How did I "make up" up a story about what was happening? I just admitted that I was wrong because I haven't read the thread since it was originally posted. Unlike some posters here, I can admit when I've made a mistake. But, there is no excuse for defending her attitude in that thread. She admits she was a bitching and deserved to get the ax. So why are you still defending her attitude when even she admits that she was wrong and would have given herself the ax?
You've mentioned you guideline so much that I think you know abide by it, but I knew that a long time ago.
Is it normal for you to accuse people of corruption and trying to abuse editing privilege without even reading about what has happened? Now that you are trapped in your web of (will be a reason for ban if I say lies, may be a better word will be untruthfulness, forget about it, you know what I mean substitute the correct word), you try to back paddle and instead justify her removal by bitching too much. What does any posting in RZ has got to do with what happens in ODP, RZ has got nothing to do with ODP. It is just an instrument for power hungry editors to make themselves more important.
Because one has nothing to do with the other. And because she hasn't admitted she was "wrong"... because she wasn't. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=879540&postcount=43 http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=879691&postcount=58
Again, how am I backpeddling? I just admitted I was wrong because I haven't read the thread in a long time. What part of the truth is too hard for you to grasp? She could have gotten the ax because she said Dmoz sucks. Well if Dmoz sucks so much, then why was she still an editor if she felt that way? What were her true reasons for still being with the ODP? But, I still wonder why people are defending her attitude like she's the victim in that thread, when clearly she was being a self-admitted bitch. Why she was let go is something only meta know, everything in this thread is pure speculation, from you, me, and everyone else. You're right, what happens at R-Z should have no effect on your being an editor, unless of course you say Dmoz sucks, then you will be looked at closely, and it doesn't matter if you say it in R-Z or at another forum using your editor name.
My two cents again people Is you talking about this post? Well she didn't in words she was wrong, but she agreed with dmoz on why she was kicked out. Summer said she would do the same thing. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=784602&postcount=70
Yes, that's what I'm talking about, but she could have been kicked out for saying Dmoz sucks. It's up for speculation.
The point is not the fact that you said you were wrong when indisputable facts were presented. The point is that you accused a person of corruption and abuse of editing privilege even without knowing what was this about in order to justify Meta's actions. I can understand that in your opinion joining an organization can mean total obedience to the powers in that organization but other people think and try to improve the organization that they are active in. DMOZ is a good idea but the abuse, incorrect procedures and many senior editors that abuse it for profit or to satisfy their hunger for power, really really suck. Some people accept anything and close their eyes to wrong doing while others try to fix it.
To me this seemed like a classical case of lese majesty, she should have controlled her temper and better not used the words "DMOZ sucks", although I did understand her reaction after her experience at RZ, and how badly she was pissed off.
Here you go, gworld. I was cautious in NOT accusing her of being a corrupt editor. That's why I added this sentence at the end of the post when I posted it. The questions I asked in the beginning of the post are questions that people were probably asking themselves when she was making the comments about how Dmoz sucks, and they are valid questions for anyone to ask..
I work with literally hundreds of sites (if not thousands). It is simply not possible to list my affiliation with all of them, and the list changes and grows, so it seems this rule could easily be used to remove me, but what is interesting is I was removed right around the time I made those posts about DMOZ top listed domains, and that is why there some reason to question whether maybe I was removed, because I was creating pressure on a meta editor who themselves had sites listed in the DMOZ Top Listed Domains. So we are left with a situation where there will be no official answer from DMOZ, yet the circumstances surrounding this occurence are suspicious. Again, if there is a Meta that would like to discuss this with me privately, or consider a reinstatement, I would be happy to spend a little time being productive on a couple of categories on DMOZ each month.
Anyone who is interested to know how truthful enigma as a typical RZ editor is, can read his original posting here. I will not even try to explain his accusation against summer, I trust people are intelligent, so you be the judge.
Exactly! Because you know I'm right, that's why you're not even going to try to explain. You know that you've done your usual thing with taking posts out of context and when corrected as to the real reason, which anyone with a brain can see for themselves, you refuse to admit it. Be in denial all you want. As for the post you've linked to, well I'm man enough to admit I was wrong, that's the least I can say about you.
I'll try to find some information that might help you. Just to be clear, I'm not talking about information as to why you were removed.
You are making it even worse, again the question, why don't you just stop posting? Try to re-read what you posted, this is complete nonsense, in the same post where you wrote "Now, If I were a Meta", you went on with "Did she think she could get preferential treatment.."