What is the easiest way to get into DMOZ?

Submit once to the following category that BEST fits your site and forget. Simply that.

There is no "fast" way to get in, but play by the editorial's rules and submit to the proper category.
If you get accepted within the first 4 months, you are considered lucky already.

 

I would have made the same comment about any poster that got banned. We dont know why the person was banned, so impying they were dishonest is in no way acceptable. If you had proof, thats different, a "guess" is not proof.

Once and for all, I am male.

Certainly not a "Yes Man", I dont give a hoot what people want me to say, I will say what i think. Being an editor does not mean I have to agree with other editors all the time, even Metas. I will however not say anything breaching the guidelines that I agreed to abide by.

I do remember hearing something about multiple accounts and being banned, but what another editor chooses to do is not my business, nor my concern and not up to me to police or pass judgement on.

Cheers.

 

So you have no concern that people who supposedly should lead the organization that you are member of, have been dishonest and been banned from other places for breaking the rules by opening multiple accounts but at the same time you are not a YES man. I got it.

Can I ask if you will have concern if they sell listings or still is not your business or concern what another editor chooses to do?

 

I wont be drawn into a futile and foolish arguement. Obviously if i had proof of editor abuse, i would report it through the appropriate channels.

You know what i meant.....but as usual you want to twist words and try and use them to your advantage. The posters that read these threads know your ways and can see through your tactics. Try it on someone else, your attitude and constant bickering merely bores me.

 

You can choose the best answer

A) Running Up Post Count/Post Has No Value
B) Attacking/Harassing Other Members
C) Inappropriate Post/Thread
D) Duplicate Account
E) Frequenting This Forum
F) All of the Above

Gracias

 

I make it simple for you, just answer a simple question. A person who opens in a forum multiple accounts against the forum rules to influence the discussion by pretending to be different people, is:

A) Honest person

B) Dishonest person

 

LOL @ Gworld... how many times have YOU claimed you have multiple accounts at Dmoz "pretending to be different people"?

Yes, *that* is somehow magically not dishonest... (*bullshit*)

But seriously... per your own test you are a dishonest person. No reason anybody'd listen to you.

 

And I have explained why I needed to do that in order to fight the organizational corruption that is in ODP. I have no respect for any rules in DMOZ since it is used by bunch of crooks to abuse the spirit of the directory and a volunteer organization. I could give some examples about this including your own colorful history in ODP but then you will run to the mods in this forum and my post will be used as an excuse to ban me, so I decline doing that.

 

The operative part of that post was "I have no respect for any rules...".
You can't admit to having PERSONALLY falsified IDs AND use the same act as evidence others are "dishonest". I don't make the rules, that's how credibility works.

As for making personal attacks on my reputation... please be supply some verification in the form of links... we'd miss you if you were just making it up.

 

At least your time in ODP was not total waste and you learned how to break a sentence in the middle in order to make a dishonest point.

As far as links are concerned, I have explain it in the blog that discusses a DMOZ editor as you are well aware of, so you are very welcome to link to my comment in that blog if you want but I won't give you an excuse to run to mods crying and trying to get me banned.

 

LOL. We don't need to, you're pretty good at getting yourself banned. You dont need any help.

 

Gworld - Your MO never varies. At Naylors blog I challenged you to provide substance instead of vague allegations and you quickly changed topics. Here I pointed out you are calling Noble dishonest for something youve repeatedly claimed to have done... and suddenly the subject changes again.

Oh well, at least you're entertaining, in a hot air sorta fashion. How many forums still even let you in now... is this it?


btw - your "red" came thru as gray. Bummer dude... did they turn off your ability to throw red now? Oooh, that'd really suck.

 

They will only accept your site if they believe that your site gets a noticable amount of traffic per day
If you are only getting 50 uniques a day for example, then your site would never be accepted

 

It's clear that GWorld is a dishonest person... what he claims about the banned editors is actually pointless. What there IS proof of though, is that there are high ranking editors on this forum that seemingly disregard rules. Says a lot about their morals and values does it not?

So what... they are honest people. They are still rule breakers.

 

I am still waiting for your answer to a simple question. You were saying that you are not a YES man but I don't know what part are you objecting to. To saying yes all the time or being a man.

I didn't change the subject, I think it is in post 74-75 that I explained how the real estate section of DMOZ was being abused by people involved in that section.
If a policeman shoots a person to defend himself and a killer shoots someone to steal a car, are these both the same thing? Two killers who killed someone?
I could go on with examples but either these concepts are too complicated for you to understand or you don't want to.
I have told you before that I am not one of your group who depend on abusing directories for my living and this is the only forum I post. I don't need to run around to different forums to keep up the price of DMOZ listings.
I don't give red, otherwise it won't be gray but just you be sure, I gave you a red just now with this comment.

"The bigger the hat, smaller the man- Gworld"

 

Their directory has its issues, I've personally pointed out many here... but the vast conspiracy BS you peddle just detracts from the intended use of this forum. The forum's object is to answer questions for people that desire accurate information about this directory. That's what I do here, and being a longterm editor but no longer a Dmoz member, I offer a different perspective than some.

You, on the other hand, simply troll. Your jaded opinions and spurious accusations (about me or anyone else) mean zip to anyone with a brain.

 

LOL.

What accurate information do you and your friends intend to give the users of this form?

Let me summarize all the information that have been given by DMOZ editors in this forum:

• There is no time frame for how long it takes to be listed, it can takes years.
• There is no email to inform people if they have been accepted or rejected and no other means of communication.
• Despite all the evidence of abuse and selling listings, there is no corruption.
• Editors are volunteers, so they don't need to do anything and have no responsibility.

Is there anything that I forgot? Now a mod can make this post sticky and we won't need the repetitive posts from your friends.

If as you say my opinion should not mean any thing to any one with a brain, then it should mean a lot to you. May be that is the reason you and your friends are so upset with my posts, showing the true nature of abuse and corruption in ODP.

 

LOL... you give yourself too much credit... I don't like dogs that mess on the sidewalk either, but I dont consider them "upsetting".
Posts like the one above provide the same general benefit to visitors of this forum as dogs do for hydrants.

But take heart... I'm sure anyone that doesnt recognize a straw man argument will be suitably impressed by your posts.

 

I guess I don't fully recognize it...

• There is no time frame for how long it takes to be listed, it can takes years.

FACT: It says so right on the ADD page (up to two weeks or more)

There is been no distorted version of what is said on the add page. Many editors have said the same thing.

• There is no email to inform people if they have been accepted or rejected and no other means of communication.

FACT: there is no email. Again, it says so, and many editors agree. Besides, the current contact function of the ODP is broken.

Again, no distortion of facts.

• Despite all the evidence of abuse and selling listings, there is no corruption.

Gworld has provided links that show COMPLETED transactions with POSITIVE feedback. Editors have have replied saying that it's all lies, and that a sucker is born every minute.

The ONLY distortion of facts in this case is by the EDITORS, not Gworld. There has yet to be ANY evidence to back up that all the COMPLETED PAID LISTINGS on sites such as scriptlance are just people running scams. NONE, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH...

• Editors are volunteers, so they don't need to do anything and have no responsibility.

Again, this is said time & time again by the editors themselves. Nothing distorted here.

If I am missing something, feel free to point it out.

Time and time again Gworld has posted links to child porn and other sites that should have NEVER made it into the ODP, yet there are very few editors willing to say that such a thing ever even happened. Strange that it's Gworld that is the one that is wrong or the one that is bending the truth, exageration, or whatever... what have the editors brought to the table other then the quoting of their guidelines (which by rights are outdated and "just guidelines"). External evidence is NOT evidence...and when internal forums are quoted as evidence not a single editor is willing to say anything.

So yeah, Gworld will likely continue to blow things out of perportion and the editors will continue to counter every bit of proof with "a sucker is born every minute".

Gworld has backed up most of his claims... can most editors say the same?

 

Attributing a ridiculous argument or position to someone else in order to then blow it away is a straw man argument.

I've never held the position quoted at the top of the post... not when I was there, not now. I've stated it is blown way out of proportion and is much less pervasive than professional trolls like gworld indicate. The directory DOES have issues, but focusing on the wrong thing is a good way to miss fixing the right things.

If G wishes to paint me as one that pretends the dmoz is perfect he'll need to erase a lot of history both here and inside the dmoz forum. Thus, yes, he mischaracterized my position for the purpose of a straw man argument. No biggie, just typical troll behavior... thought I'd point it out.