Another reason I hate DMOZ

[Randy]

This morning I was able to access a post from Shoemoney at DigitalPoint where he stated he was willing to pay for a DMOZ listing. That post has since disappeared, but it's quoted later in the thread: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showt...t=13402&page=3

It's very odd to me that his post would disappear. (Actually it's not odd, but the conclusion is pretty easy to draw.)

Who's corrupt in this situation though?

Even the people at DigitalPoint are skeptical about Shoemoney's claim, and you won't find a more committed bunch of DMOZ bashers than these guys.

[PPP]

I wouldn't call him respected, and after this few people will.

The explanaition is plain.

To get idiot attention, he offered a bribe to list his site
He was blackballed at Dmoz for it, as he should be
An editor accidentally listed his site after Dmoz had their data crash
A different editor removed it in line with the blackballing of the site

All straightforward.

Now he stupidly makes up a bribe.
And he doesn't back up his claim.
End of another episode of goofballism.

There is corruption in everything, most plainly here in Shoemoney bottomfeeding some publicity.

Jeremy, your "hate" of Dmoz has always been misplaced, but this is just an example of listening to a lying webmaster. That is what is far more corrupt.

Also, just to make the obvious point, while some people might pay for inclusion, the idea of paying to not be deleted is utterly moronic, since there are two paper trails... the email, and the deletion record at Dmoz. The chances of getting away with this would be like getting Royal fushes five hands in a row. Better to believe in pink fairies on Jupiter than this bit of preposterous nonsense.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by Randy

I've never met an SEO or web marketer yet who "had enough links".

OK I can't argue there .

[GregK]

This was a hot topic back around '03
Should damn near qualify as an "urban legend" by now lol

although, it is based in truth!