In case anyone does not know who Gworld is and why he's so obssesed with porn. It's because he runs porn sites - which link to many European porn sites. So any talk from him about the ethics of porn are pretty much meaningless. If he thinks it's ok to run porn sites that exploit girls in Europe then it's highly amusing that he thinks he is in any position to complain about Adult sites in ODP.
Coming from a guy who exploits his position as a DMOZ editor for personal gain, you'll excuse me if I don't take this claim on faith and ask you to back this up with some evidence, won't you?
I have no hatred for you or DMOZ. I only want that they act according to professional standards required by any volunteer or commercial organization. I never meant that you are running any porn site but pointing to DMOZ position that lists such sites. I am not even against porn sites and as I mentioned in previous thread, I believe this is a personal choice of each individual if they like to visit such sites as long as these sites comply with legal requirement that each country has. I also find your comments strange since I am not the one who is commenting on your postings but it seems for some strange reason you like to comment on my posts. I hope this has explained my position that in no way I was implying you are involved in porn business, so we can get back to the original topic of this thread. If it makes you happy, I can ignore your postings from now on, if you can do the same with my posting.
Whow a discussion 5 years old. Not realy big news would I say. Most inmportant statements from that discussion Two results: 1) DMOZ learned about a situation they never though would happen. And the situation was solved. It can't happen again. 2) The editor involved, which was of high standard and well respected within DMOZ, resigned. A loss for DMOZ and the whole webcommunity.
That's not really fair. Gworld is a troll, and very good at trolling, best I've ever seen anywhere in fact. You can't lump MikeD and others into that category any more than gworld is right to lump every editor in with the small minority of editors who abuse their positions. If you look beyond some of the cynical responses there are sometimes some excellent points being made - I'm not saying I agree with all the points being facts, but they make you think, and wonder if we really are misrepresenting ourselves and what we can do to be clearer about many things. Really? Please tell more, I am not aware of anything that would prevent it.
Is this what you plan to say to a judge? Because no one here would believe this. You hate DMOZ. You have said so hundreds of times. As far as hatred toward me, your postings show otherwise. If you truly don’t have hatred toward me, perhaps you should go back and edit them. You said: I thought you and imocr were going to start the "grandma's for porn" group in DMOZ. You can even list your illegal sites in DMOZ like the other editors there. I have links to all your other libelous postings attacking me of supporting kiddie porn. You have the right to that opinion. However, I do not like porn sites. I do not like porn spam in my email. I don't like porn spam going to children in their email. Porn webmasters do that, not dmoz. It's not legal. Can you show me any evidence that you go after that type of person, just like you attack us? My guess is no, but I'd love to be proved wrong. Not true. No explanation of your position can change the fact that you did in fact repeatedly state that I am involved in and support kiddie porn, and that I have illegal websites. No, this does not make me happy. I don't have to ignore your postings in a public forum. I'm not stalking you and I'm not abusing you. You are the one who is out of line. This isn't a negotiation. I expect an apology and a retraction in each thread that you've committed these offences. If your ego will not allow it then I will accept the deletion of all your libelous statements in all the DMOZ threads. I also expect you to never do it again. And for the record, your post #155 , linked above accusing lmocr and me of having illegal porn sites immediately preceded her asking "Do you still beat your wife?" As you know, “Do you still beat your wife?†is widely recognized as the classic example of the logical fallacy of "False Dilemma" where any answer given would affirm the consequence. It's very clear that lmocr did not attack you; in fact, she responded very graciously to your filthy accusation. Truth and logic are not on your side. Now would be a good time to make the necessary corrections.
I doubt that you have a legal case here, frankly, Annie. This is like one of those "she called me names - no he called me names first" things. You and lmocr have made personal remarks and attacks on gworld; he has made personal remarks about you and others in this thread. I doubt that quotations taken out of the context and climate of the entire thread would have any weight. If I were a defence lawyer, the first thing I would do is obtain a transcript of the entire thread and the case would be thrown out.
I tried to explain my position to you as clearly as possible and be as nice as possible with you. I would have even edit my previous posting if it was possible but in this forum it is not possible after certain time is passed. The reason I am doing this, is because this thread is not about you or I, but about DMOZ way of doing business. I know that Americans like to tell everybody that they are going to sue them and go to lawyers but let me explain to you some facts of life. 1- I have been involved in business all my life, so lawyers are nothing new or scary to me. 2- I already have 3 law firms in 3 different countries on retainer, so I am sure they can more than handle such matters. 3- I live in Canada, any legal action has to be in Canada and our laws are very different than USA. 4- Civil court actions usually are won by the one with largest financial resources who can pay for the lawyers and take it as far as it goes. In a case like this, it means at least 3-4 years with about $100,000-$200,000 in lawyers fee, are you ready for that? I still like to get back this thread on the subject, so if the previous post disturbs you very much, contact the Modertors that they can edit my post and delete that line and I am OK with that. P.S. Moderators please remove the line that Annie objects to from my previous posting.
How amusing that in response to a post where I plead for facts, not unsubstatiated or false proclamations of guilt, I get that in response. Anyways: 1. Without any apparent logic? 2. A lie. 3. How does DMOZ do that, exactly? 4. All search engines have a track record of hand editing SERPS exactly how you claim they don't. Two latest examples: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/more-yahoo-strangeness/ http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/hand-coded-shortcuts-on-yahoo/ This by the mighty Yahoo! Google and all other corporations have a legal obligation to maximise the dividends for their shareholders (this principle is well established in American law, dating back to the Supreme Court ruling on the case of Dodge v. Ford Motor Co 1919). Given their radio silence is many times that from DMOZ, the assumptions that all editors are guilty and the organisation itself is corrupt seems somewhat disproportionate. I'm not trying to deflect any blame or attention - all editors admit we have a editors among us who are not volunteering selflessly, and we all have to deal with those together. I'm just imploring some sense of fairness in all this, gworld.
As far as getting back on topic..lol Ya know the person who started this last post was on page 8, were now on 20. If you ask me he's just an instigator.
I suppose that is where I and you defer on what is the problem. You see the problem as isolated case of editors corruption that should be dealt with on editors level while I think the problems are caused by DMOZ structure and procedures. You want to find a corrupt editors and possibly get rid of them but you know very well that next day, the old ones will be replaced with new ones while I think that DMOZ procedures should be changed in a manner that makes corruption impossible, regardless of the editors motivation and selfishness. What confuses me is that if it is true what you say about the number of honest volunteers that try to work selflessly, why does these same volunteers try to defend DMOZ at any cost and just keep the discussions to some previous corrupt editors instead of fighting for cleaning DMOZ organization and implanting procedures that makes corruption impossible?
All Americans? Are you sure? Not me, I've never been faced with a situation like this in my life so you can consider yourself the exception. Ok, I wouldn't think they'd be new or scary to anyone. OK Are you absolutely certain about jurisdiction? And does it really matter? It takes me 20 minutes to drive to Canada. It's a lovely country with mostly nice people; I wouldn't mind at all. Yes, how much is one's reputation worth? However, I would prefer not to if you can be civil. If you would please contact a moderator and arrange for removal in this and the other threads, and promise not to do it again I will be satisfied and consider the matter closed. People can disagree without taking it to the sewer. While others have hurled some pretty nasty insults at you, I have not. I look forward to the removal of your statements linking me to porn.
I contacted crazy rob to delete that line and I hope this brings this matter to close since I have posted many times before this is a discussion about DMOZ corruption and not you and I. I don't comment on your posts and generally ignore your posting, if you do not comment on my postings. Other than that I think I have done everything humanely possible to solve this problem and if you are still not satisfied, we can discuss this through my lawyers. Edit: P.S crazyrob send pm that he can not delete it because you have quoted my post in your posting, contact him so he can delete it.
Unfortunately as soon as you have some success in life, you will notice that there are a lot of people looking for some kind of hand out. Everything in your life will change and the name of your best friends will be: Law firms Accountants Tax advisers Investment advisers Trust managers .... ... In the end you have to continually make money in order to be able to pay all your new best friends.