LOL. You two raise "Topix" daily but your lack of inside experience guarantees don't have the information to put it into proper context. About 8 years ago when we'd just hashed out the directory template I created hundreds of categories (roughly as many as Ivan's total edits), mostly localities in Texas, and I added the weather channel to every single town. We did this all over the directory. Topix is a LOT better than the weather channel link. If that's your smoking gun you're hurting for material. You call it "corrupt", I call it shrewd... but bottom line it isn't your call. As for making comparisons to death squads (Nazi or futuristic) is melodramatic silliness... get a grip on reality, it's just a web directory. If you make your own directory... you decide how it's run, we'll decide how to run ours. The constant catterwalling here not only wastes far more time than either of you ever contributed to the directory, more importantly the time of anyone that comes here and is put off by your endlessly parroted diatribes. You aren't getting back in, they won't change the directory to match your warped views, so you boys toddle off and get a hobby.
So what you are saying is that some sites get better treatment then others? How is that NOT favoritism? How is what Annie did some how bad, when you added a single site to "hundreds" of categories? Call me whatever names you must, but explain how listing one site hundreds of times is OK, but listing another is not? How is listing one site ONCE worse then listing another site TEN THOUSAND times? And you call me silly?
He got his listed about a zillion times under the same reasoning the Weather Channel and a few others get multiplied across a lot of locality cats. No big secret. He was smart enough to recognize a pattern and exploit a need. Did being one of the founders of the directory help him get it implemented. I'd say yes if my opinion is sought. If that really really gets under your skin, I suggest you become one of the early internet pioneers and do the same thing... found the first somethingorother and then... oh, I fogot, your forte is whining, not doing. RE: And you call me silly? Absolutely. Why would someone that made about a 10 minute contribution to editing the directory devote every day to whining about it. You didn't care about it when you had a login, so go away and let the adults talk.
So, you only take a minute and a half for every every page you examine for inclusion? No wonder your edit count is so huge If I knew that I didn't need to actually examine a page before I added it I'd likely have more edits then I did. Right. Self Serving Favoritism
Save it. Nobody's picking on you for a low edit count, we're making fun of the fact that you attempt to pass yourself off as having been an editor at all. You've spent more time in this forum today than you did editing when you had a login. Get a life.
Do you always have to make it personal when you can't actually come up with something to refute what I've said? Tell me how it's not favoritism to list a single site thousands of times, especially when such a site is owned by an editor, while it is favoritism to list sites that do not belong to you that were found on a webmaster forum. I actually have a life, I volunteer to help make the ODP the best directory on the net, by pointing out that double standards, and corruption do in fact exist within it.
Again, I'll ask you why you bother to post here if you believe that... I know why I'm here. Why are you here?
BTW did you find those posts you accused me of making or do you admit to deliberately lying since every other method of discreditation has failed? Was that initiation test for meta to see if you can make accusation of someone based on zero evidence? There is never lawyer around when you want to sue someone for defamation.
Hmmm.... let's see what we have here... One plays like he's a Dmoz expert based on having added his site and 5 others then leaving.. One got canned after a few hundred edits & apparently will spend the rest of his life sharing his bitterness about it... One has never edited there at all but has an inordinate attachment to being a pretend dmoz guru. How sad. Already countermanded Q's most recent gripe... it's no more an issue than is the Weatherchannel. Ivan's lie about the ex-ed sites delisted like lightning stands in stark contrast to his own listings there so I'll skip chasing a better quote to RE-prove his lack of candor... and Minstrel... well, he never knew about the directory to start with, who cares why he's addicted to discussing it. He's a non-entity. Again, the people that KNOW about the directory are here now, I'll just ask the pretenders to try not to get in the way.
Your debating skills are legendary! You counter me saying that it's favoritism to add 10k sites from one editor by saying it's favoritism. You counter me saying that people can pay to get in by saying people pay to get in. You counter me saying there were no help files by saying I didn't help all that much. We left for the same reason, yet you claim what I did was pathetic. You should consider politics! You have proven that ex-ed sites do get watched and removed if there is a little server trouble, while CNN cats with HUNDREDS of dead links stay. Yes, thats certainly a reason to not listen too him. It's the same reason no one in the gov't cares what you think about the gov't. Our vote does not matter, because the elections are fixed any way...
Cool. Yours are imaginary. I understand why you got into dmoz... but can't see why having been there briefly is now the defining issue of your life. Being a career EX-something is a waste, kinda sad. I still edit there when not working or jawboning somewhere. Hanging around to incessantly talk about something you don't do and basically never did is just a weird obsession.
That happens to lots of websites, not just those belonging to ex-editors. It's what's supposed to happen. Your logic is akin to drawing a conclusion from 90%[1] of convicted murderers liking tomatoes . Dunno if you noticed, but your website was relisted some days ago - because when rechecked, it was working. That's also what's supposed to happen. (Nothing to do with me BTW) Move along please. Nothing to see here. [1] Like 80%[2] of statistics in forums, that one was made up on the spot. [2] So was that.
LOL. Spoil sport... you told her. Was looking forward to seeing how long the big expert kept whining about something that was still listed.
How is hanging around a thread on a forum which you think is pointless any less a weird obsession? Or do you just like the sound of your own wit (sic). Good advice. Please act on it.
Again you are right. Official warnings are mandatory. Official Appeals are a possibility Skrenta having 10,000++ affiliated listings never happened. Paying an SEO can never get you listed, even though such a thing is in the rules. I'm just making this stuff up as I go along Everyone needs a hobby, oddly enough both of our hobbies are to make the ODP the best it can be. I'm sure you are right, ex-ed sites are not watched. Though I bet if you looked at Mr. Jones edit history (which is HUGE because he's listed the same sites hundreds of times) you'll find that he's been adding sites in the Occult cats since day one, which I'm sure is the reason that he noticed that mine was down. Sorry to burst your bubble there Rob, but it seems you don't pay attention. I said that it was listed hours after it getting put back. Check in the thread where you said you removed it.
It is less pointless now that real editors and a few knowledgeable ex-eds are here and wannabe's like you are exposed as fakes. You expounded BS for years in here unchallenged, Now you simply can't. You're exactly like Q... you know nothing of the subject but have a fascination with pretending otherwise.
I've backed up everything I've said here, unlike you that relies on personal attacks rather then keeping to the issue. Making fun of me, or Minstrel does not back up your claims. So point to something in this thread that either of us said that is actually wrong, rather than pointing out you have gender confusion issues, point out something that will correct us. The only thing you've brought to the table thus far is personal attacks and edit counts. Mind explaining how that proves that we are clueless or that you know what you are talking about?
Some make contributions like a sculptor makes to a statue. We've carefully built something. Your contribution is more like a pigeon... you make a lotta noise and crap on everything, but don't add much else.