Treat others as you wish to be treated

[hutcheson]

As you've been told, repeatedly, there's nothing of value to communicate.

 

This is not my theory, my fantasy, my uninformed vision of what might be. This is based on six years of careful experimentation, to see what would work and what wouldn't. We tried what you ask for: making a concerted effort involving many editors and considerable review of the value and results.

 

We know, from long and detailed personal experience, exactly how much it's worth--and it's much less than it costs. That's the end of it. We made a community decision to cut off that massive waste of time and energy. And only mass amnesia can change that fact.

 

Alienating website owners, is not a problem. The sane, rational website owners can be brought to understand reality, and how it works, and how they can expect it to work: and we'll keep on explaining it, for them. The others are beyond our help.

 

The popular uprising is not a problem. The ODP IS a popular uprising. Many editors support other popular uprisings. If you have a good ideal (other than "volunteer slaves for any spammer who walks by", which is all you've come up with so far), then you may attract people: editors and non-editors. More power to you! The net is large: there's room for many more popular uprisings.

 

As for the wants and needs of people, the ODP was formed because someone thought it was the most efficient way to serve one need. Other needs, such as website reviews, web promotion services, etc., can be taken care of far more efficiently elsewhere. So, when I want to serve those needs (and there are other needs I do want to serve), I'll go elsewhere. And when you want those needs served, reason would suggest that you go elsewhere also.

 

But it's not polite, it's not _rational_, to go to a group formed to serve ONE need, and demand they drop that to serve some OTHER need. You don't expect soup kitchens to treat trauma wounds, you don't expect hospitals to provide indigent housing, you don't expect libraries to provide hot meals. This is not to denigrate any of those needs: it is just to say that it's better for a volunteer organization to focus on the needs that its community can provide efficiently, and let some OTHER community form to provide for other needs. Is the net any different? Hardly. Wikipedia doesn't index businesses in Toxic Meadows, New Jersey; Project Gutenberg doesn't index websites.

 

Is there anyone on the net that offers website promotion or website review? (Duh...) Then ... there's no need for the ODP to provide those services; any ODP editor is free to volunteer on those other sites also, if he thinks it worthwhile.

 

That's reality. That's life. The internet is no different.

[motsa]

It's like saying we'll build a pyramid for the good of mankind for the public, but we don't care much about the quarry workers who cut out the stones. Since they cut out those stones for their own interests we don't have to deal with them at all.

Actually, it's more like saying we'll build a pyramid for the good of mankind but we don't necessarily have to use the stone that was quarried by any particular quarry worker.

 

there should be some simple query or feedback device, even if it's just a standardized form response.

See our FAQ here for the answer to that suggestion.

[inetbug]

I have exhausted myself in making an appeal to you (or to the those in charge whoever they may be). Thank you for your time and for relaying my suggestions to them

 

Have a nice day.

[hutcheson]

I should perhaps mention here that even from the start, the "ones in charge" had deep reservations concerning our "submittal status" initiative. Experience has done nothing except to confirm those reservations.

 

We have taken your excellent advice to return to our original goals, to serve the surfers of the world as best we can with our resources.

 

This leaves your mission unaccomplished (by us.) If that mission is truly worth anything, it's a great opportunity for you. Go for it!

[oneeye]

I was in a very small minority who wanted to keep status checks. Not as a public service but because it pointed me at loads of spam I could clear up. But since I was in such a small minority I accept and apply the views and decisions of the vast majority of my colleagues (in case anyone was thinking of sending me a PM asking for a check). So no-one I can think of wanted to keep them because they gave any value to the questioner. Because they didn't give any value to the questioner.

 

Popular uprisings? Lets say every webmaster in the world agreed and decided to withdraw cooperation. Presumably by not submitting their site. No problem, we then search for the sites and list them anyway. We do that now and find it far more productive usually. Might do us some favours in many categories. Please encourage travel agents and dating site owners and real estate agents and get rich quick scheme affiliates to rise up and withdraw cooperation.

 

Do we treat everyone the same - spammers and the honest and legitimate? No. We refuse to give any information to spammers to help them become better spammers. And we refuse to give inaccurate information and false hope to the honest and legitimate so they are not misled. By coincidence that actually equals the same thing - no status information. Because there is no way of giving accurate and meaningful information.

 

Pyramids - OK we are building a pyramid. We go out looking for stones but invite people to bring us stones to include. To build the pyramid we need stones of certain proportions and type. Pebbles are no good, sandstone is not suitable, a lot don't fit the engineers' plan. Around the base in the compound we now have far more stones than it will take to build the pyramid. A lot are pebbles which we have asked people to stop bringing but still they come and leave them at one of the gates which sometimes makes it difficult for the builders to get at the stones they need of the right size and type - the pebbles are blocking some of the gates. We have also explained that we may not be able to include other donations or it might take a long time until we get to that bit of the pyramid where that stone might fit. But still there is a constant stream of people asking when we are going to include their stone - when we get to it we say - and then they complain. But they don't understand - if we put the stones in as they arrive we'll end up with an unstable pile that will collapse. If we put sandstone in then it will collapse. What are we supposed to do with the pebbles? And progress on building the pyramid slows down because of the need to constantly stop and tell people where their stone is in terms of if and when it will be added to the construction. So instead we post a notice on the gate explaining all this. And people ignore the notice.

 

OK you haven't brought us a pebble or a lump of sandstone. It is a great chunk of granite that will fit in somewhere. That is fantastic, thanks. When will we put that granite chunk in? Sorry I don't know when the builders will need it or where exactly it will end up but it is in the compound and as soon as someone needs some granite that size I am sure they will look at it and decide whether it fits the plan.

 

Pyramids took decades to complete and they have stood for thousands of years. We are not quite thinking of those timescales but we are trying to build the most stable Internet structure in existence to last for the longest possible time. Which is why we are not that bothered about including every listable site within days of it being published. If it is one of the rocks of the Internet then when we come to it in a few years it will still be there waiting to be added.

 

Meanwhile there are stone merchants standing outside the compound trying to flog us sub-standard stone they can't get rid of anywhere else. And they also want to sell us cheap mortar. They even try and get their cowboy builders into the compound to bodge the job. And the latest trick - sandstone painted in a granite colour and real granite hollowed out and the centre replaced with styrofoam to make it cheaper. We decline their offerings because frankly the resulting structure would be hazardous and fall down in a week like the pyramids started by others who couldn't resist the cheap materials. So they employ sorcerors to put a hex on our builders and constantly implore the Pharaoh to force us to take their wares. But the Pharaoh is wise and ignores them. Some of them think that if they can't get the exclusive contracts to provide stone the only answer is to destroy the pyramid entirely and so they catapult their sub-standard stone over the compound wall. Sometimes hoping it will get picked up by accident and cause a wall to collapse, sometimes hoping to make a direct hit on the work under construction. So we build the wall higher and they complain bitterly we are stopping them destroying the pyramid.

 

Yep, I like the pyramid analogy...

[Alucard]

I think we need to stop using the pyramid analogy before we fall down on our asp.

[arubin]

I didn't think we listed pyramid schemes ...

[hutcheson]

I used to wonder why the tombs contained servants' bodies. Maybe that was just their anti-spam technique. "Aha! another fine (but very light) granite boulder, attractively painted and garnished with dust. Thank you very much, the Pharoah would love for more of your service (infinitely more....) Join the 'special priority processing line' over here, yes, around behind that screen. Ignore the screams, some people are just jealous of your special status. Aaaaaaaaarrrg......"

[oneeye]

some people are just jealous of your special status

Some people are just jealous of my asp.

[cali casino]

Pyramid

 

is this pyramid sceme or what