After all the crap and condescension you have dealt out over the years, you long ago gave up the right to whine about anything anyone aims at you.
Not whining. I'm pointing out that there's no reason to mention me for no reason and certainly no sensible reason to libel me.
I think the original poster used you as an example of what is wrong with DMOZ, so I don't think it was for no reason.
Actually the original poster did not mention kc at all. Another poster just said it sounded like him. And then the whole thing spiraled into a kc bashing. Communication may not be one of kc's virtues, but being a stay at home parent is certainly no reflection of his capabilities in any way, form, or fashion. I commend him wholeheartedly for being a caring enough parent to do what he does. The job of a stay at home parent is harder than holding down two 40 hour week jobs outside the home. Keep up the good work, cuz!
1. It's not libel if it's factual. 2. You cannot possibly be stating with a straight face that you haven't invited abuse with all the effort you have put into and all the obvious joy you have felt in abusing others every chance you get.
First of all, let me start out by saying that I am a DMOZ editor, so I may be looking at the issue from a different perspective than some of you. Giving that caveat, one thing that people dont seem to remember is that DMOZ is "the largest human-edited directory of the web". Having said that, there are a lot of different types of human ranging from purely altruistic to purely greedy, and everything in between. This forum is chock full of people bashing DMOZ, and some of them are actually pretty good people trying to do good things. If you read the entire thread, it sounds like the reviewer gave some valuable feedback, and added his/her own 2 cents. Reading the comment, it sounded like the reviewer was trying to let the applicant know that they read digital point, and that it wont hurt the applicant (unfortunately there is no way to tell tone in an email). Just like there are good and bad editors in DMOZ, there are "good" and "bad" people applying to be an editor, I am sure there are a number of people who want to be an editor just to get their site listed. To be honest, my experience with DMOZ has been very positive - I was initially denied since I misunderstood the application process, but I worked with the reviewer, and got accepted without any issue. I am in a pretty inactive category (Sports->Fantasy->Simulations->Football) so there are rarely any additions, which I was looking for, so I could check once in a while, but it wont take up tons of my time. So, I guess what I am saying is that DMOZ bashing seems to be a very popular hobby in this group, but I think the idea behind the DMOZ is a very good one, and I also think there really are people trying to do a good job with it, but there are also people trying to abuse it, so dont judge all of DMOZ just on the actions of some.
AQs I've said repeatedly previously, I think the original idea was a noble but flawed one and the flaws are becoming increasingly obvious as time goes on. Add to that an unworkable infrastructure/bureaucracy and a poisonous inner circle atmosphere, and you have all the ingredients you need for increasing irrelevance and eventual extinction. There are definitely some good editors. That won't save DMOZ though.
No gworld, I didn't do anything of the sort. Good post dogbows. Hi AYF, another sensible post. '''it sounds like the reviewer gave some valuable feedback''' Yes, that's exactly right. By the way, I got a b*ll*cking from the mods on here a while ago for supposedly making an 'irrelevant' post. By that standard I should think there would be a few people in this one thread that deserve the same. Twelfty
Your on your way on becoming a DMOZ editor a little more of hugs and kisses and you would perfectly fit in. See related.
Google kctipton. Here's one - is this true, kctipton? http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t3137.html
Minstrel, I googled kctipton last week to try and figure out what you were talking about. Maybe my searching skills aren't up to par, but I honestly couldn't find anything I'd consider odious. I have to say, I respect the man. Personally and as an editor.
popotalk, I don't know anything about that. Can you provide a link? Although, John Scott seems like a man who can give as good as he gets. Probably even better.