Is DMOZ just a Bunch of Corrupt Editors?

dontpassup · Apr 11, 2010

I have been reading more and more that DMOZ is infiltrated with many corrupt editors who have MULTIPLE sites listed when the rest of us cannot get ONE site listed. After six years I have given up on DMOZ. Hopefully in the near future the serch engines will see DMOZ for what it IS and devalue it's relevance.

motsa · Apr 11, 2010

(a) Multiple sites owned by the same person being listed doesn't necessarily mean any abuse or corruption has occurred. It all depends on the nature of the sites in question.
(b) Multiple listings for the same site even doesn't necessarily mean any abuse or corruption has occurred. It all depends on the site and the categories involved. (For example, many businesses can be listed in a Regional category and in a Topical category.)
(c) While editorial abuse can happen, we deal with it very seriously when we find it. If you have evidence of wrongdoing by an editor, we invite you to fill in an abuse report to tell us about it. http://report-abuse.dmoz.org.

makrhod · Apr 11, 2010

I have been reading more and more that DMOZ is infiltrated with many corrupt editors

It is generally unwise to believe everything you read on the internet, particularly when statements are made without any evidence at all to support them, and when the person making the statement has a very obvious personal agenda.

It is very disappointing that those people who make such insulting claims about volunteers are never able to produce any evidence to support them, despite constant reminders about the abuse reporting procedure, as motsa has just done for you.

dontpassup · Apr 11, 2010

makrhod said:
It is generally unwise to believe everything you read on the internet, particularly when statements are made without any evidence at all to support them, and when the person making the statement has a very obvious personal agenda.

It is very disappointing that those people who make such insulting claims about volunteers are never able to produce any evidence to support them, despite constant reminders about the abuse reporting procedure, as motsa has just done for you.

makrhod ,
When you're done with your Whinny rant, go to Google and type "dmoz corruption". If you cannot find enough evidence in there to last a lifetime of "denial" I don't know what else to tell you, but peel away the Blinders.

makrhod · Apr 11, 2010

"There are none so blind ... "

As we keep reminding you, IF you have proof of editorial corruption, please report it. Simple.
If you don't have any proof, then please refrain from further insults.
(And FTR I have never whinnied in my life.

)

motsa · Apr 12, 2010

When you're done with your Whinny rant, go to Google and type "dmoz corruption". If you cannot find enough evidence in there to last a lifetime of "denial" I don't know what else to tell you, but peel away the Blinders.

No, what you'll find there are people complaining about things without offering a shred of proof. And you'll also find out-and-out liars who were exposed by their colleagues in the SEO world. What you won't find is evidence of specific cases of editorial corruption.

The Old Sarge · Apr 12, 2010

dontpassup, after taking your suggestion to Google your problem, ALL what I saw in three pages of results was at least 3 years old. Some almost 10.

Pitchin1 · Apr 12, 2010

makrhod said:
"There are none so blind ... "

As we keep reminding you, IF you have proof of editorial corruption, please report it. Simple.
If you don't have any proof, then please refrain from further insults.
(And FTR I have never whinnied in my life. )

WHAT IS THE SAYING?? "The proof is in the pudding" looks like a duck, sounds like a duck it's probably a duck..

hewhowaits · Apr 13, 2010

YES pretty much I would have to agree, very dodgy indeed, one example near where I live I know there is a DMOZ editor he has friends who have business websites of a certain type. when you look in that category for a particular thing you only find 3 businesses and , oh what a coincidence they are the 3 sites of the DMOZ editors friends, hmmmm how bizarre.

I think some editors are OK but I know others take money to list sites and keep others sites off. There is no boss in ODP, just editors who think there the boss, there is no real compliants department etc, all you get when you say anything is err, its free, err, we invest our time in this, err nah nah nah, we dont have to list your sites, we are just dloing this out of the goodness of our hearts, and you should be grateful we even read your submissions with 5yrs. Go on someone say something. tell me Im wrong.!!!

jimnoble · Apr 13, 2010

there is no real compliants department

Had you thought of trying http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/ ? It's linked from the top of every category page. We'd really like to know in which category some editor is just listing his mates.

hewhowaits · Apr 13, 2010

jimnoble said:
Had you thought of trying http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/ ? It's linked from the top of every category page. We'd really like to know in which category some editor is just listing his mates.

Yes, this is the same old story, same answer every time, hmm why dont you report them here at this link http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/, where upon which someone might reply to you, and then they tell you , no sorry your wrong we could not find anything to suggest any wrong doing. So what next who governs the governers??? I mean is that link as far as we can go towards reporting someone? ohh and could you tell me who will get the report? who will read this report I send? will it be the boss of ODP? Hmm most likely not, it's just another Dmoz editor, So it's kinda like telling the person your reporting that your reporting them? true?

pvgool · Apr 13, 2010

> who will read this report I send?
Only editors with function of Meta, CatMod or Admin can read the abuse reports. All reports that I have seen are looked at by more than one of them.
> will it be the boss of ODP?
There is no "boss". All editors are equal. Some just have extra privileges, those editors have shown over the years that they can be trusted.
DMOZ is a community in which all editors can check the activities of all other editors. Such a self control is very effective.

hewhowaits · Apr 13, 2010

1. So what your saying is I am right, just another Dmoz editor will read it? no boss as you said, no one to govern you.

2. All editors are equal, erm except the ones who have extra privileges, right? Only that just backs what I already said, Stop me if I am wrong but that's not really equal is it?

3. Editors have proven there trust worthiness, lol really who to them self's and other editors? there is no boss, no one to govern.

4. "SELF CONTROL" Yes that is effective, but only for the editors. self control is what dictators use, Hence why everyone thinks Dmoz is a dictatorship.

5. You guys should really stop using the pre written text and answer the questions put to you. You say more than one editor reads the reports, well prove it. ODP are always asking for proof of corruption, surely the onus is on you to prove otherwise, something which I am yet to see.

6. I challenge any Dmoz editor to use there own opinion about this subject, you know as well as me next week you will no longer be an editor, something that I have seen in many forums a Dmoz editor says something next time you look the thread has been deleted and the editor is no more.

7. My final point, when one editor looks at a report they can decide to delete this report and that's that, so then no one else would see it? otherwise if what your saying is true I would expect more than one response about a report, which does not happen.

Its like this, Dmoz editors hold all the cards, if you don't like it then please complain to said editors at this link here http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/ upon which nothing further will happen.

I suggest Dmoz/ODP put up a name and shame list every 3mths, you tell us what you are doing to take steps against corruption, name editors who have been sacked, with a reason for each. Trouble is it's very difficult to have faith in such a self controlled system where the only answers you get are the same each week, by the same top editors. Dmoz I my opinion "which I am not scared to use" wont be around for ever, google will drop it like a bad smell if even a hint of corruption was leaked.

The End, If you would like to report an editor please ensure you have photographic proof of an editor committing an offense, I do appreciate you may have to be stood beside them and this could be a difficult task, oh hey it's OK I just seen this link I'm sure will do the job instead http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/

hewhowaits · Apr 13, 2010

The one question you did not answer "I mean is that link as far as we can go towards reporting someone?" ? ? ? ?

hutcheson · Apr 13, 2010

7. My final point, when one editor looks at a report they can decide to delete this report and that's that, so then no one else would see it? otherwise if what your saying is true I would expect more than one response about a report, which does not happen.

Wrong. Any meta-editor can review an abuse report. Even the closed ones are maintained for future reference. And quite often several different meta-editors will investigate some part of a report, and leave their own findings. On the rare occasions when it's not just some malicious person throwing dust, and there's actually fire under the smoke, at least five meta-editors must review the evidence to remove the abusive editor.

This isn't secret information--the meta-editor guidelines are a matter of public record.

But nobody would waste time sending a second response if one had already been sent. It would be almost as stupid as ... suggesting a site that has already been rejected.

pvgool · Apr 13, 2010

hewhowaits said:
1. So what your saying is I am right, just another Dmoz editor will read it? no boss as you said, no one to govern you.

Correct, we govern ourself. Although there are a few AOL people involved for technical and legal stuff. They also check that the editors commucity stays within the set bouderies.

4. "SELF CONTROL" Yes that is effective, but only for the editors. self control is what dictators use, Hence why everyone thinks Dmoz is a dictatorship.

I prefer to call it democracy. Real democray. 1 man/woman 1 vote and everybody can check on the other members.

6. I challenge any Dmoz editor to use there own opinion about this subject, you know as well as me next week you will no longer be an editor, something that I have seen in many forums a Dmoz editor says something next time you look the thread has been deleted and the editor is no more.

I always write my own opinion. And I know it is not liked by all. I don't care. And I am not afraid to be removed from DMOZ for expressing my opinion because that is no reason for removal.

7. My final point, when one editor looks at a report they can decide to delete this report and that's that, so then no one else would see it? otherwise if what your saying is true I would expect more than one response about a report, which does not happen.

Nope. Reports can not be deleted. I can check back to 2002 when we started with the abuse report system.
Nothing in DMOZ is ever deleted. As a result we can always check what has happened in the past.

I suggest Dmoz/ODP put up a name and shame list every 3mths, you tell us what you are doing to take steps against corruption, name editors who have been sacked, with a reason for each.

For legal reasons this is not possible. Privacy laws prohibit publication of such lists.

Trouble is it's very difficult to have faith in such a self controlled system where the only answers you get are the same each week, by the same top editors.

If the answers are always the same it might be that those answers are the truth. Ever tought about that.

Dmoz I my opinion "which I am not scared to use" wont be around for ever, google will drop it like a bad smell if even a hint of corruption was leaked.

This is a prediction already made some 10 years ago. Maybe it will happen sometime. I wouldn't like to see such a wonderfull communty to end but if it did I will easily find another interesting hobby.

The End, If you would like to report an editor please ensure you have photographic proof of an editor committing an offense, I do appreciate you may have to be stood beside them and this could be a difficult task, oh hey it's OK I just seen this link I'm sure will do the job instead http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/

Just write down what you know and how you have come to the conclusion that there is abuse. That is enough.
Just shouting that there is corruption will not do the job.
BTW. The fact that a suggested website is not listed is not proof of abuse.

pvgool · Apr 13, 2010

hewhowaits said:
The one question you did not answer "I mean is that link as far as we can go towards reporting someone?" ? ? ? ?

yes it is.

hutcheson · Apr 13, 2010

is that link as far as we can go towards reporting someone?

No, you can report someone anywhere you like: the Dalai Lama, Secret Police, United Nations, Galactic Patrol ...

But that link goes directly to the meta-editors: the people who are responsible for investigating editing abuse. Anyone else you report to, can (at best) only go to the meta-editors to ask for an investigation. But you can do that yourself.

And who could possibly care more about corruption than someone who has invested thousands of hours building non-corrupt parts of the directory?

motsa · Apr 13, 2010

I challenge any Dmoz editor to use there own opinion about this subject, you know as well as me next week you will no longer be an editor, something that I have seen in many forums a Dmoz editor says something next time you look the thread has been deleted and the editor is no more.

Having your own opinion about anything will not get an editor removed. But violating our confidentiality or communications guidelines while you're voicing your opinion can be a problem. That's pretty clear in our guidelines so it shouldn't surprise anyone when it happens.

The End, If you would like to report an editor please ensure you have photographic proof of an editor committing an offense, I do appreciate you may have to be stood beside them and this could be a difficult task, oh hey it's OK I just seen this link I'm sure will do the job instead http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/

We really do take allegations of abuse seriously. We don't like having abusive editors around any more than you would. But I have to be honest -- most of the reports of abuse that we get are not abuse at all but rather are just someone interpreting something incorrectly. (For example, we get a lot of "My site hasn't been listed so an editor must be keeping me out" kind of abuse reports. In 99.99% of cases, it's just a case of the site either having not been reviewed yet or being not listable at all, with not one iota of abuse involved.) We don't ask for photographic evidence, but clearly the more evidence, even circumstantial evidence or theories, someone can provide when they allege abuse, the better.

hewhowaits · Apr 13, 2010

hutcheson said:
Wrong. "Any meta-editor can review an abuse report. Even the closed ones are maintained for future reference. And quite often several different meta-editors will investigate some part of a report,"

So how many meta editors are there? in one area? im not sure how that would work?

So Five meta editors will review each case? where is this public record of guidlines for meta editiors please?

But nobody would waste time sending a second response if one had already been sent. It would be almost as stupid as ... suggesting a site that has already been rejected, yes true and fair point, I have never had a site rejected (yet)

And I am not here to "throw dust" just make sense of the way in which the reports are conducted to start with, there certianly is some secrets, and surely as a meta editor you must have in your time came across corrupt editors?

Is DMOZ just a Bunch of Corrupt Editors?

dontpassup

Member

motsa

makrhod

Member

dontpassup

Member

makrhod

Member

motsa

The Old Sarge

Member

Pitchin1

Member

hewhowaits

Member

jimnoble

DMOZ Meta

hewhowaits

Member

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv

hewhowaits

Member

hewhowaits

Member

hutcheson

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv

hutcheson

motsa

hewhowaits

Member