Editorship revokation ??

[dan.kotarski]

I tried loggin on this morning and found that I am no longer an editor. Did I violate some obscure DMOZ policy? I also found that my affiliated site is no longer listed in the directory. What happened?

[motsa]

I'm afraid we don't discuss editor removals here.

[dan.kotarski]

OK. Where can I go to discuss it then? I cannot log into my editor account because it was disabled.

BTW - I like the picture of the cat. It's cracking me up !

[motsa]

Editor accounts are only removed after in-depth discussion and consensus among meta editors. There really is no place where you can discuss it. You could send an e-mail to staff@dmoz.org but you are not likely to receive a response. The editorial guidelines give some general reasons why an account may be removed.

[Janeth]

Dan,

You’ve become famous, check out the forums, everyone’s talking about you.

[vinodjk]

Dan,

You’ve become famous, check out the forums, everyone’s talking about you.

Its clear as crystal that the editor is corrupt and dmoz has done a great job... Keep it up

[critic009]

Crystal Clear? Based on what?

So thats all it takes to get an editor removed? WOW.

No headers of the email - no proof that it was actually sent by the editor and poof hes a crook.

You know how easy it would be to create the same letter ... and submit it as a fraudulent editor? (just picked an editor for example - we all know <an editor> is great.)

=======================

I am the editor of the DMOZ category to which your site was submitted. Despite what everyone says, you DO get your site listed faster (and everyone knows how important it is to be listed in DMOZ) by throwing an editor a few bucks (no-one on DMOZ will ever admint to that though). The key is, you need to find the right editor.....

Thanks,
<an editor>

<website URL>

=======================

I sure hope that the staff would make sure this was a 100% valid case of fraud before they acted! Course I am 99.9% certain that they didnt follow up on it one bit!

[nea]

You would be 99.9% wrong, then

As you know, we don't discuss specific cases of removal here or anywhere in public. But it's not difficult to find equally tenuous-looking accusations of various named editors in forums all over the place, where the editor has patently not been removed. So obviously a vague thing like that would not be enough.

[shadow575]

I sure hope that the staff would make sure this was a 100% valid case of fraud before they acted! Course I am 99.9% certain that they didnt follow up on it one bit!

And I am 99.999% sure the sky is green and the sun is purple.

The Meta's (important point ODP Staff are not the only ones that handle abuse-Meta editors do much of the investigations) take abuse allegations very seriously and removal of editors is not something taken lightly. Other evidence must be presented and a concensus of Meta's must be reached before removal becomes an option. In many cases (most?) warnings are sent first but if the evidence shows extreme abuse then more immediate action is required.
This is all outlined under Meta Guidelines - Abuse and Removal.

Editor abuse is a serious issue and editor removal is a serious consequence of abuse. If an editor is removed for abuse, it is done so because the Meta editors have discussed it in depth, reviewed all the avialable evidence, and concluded nothing good would come from the editorship continuing.

[motsa]

Editor abuse investigations are not performed casually, despite what the speculations of any number of people would have you believe.