sidjf, you are a hypocrite. You know it and I know it. Lose the crocodile tears. They really don't impress me. And your attempt to present yourself as some sort of mistreated and misunderstood Samaritan or defender of freedom of speech makes me nauseous. You came here for one reason only and that was to attempt to portray the people posting in this thread as uninformed right-wing zealots who want only to destroy DMOZ. What is abundantly clear is that you support the maintenance of the Adult section for your own reasons and you are working hard to discredit those who see a problem with it. The reality is that the Adult categories represent a festering boil on the face of DMOZ. It is a monumental hypocrisy to try to portray DMOZ as the champion and protector of the web, saving the people from unscrupulous webmasters, while at the same time endorsing and promoting the types of sites that populate those categories, many of them illegal or borderline illegal. For you or any other DMOZ editor to try to put any other kind of spin on it is laughable. http://www.whois.sc/internet-statistics/dmoz-listings.html
I don't hate you. I am the love and hug guy here and to prove it love and hug to you sidjf. The problem is that you are ready to agree with as much as we want, talk is cheap, as long as it doesn't change anything in DMOZ. The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He though it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn't see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly on his carriage, while behind him a page held his imaginary mantle.
Thanks. Does that "we" include minstrel? lol lol, thanks... I'm doing what is in my power to be done (one guy doesn't have a lot of power...). There isn't much that I can personally do to effect the changes being discussed, so you're correct in that aspect - talk is cheap. If Adult ever changes to a system of not allowing extensive deeplinking (more in line with the rest of dmoz), I expect you will apologize to me - here on these boards, shake my hand, and pat me on the back for being honest.
Don't be too modest. I have seen may other meta and Admin read this thread too. I think the punch line in your post was the word: EVER. At least from now on, I think it will be hard for you to say that it is difficult to fix the corruption in DMOZ and keep a straight face.
You know that it so easy that is laughable, so every time you say it is difficult to fix the corruption in DMOZ, it makes you laugh because you know how easy it is.
Typically you at least speak English - however, this time I can't understand a thing you've said in the last two posts. Care to translate?
keep a straight face- Don't show one's feelings, especially refrain from laughing. Haven't you heard the latest joke: "It is hard to fix the corruption in DMOZ"
sidjf- Here is a simple solution, if you believe or there is even a hint of what the public is thinking as it relates to corruption within the editor ranks, get someone who has the power to bring on an admin who can investigate and snoop around all categories. This would include viewing all logs and becoming part of that inter circle so to speak. If Dmoz is serious about weeding out corruption than this is one way to find out. If you choose to keep it in-house so to speak, I dont believe anyone is going to take what Dmoz has to say to heart. As Dmoz believes all webmasters are spammers, we as webmasters believe most not all editors are corrupt. So it seems we are at an empass, there has to be some compromise here. We dont take your word for it and you dont take ours, we have shown proof that there is something fishy in Denmark, yet you havent been able to provide proof of no corruption, there is a medium I am sure we all can come to, lets resolve this.
I think sidjf was their last hope for finding excuse for adult section, so it is understandable they are disappointed.
Why do these categories even exist at DMOZ? http://dmoz.org/Adult/Computers/Int...s_and_Practices/Pedophilia/Affirmative_Views/ Top: Adult: Computers: Internet: Chats and Forums: Activities and Practices: Pedophilia: Affirmative Views http://dmoz.org/Adult/Society/Sexuality/Activities_and_Practices/Pedophilia/Affirmative_Views/ Top: Adult: Society: Sexuality: Activities and Practices: Pedophilia: Affirmative Views Can someone, anyone explain to me how DMOZ editors justify listing these sites? DustyG? sidjf? This is the stuff you are evidently defending... would you care to tell the rest of us why?
Stupidity is the only explanation Minstrel....... AOL could be in legal trouble over these sites in a hurry!
I think the answer is in the title of the category (Affirmative Views), they are Affirmatively supporting pedophilia.
The fact that there even needs to be a debate or discussion about whether or not to include such sites in the directory in the first place, or whether or not to remove them now immediately, is absolutely astounding to me.
I don't think that http://dmoz.org/Adult/Computers/Internet/Chats_and_Forums/Activities_and_Practices/Pedophilia/Affirmative_Views/ should exist and stated so in the ODP forums earlier today actually. I can't justify that category as I personally do not agree with it. As for http://dmoz.org/Adult/Society/Sexuality/Activities_and_Practices/Pedophilia/Affirmative_Views/ - We have "affirmative view" sites listed for other illegal activites as well (illegal in the US at least). I think these sites need to be monitored very closely and re-reviewed regularly to make sure they are remaining purely acedemic as opposed to actively encouraging illegal activity. In other words, I think it is ok to list a site that is expressing an opinion - "I think this should be legal and here is why...". I don't think it is ok to list a site that is encouraging or explaining how to do an illegal activity - "I do this illegal activity on a regular basis, and here is how you can do it to...".