Former Dmoz Editor Admits to Gaming the System

[Former Member 14]

Hi,

To obtain a broad based opinion I posted a thread about dmoz to:

http://www.webmasterworld.com/foo/4281865.htm

Check out the reply from the poster wheel.


Cheers



Dave

PS Michael this is a valid reason for opening another dmoz thread.

[Jamie - RateMyCasino]

No offence, but who gives a rats ass. This has been going on to long and I think most are sick of the conspiracy theories. Use your time and effort into building your sites and adding your own sections about this. Then you would be able to spout off all you want. I am sick of coming to GPWA and seeing this sort of bullshit. Sorry if my tone comes across as rude, but I don't care enough is enough.

I haven't been around as long as you, but I would say 75% of your posts are trying to discredit people, rather than trying to build this industry.

Threads have been closed over and over because these types of posts always end up with name bashing and people trying to discredit each other. You made your point in other threads Dave, everyone was told to bring proof and nothing was brought. If you intend on posting this publicly, post your proof or shut up. I use to respect your comments, but after the last thread I done something you would do and researched posts, yours included. It has to stop.

I would understand if you post proper proof, but you haven't all you have posted is your commentary on the situation.

Now I am no part of DMOZ at all, I am not friendly with the chain gang you keep referring to, but I am sick of reading posts with people who cause bullshit. Grow up

[alexpratt]

No offence, but who gives a rats ass. This has been going on to long and I think most are sick of the conspiracy theories. Use your time and effort into building your sites and adding your own sections about this. Then you would be able to spout off all you want. I am sick of coming to GPWA and seeing this sort of bullshit. Sorry if my tone comes across as rude, but I don't care enough is enough.

I haven't been around as long as you, but I would say 75% of your posts are trying to discredit people, rather than trying to build this industry.

Threads have been closed over and over because these types of posts always end up with name bashing and people trying to discredit each other. You made your point in other threads Dave, everyone was told to bring proof and nothing was brought. If you intend on posting this publicly, post your proof or shut up. I use to respect your comments, but after the last thread I done something you would do and researched posts, yours included. It has to stop.

I would understand if you post proper proof, but you haven't all you have posted is your commentary on the situation.

Now I am no part of DMOZ at all, I am not friendly with the chain gang you keep referring to, but I am sick of reading posts with people who cause bullshit. Grow up

Agreed

[MichaelCorfman]

AussieDave:

I appreciate being informed about the fact you have spread your unfounded attack to other forums. I made the following post in the thread you stared on webmasterworld.

Michael

I run the Gambling Portal Webmaster Association (the GPWA) where AussieDave also participates. And in that forum he has alledged the same issues he alleges here.

Certainly cases of corruption within dmoz, as evidenced most clearly by the fact that there are editors who have been removed by dmoz itself for failure to properly follow the editing guidelines. However, there are many honest editors who act ethically and try to do a good job.

In this particular situation, AussieDave has posted complaints in the GPWA but has specifically refused to provide the details required to back up those complaints.

Instead, he focuses on single instances of behavior that might appear to be questionable on the surface, but where the allegations do not hold up under scrutiny.

The example given above of a site being accepted promptly is in the context of an editor that is very good about reviewing all submissions to the category into which the site was accepted. And in the context of a category where the sites accepted are all reasonable sites, and where no examples have been given of sites that should be listed but have been inappropriately excluded. That does not indicate corruption. That indicates a good and conscientous editor doing a job that should be respected and appreciated.

Now that the members of the GPWA are tired of these attacks against a webmaster that is viewed by the community as being very ethical, and where I have closed a couple threads after there was a refusal do do anything more than make complaints while refusing to provide more details, he is taking his campaign elsewhere.

If you want to see more background information here are links to the threads where these same unfounded attacks were made:

https://www.gpwa.org/forum/dmoz-frau...em-195563.html

https://www.gpwa.org/forum/dmoz-187571.html

https://www.gpwa.org/forum/dmoz-edit...em-196528.html

I would like to be clear that I am a dmoz editor. I try to be open and honest about my participation, and in being the executive director of the GPWA, I would probably be ripped apart by the members there if there was any hint that I abused my editing responsibilities within dmoz. As an indication of how open I am on that front, my dmoz editor handle is my name, as is my forum name here and on the GPWA.

The editor in question is, in my opinion, also a very honest editor. I formed that opinion over the past year based on the actions I have seen him take within dmoz in terms of fighting for ethical editing decisions over all else.

And I am posting here because of my anger over AussieDave continuing an attack that I consider to be unfounded, and at the same time refusing to provide the evidence (beyond an unfounded example or two) when requested.

He has filed a complaint of abuse with dmoz, but is not content with letting dmoz handle the matter. Rather, he is taking is public, but at the same time refusing to provide in a public setting the information submitted to dmoz. I don't think it is reasonable for him to have it both ways. If you also want to make public complaints, then also provide the evidence in public to justify the complaint.

Michael

[arkyt]

No offence, but who gives a rats ass.

If you don't give a rats ass about this topic, WHY in the world are you taking the time to come in and post on it?

Further, you start your post with "no offense" then go on a tirade bashing the OP - you clearly must have a deep seeded grudge against the OP and it has nothing at all with his disgust for unethical dmoz editors! IF you truly dont care about the issues being discussed; then don't bother to participate in discussing them!

[Webzcas]

Perhaps he is tired like many others of hearing you and AussieDave spew your unfounded crap.

Who made you judge and jury on this forum Brian?

It is okay for you and Dave to post your bile and conveniently not provide any of this so called proof you say you have that implicates myself and others in a link wheel ring of steel.

Post what you have. Go on. Lets get it out in the open. I have nothing to hide.

Certainly the senior editors at DMOZ also believe this also to be the case. Because since your petty vendeta against me at the beginning of last month, I have in the meantime been afforded additional editorial permissions in the directory.

If you won't or are unable to post this proof here and now. Then Michael should close this thread and if I were him, I would ban you both from this forum. As you are both polluting it with your smoke and mirrors, conspiracy theories and personal attacks.

PS: WMW have deepsixed AussieDave's thread. Shame!

[arkyt]

Perhaps he is tired like many others of hearing you and AussieDave spew your unfounded crap.

I have info that suggest otherwise, but now isn't the time to send out any additional smoke signals or twist any mirrors ... LMSAO!

Who made you judge and jury on this forum Brian?

Where have I attempted to play either role? I was just stating the obvious!

Post what you have. Go on. Lets get it out in the open. I have nothing to hide.

This thread had absolutely nothing at all do to with any "ongoing" investigations ... Regarding the topic you are referring to; let me once again state that once dmoz have completed their investigation the info will be released; until then I have agreed to not dicuss that topic ... it was my understanding, via Michael, that you were not to discuss it either.

I were him, I would ban you both from this forum.

Who is the one really trying to play judge and jury?

[MichaelCorfman]

This thread is, like the ones before it, degenerating into a discussion that does not appear to serve any constructive purpose.

I also do note that webmasterworld has, at least at this time, closed down the thread started in that forum on the same topic. Update: The thread has now actually been deleted from the webmasterworld website and returns a 404 error. Previously there was a statement that the thread was under review.

Therefore, I am once again closing down yet another thread on this topic.

And I would once again request that no new threads be started on this same topic unless and until dmoz has resolved this issues raised to it or until the full and complete detail of the material behind the allegations is made available.

Also, please note that I made a slight edit to the title of this thread by prefixing it with the word "Former." In the webmasterworld thread linked to in the initial post there was a webmaster who stated that he acted in a corrupt fashion. However, this editor stated that he was a former and not a current editor. As pointed out subsequently in that thread, such a corrupt editor would not be allowed to remain an editor.

Michael