A whistleblower is one who expose corruption that is being intentionally swept under the carpet. Those screenshots [which are very hard to read] show that an editor saw signs of possible corruption, and was asking what to do. Another editor agreed that there was a potential problem in an editors activity that should be reported for investigation. The whistleblower [if any] was the person who started that thread in the internal editors forum. No indication that anything was swept under the carpet. The person that started this thread, is not exposing anything, and is making vague accusations of corruption without any proof. Got any proof, then post the names of the guility with the proof and they will be removed. Sounds to me it's just a newbie editor who is miffed they did not get a second category when they applied for it. Jumping ship and failing to follow through to get rid of real offenders, of which I'm sure there are plenty we have not caught yet - shows a lack of dedication.
I think Debunked has said it very well: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=468214&postcount=51 We're beating around the bush here. If there is darkness, shine some light. having such a closed society with so many rules is not healthy.
Don't give up so easily. I am sure there is a lot more that you can post from DMOZ and editors corruption. Reading your links, makes editors claim of honesty, extra laughable.
That has been determined long before you ever started this thread. all you have completed is posting information that clearly is a violation of dmoz editors. every little bit helps, in stead your going to let this person continue. All I can say is I hope you edited better than you did trying to make your point in here, because it sucked. good luck
I think yours and other editors attitude proved that corruption is intentionally swept under carpet, but I agree with you that screenshots are hard to read. Spendlessly Maybe instead of screenshot, you should take a look at this program HTTrack website copier I think is much more useful.
So an attitude is proving corruption....where do you get these remarkable statements, are you a lawyer?
I know, but it is much more usable when everything is in HTML, complete and hosted on a free web site.
quoted for truth. Spendlessly, from what I can read, instead of helping anyone fight any corruption in DMOZ, all you have done is grandstand and promise screenshots that will devastatingly prove rampant corruption at DMOZ. All your posts end with 'I have to go now, here are some but I have better ones coming'. In reality, all you did was use the dmoz forum search for the word 'corruption' and post screenshots of the threads you found. I'm not sure if you actually read what you were posting, as you were in fact highlighting DMOZ discussion and response to corruption. At best, you have highlighted that 'we know there is corruption in DMOZ'. Congratulations, have a cookie. A gold star even. I was expecting help from you making DMOZ a better place. Screw you and your moral grandstanding, you've let everyone here down, DMOZ supporters and critics alike, just to fuel your ego.
There are federal statues that protect such a class. It is called the Whistle Blowers statue. This statue protects those who blow the whistle on companies who are committing criminal offenses. Any non disclosure agreements become non enforceable if a hindrance of criminal violations are expected and become the cause for disclosure.
is that the case here? Look, I don't care what the definition of whistleblower is - I welcome it if its to make something better. That's not the case here, Spendlessly has done nothing of the sort, so I wouldn't like to bung him in with other true whistleblowers whom I respect
Read the previous pages. lmocr (DMOZ editor) was trying to scare him to silence by threatening him with nondisclosure agreements.