ as I suggested many times before to DMOZ editors here and then we can see who is more knowledgeable about it.

 

DP doesn't reject 99% of the people that "volunteer" their time. DMOZ does. I would expect them to hold the few, the proud, the DMOZ editors to a higher standard when it comes to workloads. There is simply nothing that makes sense about keeping an editorship as long as you meet a three-reviews-per-year requirement.

 

I have never seen any evidence that you are willing to do so. You only want to force your opinion onto DMOZ and are always rejecting the opinions and answers giving by DMOZ editors. That is not a discussion. That is dictatorship.

 

and you're a cheertator lol DMOZ is history.

 

Just give us some reasons why this doesn't make sense to you.
What do you think would change if these people were not allowed to stay as an editor.

From the DMOZ perspective:
- these editors are doing some edits the other editors don't have to do
- these editors are not blocking access to the categories they are listed in for the other editors or for new editors

It might not be much that they are contributing to the growth of the directory but it is more than nothing.

 

I think it is the other way around and you just ask everyone to trust you on faith. Let's start with a simple question:

What do you really know about other editors and what stops a person from having 10 different editor ID?

 

If it is why are so many people discussing it?
For me (and my fellow editors) I can understand as we don't think it is history. But why are all these other people so interested. I wouldn't waste my time on a death (or sone to die) directory.

I personally am starting to worry as soon as noone is discussing DMOZ or complaining about it. That is the time DMOZ has reach the end of its usablity.

 

For the same reason that DMOZ editors are always worrying and discussing when will be the next Google update from DMOZ.

 

1. you can report 'spam posts', and members in violation of DP TOS... whether you do or don't is up to you. But for the sake of this discussions - let's say you don't even when you know it is a TOS violation - are you corrupt?

2. your opinion may matter to new members probably more than another "new member's" opinion. But for the sake of this discussions - let's say you abuse that trust that is usually associated with seniority - is this a fault of DP? ...or you "individually".

3. Your "I am not financially benefiting by establishing a corrupt environment in this forum"... that may be... but are you saying "no one here benefits financially from aggregating here", that "everyone here is as honest as you", or that "individuals" are not responsibile for there own actions?

For the sake of this discussions - let's say you "individually" start abusing the system in place here - PMing all members about some 'get rich quick scheme'... rip them off and you "had" the Admin/Mods here for letting you be a member: does this make them responsible for your corrupt deeds?

You paint a pretty consistent total organization wide "corrupt" society in DMOZ - on "non-involvement" and on others "say so" to base your position.

That's not only foolish - that's pure stupidity [whether you wish to admit it or not].