cat=Chainsaw [at end of reference string] denotes reject [or moved to another category]. Also =unreviewed denotes url where it was moved to. review is denoted by url in editor.dmoz..... NOTE: this was all pre-editors days [SEO analysis- I have every action an editor takes on a volume of sites [with the expectation if they don't use the dashboard]. A post here [as I understand] Well I already apologized for the confusion - but it was suggested "if you can't get listed [or edit everywhere] then it isn't "open"... and the rest of my statement was "you can do whatever you wish with your own "open" project.
Well - I use OSCommerce it's "OPEN SOURCE" I've modified the code and added 20 odd proprietary inclusions to the cart. Are you saying "in the spirit of open" I MUST allow you access so you can do whatever you wish to my cart? I say 'get your own OSCommerce cart' - and you can allow your store to be "open" to everyone to do as they see fit. <BTW> AOL should be able to address their policies and ideas of OPEN<BTW>
You are leaving me speechless. 1) I was commenting pagodes post 2) obviously you never read http://dmoz.org/about.html 3) and at least to me you still seem to be "a bit confused".
The number of times "open" is referenced is subjective of what? My original response was based purely on you, everyone else, and myself are welcome to an opinion... it doesn't make it right or wrong. My second response denotes what "open" means to me. It may differ from your view - but it doesn't make it incorrect.
If you are the same "fathom" previously at WPW and SEOChat, either 1. you are intentionally and knowingly playing semantic games, or 2. I have seriously overestimated you in the past The alternative is, of course, that you are not the same "fathom" and I have been unreasonable in expecting better of you... if so, my apologies... carry on being obtuse.
I don't know if I can help with the "open" issue - but here is the best read I can find on the subject at the moment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_content When the truth is spoken multiple times it does appear to be a canned response - if you want a different answer, then either ask a different question or wait for someone to lie to you (BTW it won't be me).
On the other hand, and in marked contrast, I don't expect any better of lmocr. I'm pretty sure that's all she's got.
Pagode; I am still waiting for the answer to my easy questions but some how you avoid any discussion, except repeating the canned DMOZ response to other posters. If you don't want to answer, I understand, probably becoming a Meta is too tempting but don't fool yourself about your honesty. Vulcano; did you found out how old these discussions are?
I can assure you that I have read the relevant threads and that I am well aware of the age of these discussions.
Actually, depending on the license of the cart and/or demands of the author, you might have to release any changes if you make to the code. My point was that dmoz.org is not very open. In open source software projects, some code submitted (e.g. a bug fix or new feature) might be rejected but there's human communication (usually). Successful projects have great communication. Take a look at drupal.org for a successful open source project where there are lots of contributors (whether modules, themes or core) plus people who like to use drupal and submit new features and bug fixes for core/modules/themes. The communication back to people who submit bug fixes/features is great and doesn't have an negative impact.
Would you like to inform the rest of us, how old these discussions are since DMOZ editors are asking people here to give admins time to discuss and come to a conclusion? We don't want to be to hasty and jump to conclusions like "one day, someday, we will do something."
No need to search for older quotes from your posts. You can't seriously expect internal info from my site, doesn't make sense to put this honey trap. I am also sorry that I can't recall editors "asking to give admins time to discuss...". This is obviously your interpretation of some post. I was pretty much convinced, you already jumped. Please proof me wrong.
Can you tell us if this discussion is older than 5 years or less? The reason I ask is, because I remember the old soviet leaders always talked about their 5 years plan, so I was wondering if DMOZ admins are following the same type of plan or even longer.
The old soviet leaders seem to be gone. The admins at DMOZ are still there. I assume and expect, that a decision will be there within the next couple of days. In the meantime we can continue accusing each other of selective perception of reality. It is not that there is only some fellow editor, claiming always telling the truth.
I hope you are right and a decision will be there in the next couple of days but in the mean time, please tell us if this discussion is older than 5 years or not. I just don't understand why you can't answer this simple question, unless you feel this is such a sensitive state secret that DMOZ secret agents have to kill all of us for knowing the answer.