I recently applied to be an editor. The DMOZ reply after review worryingly included this: >>>Additional reviewer comments: >>>Ah yes, you're the guy whose site was listed in Battle within days of it being suggested there and then claimed in Digitalpoint that it took 6 months. Don't worry about it. We thought that was quite funny Hmmmmm.... they seem to think I'm telling tall stories..... I do recall that when I made the 'claim' on DP that someone commented on the thread that they thought I had my site added very quickly as they had seen some dates somewhere. I thought this a bit of a strange comment as I am pretty damned sure that it was several months ago that I first applied. So, I have replied to DMOZ with: I would like to point out that when I first submitted my site for inclusion it was well over 6 months ago. Certainly not a few days by any stretch of the imagination. Could it be possible that it was included after a second, more recent application? Although you found it 'quite funny' please take the time to give me an answer here as I have not claimed anything in DigitalPoint or anywhere else that hasn't been true. Many thanks.
That sounds like DMOZ all right. Question to DMOZ metas: What has that got to do with his fitness to be an editor? Question to twelfty: Why the hell would you or anyone else want to apply to be an editor in an organization as crippled and paranoid as DMOZ?
Okay then: "I detect the fingerprints of kctipton and/or opne of his buddies and/or one of his clones." The point is that a remark like that is typical Resource Zone mentality and just one more reason for the almost universal disdain for DMOZ (for you and the other editors who seem almost continuously surprised by that fact).
Yeah, he probably did not review the editor app's assuming he's an editall as he was before he quit some time ago. What I find interesting here is that when he did leave, he left the directory (the first time, not the last time) in such a fit of disappointment and almost anger it seemed, and now he's back in. What changed I wonder, kc or did the powers that be actually run thru his litany of problems and address them? At the time it seemed nothing could have gotten him to return to editing, but suddenly there he is again. Makes me wonder anyway. Furthermore, there are quite a few others who are back in, people I recall who were editalls and also left the directory for various reasons of frustration or unhappiness. It looks like there may be some sort of concerted effort to bring back good editors who resigned and seemed to indicate they weren't about to return. Alucard was there when I was an editor. I always thought his comments in the internal fora were thoughtful and balanced responses, and then he too left out of frustration. Now I see he's back in under Regional/. There are a few others I recognize who also have returned. Someone or something must have changed internally to get these senior editors to jump back on board, so maybe there's still some hope.
So which is it? Do only metas approve editor applications? or do kctiptons also approve them? I don't think DMOZ editors are qualified to address his litany of problems. I think that would require years of psychotherapy and some major doses of psychotropic medications. kctipton and orlady are "good editors"? Or... they relapsed, like crack addicts, unable to continue without another hit.
It might just be a change in attitude, rather than whether or not DMOZ editors are capable in some absolute sense, than brings back people. The returnees had been questioning policies and attitudes, and changing those at the top could be what it takes to make a big difference. Well, kc is a physicist isn't he? That says something in my book, so at the least he should be technically capable. His resignation statement identified a lot of areas that desperately needed attention. I get the feeling he would not have returned were the issues he mentioned not being addressed. So, yes, I think he's capable and his comments reflect that, imo. I don't know orlady but that she's admin and has been around forever. One thing that sort of stands out is that admins rarely seemed to mix it up in the internal fora the way others do. More of that would give others a better idea of how "capable" they are. kc was always commenting there in his usual brusk manner that seemed to unnerve some people but in a way I thought was generally appropriate. If a one-word response answers a question, then so be it. I'd rather get that than a lot of drivel the rest of them offer up all too often. I don't remember orlady in the fora that much, maybe I didn't look in the right groups. There's actually a lot of truth to this apparently. It's often said internally that editing is an addiction that many cannot do without. Unfortunately, this kind of addiction I fear leads to cranking up the edit numbers rather than doing an accurate and careful job. If you're doing a mediocre job, it's easier to get the numbers that eventually lead to promotion which then leads to even greater numbers of borderline editing that results in a large, but low quality product. Therefore, it's best not to be addicted to editing, but to enjoy it and try to be accurate as opposed to hitting the 10,000 edit number count. Personally, crappy editing always bothered me more than abuse probably because I saw so much more of it than abuse. Many editors who returned are often treated as conquering heroes. This is another type of "addiction", I think, that feeds the ego. They may not be great editors, but that doesnt matter probably as they will be feted and welcomed back no matter their capabilities.
Yes, they are both very good editors. I'm sure I'll be jumped on for saying this, but it really bothers me to see how over the top most of this hatred directed at kctipton is. Yes, his method of communication is blunt and to the point, but if another editor can't take the simple truth in what he says then maybe it's a reflection on them more than on kc.
I don't know anything about his behavior vis-a-vis other editors. My comments about him are referring to his pathological behavior with non-editors in various places. I gather he is just as pathological with some of his colleagues but I have no direct knowledge of that.
Minstrel sometimes you cross the line of what is acceptable. The links in your posts you clearly identify yourself as Dr. David J. Baxter, a practicing psychologist in Ottawa. The moment you make pronouncements like this your status swiftly changes from that of a member of the public talking about Dmoz to a psychologist. How do you think your professional colleagues would react to you using your profession status and knowledge to belittle and bully a member of the public that you disagree with? Presumably you are bound by some sort of code of professional ethics. You are also a brave man. Canadian libel law is so draconian that people come from all over the world to file suits there. A practicing psychologist making such malicious claims is leaving himself wide open.
Back on topic... @twelfty: Was that the entire message or just an extract from it? It's pretty hard to judge the intent without the context.
Thank you for your concern, neb. However, before you worry about my ethics, how about you tell us what steps you have taken to address the issues that I raised here, here, here, and here? Then, when you've answered that question, tell me how again how is it you justify the blatant bullying behavior of the man you are defending and his buddies?
the snippet i posted ...... >>>Additional reviewer comments: >>>Ah yes, you're the guy whose site was listed in Battle within days of it being suggested there and then claimed in Digitalpoint that it took 6 months. Don't worry about it. We thought that was quite funny ...... was not related to the main message regarding being an editor - it was just a comment tacked on the end. twelfty
To be able to assertain if your thoughts of being qualifed to be an editor are accurate can only be decided or debated if we see the actual application you filed. It's supposed to be like a resume and cover letter rolled into one. Was it? Did you apply to a top level or a sub-level? If a sub-level, how far down? How many listings were already in the caetgory you applied to?
Are you really hoping to scare anyone to silence with this BS? It seems not only you don't have any real power in DMOZ, just a deluded notion of self importance as was previously shown but you don't have any knowledge about the laws either.
Minstrel, I like to think I'm one of kc's buddies... I don't believe I have a reputation for bullying. Gworld, are you saying Minstrel is NOT a brave man?