Printer Friendly Version
Email this thread to a friend
|
Well Established Internet Dating Website for Sale (In: I Want to Sell My Website)
Featured Web Site Template |
|
There are 0 guests and 1 members in the forums right now.
Reflects user activity within the last 5 minutes
|
|
| Member |
Message |
papajoe
Joined: Aug 02, 2005
# Posts: 5
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-03 04:04
DMOZ is a good idea, but poorly implemented. Yes, right. The USSR also was a good idea, but poorly implemented.
DMOZ is a corrupt idea and that is the reason we are reading stories about corruption within the ODP, not because some bad guys got into DMOZ and hijacked it. The corrupt idea brought about the corrupt culture and the corrupt culture does not tolerate decent editors. A fish is getting rotten from the head, not from the tail.
DMOZ is a small but a very accurate replica of the USSR. In the USSR people had a right for a free medical care, free education and free shelter. In exchange people agreed to relinquish freedom of choice, rule of law, right for a reasonable standard of living and agreed to the rule of the nomenclature. DMOZ is exactly that - a closed old boy’s club with the lack of transparency and public accountability and absolute intolerance to any dissenting opinion. The club run by the nomenclature of meta editors. The stakes are high the public accountability and transparency are low or non existent. Why ? Because it was conceived that way. Free is bad, one has to pay for everything in his or her life and demand quality for his or her money. That is why capitalism is a better alternative to anything else.
Free means ‘not enough for everyone’. Free means ‘no freedom of choice’. Free is an invitation for abuse. Because as long as something is free, someone in the nomenclature has to decide who, when and how much will get of this free stuff. The same applies to DMOZ.
I have been editing since 1999. The stories told on www.corruptdmozeditor.com are only the tip of the iceberg. Here is an example. The meta editor for my category is Aaron Larson who is a lawyer from Michigan www.a2lawyer.com . He is particularly keen on eliminating second listings. In his view the company can have only one website and one listing in one category, period. Even if the sites a company has are distinctly different, he will eliminate the second listing. DMOZ does not encourage second sites but does not prohibit them either. So, it the discretion of a meta editor what to do. Well, lets see how Aaron treats his own sites:
Open Directory Sites (1-5 of 5)
1. ExpertLaw - Articles on a variety of legal subjects.
-- [link]library/]link[/url]] Society: Law: Legal Information (2)
2. ExpertLaw - Directory of expert witnesses, litigation support services, and private investigators, also providing legal information for experts and attorneys.
-- [link] Society: Law: Services: Directories (1)
3. ExpertLaw - Directory of expert witnesses organized by area of practice and location.
-- [link]experts/ Society: Law: Services: Expert Witnesses: Directories (1)
4. ExpertLaw - Find a private investigator or related service, by specialty and location.
-- [link]investigators/ Business: Business Services: Fire and Security: Security: Investigation: Directories (1)
5. ExpertLaw Forums - Public discussion forums on a wide range of legal issues.
-- [link]forums/ Society: Law: Legal Information: Chats and Forums (1)
Open Directory Sites (1-2 of 2)
1. Aaron Larson - Ann Arbor attorney specializing in civil litigation and appeals, as well as motion drafting services. Includes articles.
-- [link] Society: Law: Services: Lawyers and Law Firms: Appeals and Writs: North America: United States: Michigan (1)
2. Aaron Larson - Representing clients for civil litigation and appeals, and offering motion drafting and appellate services to attorneys. Articles on a variety of legal subjects.
-- [link] Regional: North America: United States: Michigan: Localities: A: Ann Arbor: Business and Economy: Legal Services: Attorneys and Law Firms (1)
I am currently editing 7 directories under different names. This is the only way to make sure that when some metascam decides to wipe me out to take in his or her friend, I will not be eliminated. I made a decision to go stealth when a friend of mine run into a problem with another meta editor Oneeye (Paul) who handles even bigger chunk of DMOZ [link] and for thr argument with him my friend’s login was cancelled.
Will be continued….
|
 |
macdesign
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
# Posts: 25
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-03 04:26
How do I know you are an editor, I doubt it.
|
|
cbp
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
# Posts: 181
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-03 06:18
I am currently editing 7 directories under different names
Thats a bigger fraud than the one you are alleging!!!!
|
|
macdesign
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
# Posts: 25
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-03 16:41
He claims to be an editor editing multiple categories - and he is also a lawyer.
He's either telling the truth and is editing multiple categories, or he's a total lier and is not an editor. Either way he's totally unethical and probably should be reported to the local bar association.
|
|
oneeye
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 4
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-03 18:48
I know someone else with a habit of posting the same post twice in different places. This "friend" wouldn't be you by any chance.
See: other thread
[ Message was edited by: JimBot 08/04/2005 12:29 pm ... Reason: Fixed Thread Stretch. ]
|
|
kptmf
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 02:55
Oneeye,
You sound like a half decent guy.
Could you please let us know what are the websites you are controlling/affiliating with and in what categories they are listed.
Thank you very much.
|
|
oneeye
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 4
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 14:16
My affiliations, including all URLs ever registered by me even if not used and URLs belonging to members of my family, are all registered with DMOZ via the preferred method along with a full explanation of the nature of the affiliation. Those are available to all meta editors at any time. Few editors publicly declare their affiliations these days because in the past they have been subjected to malicious attacks e.g. denial of service, being added to spam mailing lists etc.
There is nevertheless a requirement to fully declare all such affiliations to meta editors, whose responsibilities include abuse investigations and assignment of editing rights to other editors. The links referred to in the first post relating to another editor will likewise have been declared. It is a requirement that not all editors are comfortable with but one that must be accepted if an editor wishes to continue with the privileges. Failure to do so fully and completely can and often does result in editors being removed. It is not optional.
|
|
kptmf
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 16:07
I am afraid this confirms what Papajoe is stating. There is one set of rules for the meta editors and there is another set of rules for the rest. It does not matter whether meta editor declares his or her affiliations or not if by the end of the day he or she is listing several sites in several categories with high PR.
Unfortunately we always knew that this is how DMOZ works.
|
|
papajoe
Joined: Aug 02, 2005
# Posts: 5
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 19:13
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The Open Directory Project is as ‘open’ as Korean Democratic People’s Republic is a ‘democracy’.
If you are editing multilevel directories with multinational responsibilities as I do, one day you are upto surprise. You are logging in to your directory and are not able to recognize it. Everything has been changed – website descriptions have been stripped off important keywords, anchor text has been modified and the last but the least one site has been introduced on highest level (continental) with no reason whatsoever. All the changes are made by one of the meta editors and all are made just to disguise the introduction of this new website.
If you are new to DMOZ and do not know how the things are working here, you would write to the meta editor and express your concern. This is a bad move, because you most likely would get a very angry reply saying do not ever touch this website or else. Again, if you are new to DMOZ and do not understand how the things are working her, you might decide to post your concerns in the editors’ forum asking for help. This is even worse move then the first one. This is a serious mutiny in the ranks that ought to be dealt promptly and brutally. Within minutes your login is cancelled and your post in the forum is deleted.
From this point on you are nonexistent to DMOZ. You cannot communicate with DMOZ through abuse@dmoz.org and staff@dmoz.org because these addresses only accept correspondence from those who are on the approved list. Your login has been cancelled and you have been removed from the list. You could use their public abuse form, but it does not work (what a surprise). This is the point when you realize you need multiple logins to survive in the rotten place with rotten culture like DMOZ.
Here is a wonderful post that gives you a hint on what DMOZ is all about:
www.resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40180
[ Message was edited by: bhartzer 08/04/2005 11:40 am ]
|
|
oneeye
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 4
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 19:53
The rules are the same for all editors. Protection of the directory against meta abuse is vested in Admins, selected in part for their lack of commercial affiliations. Above Admins are Staff.
The link from papajoe tells you what? Someone bought and redirected a listed site? A mirror got past an editor maybe. Certainly nothing sinister, merely a quality control issue and with millions of listings and limited editors such things will get by until pointed out. We welcome and encourage all users of the directory to report such things they find and they generally get fixed very quickly. Are those the attitudes of the corrupt?
Papajoe, you know the names of the admins, you also know the names of metas who are incorruptible even if you pulled their toenails out. You also claim to be still an editor. Report your suspicions to an Admin via their profile link. Your credibility, given your admission to being a corrupt editor yourself, is somewhat tarnished but every report will be investigated.
You cannot get removed for reporting abuse. You cannot get removed for disagreeing with anyone. You can only get removed for abusing your own position as an editor. If you were only 5% right in your assertions virtually all editalls and metas would have left in disgust years ago.
People can believe me or believe you, it makes no difference really and it isn't worth continuing a dialogue like this. The only way to test it is for honest people to apply to become editors and test it out for themselves. Dishonest editors with multiple logins need not reapply.
|
|
papajoe
Joined: Aug 02, 2005
# Posts: 5
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 20:44
http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=5708
Moderator Note: we don't normally allow links.
[ Message was edited by: JimBot 08/04/2005 01:15 pm ... Reason: "Revealed" Link URL. ]
|
|
macdesign
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
# Posts: 25
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 21:33
kptmf - you just joined to post to this thread? - must be papajoe's schizoid twin.
|
|
kptmf
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-04 23:40
Macdesign,
You sound like a half decent chap too. Primarily because of your integrity and high degree of concern about ethical issues.
Since we did not get much by way of disclosure from Oneeye, just a long speech, perhaps you, as a highly ethical individual and a proud ODP editor, could disclose your sites and the categories you are editing.
No speeches, just URLs and categories.
Thank you very much.
|
|
JimBot
Staff
Joined: Jul 20, 2003
# Posts: 239
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-05 01:08
Anything with a "personal" tone to it, whether in past or future posts will shortly be deleted from this thread.
Two other options are also available: delete all posts from this usename and ban this user. Fingers are poised.
You can easily find out the categories where an editor is named, and you can also find out their editing permissions "level". No "challenges" are required.
|
|
cbp
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
# Posts: 181
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-05 04:02
could disclose your sites and the categories you are editing.
It was explained above why this is not going to happen. Editors are not accountable to YOU. All this information is available internally to DMOZ editors.
|
|
windharp
Joined: Mar 11, 2002
# Posts: 513
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-05 09:17
As JimBot says: The categories an editor is assigned to are no secret, this information is freely available to the public. So no need to post it here.
Btw: If you want to read an editors affiliations, choose mine. I do list them in public, and when you have found out which categories I edit in, you are only a few clicks from the place I list all sites I have a relation to. Not very spectacular though, I am afraid.
|
|
cbp
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
# Posts: 181
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-07 04:02
I notice this thread appearing on many other forums. I also notice 2 have deleted it (WPW & SEW) - I presume it was deleted at these other forums for similar reasons to the forum rules in the sticky of this forum about whats not allowed:
2.) Complaints about specific individuals at any of the Volunteer Edited Directories
|
|
PhilC
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 75
|
Posted: 2005-Aug-15 02:06
Sorry to bump this after a week, but, judging by the evidence in this thread, papajoe is not a DMOZ editor.
In his first post, he stated that he is "currently editing 7 directories under different names." DMOZ editors edit "categories" and never "directories".
More importantly, he states that "The meta editor for my category is Aaron Larson who is a lawyer from Michigan." Now, I could be mistaken about this, but since Aaron is English speaking, I would assume that he would be the meta editor over English language categories, if he's over anything at all (when I was an editor, I never heard of metas being over certain categories, but it seems reasonable). But papajoe isn't a native English speaker, and would never get to edit an English language category. His first post is written ok, but, judging by the poor English in his second one, he didn't write the first post himself.
|
|
dbarn
Joined: Nov 12, 2005
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2005-Nov-12 21:16
DMOZ this is what was said, after I posted
I posted:
I recently read a forum (digitalpoint) which a person claimed to be a editor at DMOZ and by the way also owned a SEO company, here is my problem: I have owned 3 domains all of which did submissions freely to 800000 engines, two domains I have let go, but one is up and running: ranks1.com, the old domains were jesuspagetools.com and TXsprinkler.com not one of these 3 URL's have ever been listed on DMOZ, I wonder why ?
I have added this to the complaint area in hopes of a reason, I am however not to worried about the outcome due to the fact....how could I be hurt anymore than I already have. Be judgmental, be concerned, but don't be biased !
They posted:
You might like to read the FAQ which gives some indication of the listing timescales to be expected.
Because I notice you've also made almost identical posts on other forums, I'll comment further. Your website hasn't yet been listed because no volunteer has yet got around to evaluating it. That's it. No conspiracy, just unrealistic expectations
Finally, your abuse report has already been resolved . No evidence of abuse was found.
I posted:
Hummm OK can you explain:
#1)
www.JesusPageTools.com and www.TXsprinkler.com both sites ran on the web for over 2 years and both were never listed.
#2)
I am not bias and I hope there are more sites such as mine that get listed, Why are NONE of the 1560 sites that offer completely free submission not listed ? huh ?
#3)
and it took you all of what 10 minutes to come up with this reason, no conspiracy ?
then what about reason #2 again ? the 1560 sites !
they posted:
You've been given an answer to your question, in fact more of one that we would normally give. If you choose not to accept that there is no conspiracy, there's not much we can do. I'm going to close this thread (and I'd advise you to not start any others about your sites) because leaving it open is just encouraging people to discuss your specific situation, which is against the rules of this forum.
|
|
dbarn
Joined: Nov 12, 2005
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2005-Nov-12 21:19
I will spread good news till there is no news to spread.
|
|
You are not permitted to post messages in this forum or topic, because of one or more of the following reasons:
- You have not yet logged in, or registered properly as a member
- You are a member, but no longer have posting rights.
- This is a private forum, for which you do not have permissions.
If you are a recent member, it's possible that you simply have not yet confirmed your account. Please
check your email for a message entitled 'JimWorld Forums: Confirm Your Account' and follow the instructions
contained within.
If you cannot find this message, click here to Re-Send it.
|
If you are still experiencing problem, please read the
Login Assistance
Article for some advice on what may be causing your login not to work properly.
|
Switch to Advanced Editor and ...
Create a New Topic
or Reply to this Thread
|
|
Inbox
