I wonder why?

[Stern123]

stern, you are correct when you say that uninformed suggestions about changes to the ODP governance invariably get a response that consists of information about how the ODP actually works.

 

Uh, I never said that.

 

A suggestion that involved ANYBODY (let alone webmasters) given the power to tell editors what to do and when

 

I never said that either, if you are using the term "tell editors what to do" literally.

 

And there's no point in trying to make the ODP into a cheap imitation of some other, less-successful, less-respected project.

 

Never implied that, and I'll refrain from commenting on the part about respect.

 

Now, you've asked, what is the use of that community and its activities?

 

I never asked that.

 

And the community may do other things, such as this forum, that are of no use to you. But that doesn't mean it's no use at all! There are other people in the world. And the forum remains useful to some people, both editors and non-editors.

 

I never said this forum was useless.

[hutcheson]

I think the point is, that there are a lot of suggestions that are so ill-informed they can't possibly be construed in any useful way.

 

So the forum serves two purposes: (1) informing people about how the ODP "works" in the most general sense, which we can do without having any power or interest in changing it, and (2) collecting evidence about cases in which the current mechanism FAILS to work (quality feedback, again in the most general sense.)

 

Obviously, AOL corporate would be the place to take suggestions about changing the ODP charter, constitution, requirements, etc. We don't change those, and it's pointless to propose that we do.

 

For that matter, it's pointless to propose a change unless you can show that it addresses a real problem.

 

Webmasters not being able to find their own sites in the ODP is not a problem. Webmasters not having the free publicity provided by the ODP, is not a problem. And webmasters not getting constructive site reviews provided free by the ODP, is not a problem.

 

The ODP was designed to help surfers find specific kinds of information. Whenever it fails, that's a problem. And IF it fails, there must be some tangible evidence of failure. Hence the editors' insistence on focusing on what might really be a problem. Editors are, in my experience, very good at solving problems. Find a problem, first, before you start making uninformed proposals about how the ODP could be different.

 

And explain what problem you're trying to solve. Hint: that problem must have nothing whatsoever with enabling promotion of any website. That problem has to be some way the ODP fails surfers.

 

Now, showing there is a problem that the ODP ought to address, is a constructive step. But saying it can't be manipulated by webmasters for their own profit, isn't a problem. It's a valued feature.

[jimnoble]

This thread seems to have reached a pointless stalemate. Let's just agree to differ and close the thread now.

 

@Stern123: Please don't start a similar one.