[Polyppa:]
>
> I noticed a few months ago that the ODP article at Wikipedia was
> listed as "disputed".

The dispute notice was inserted by XODP Editor liftarn, who remains an ODP
cheerleader notwithstanding the unceremonious removal of his editing privileges
quite some time ago. Liftarn gives a whole new meaning to the Stockholm
Syndrome.

[Polyppa:]
>
> . . . Other disputed articles included ones on Scientology and
> religious and political topics. The Scientology connection made
> sense because ODP looks more like a cult all the time. (I just
> looked at Wikipedia, and Scientology is no longer "disputed"; maybe
> I had that wrong.)

The insertion of a neutrality dispute is meant to be a temporary measure. Very
few Wikipedia articles keep that label for very long.

[Polyppa:]
>
> . . . Someone mentioned that the legendary Arlarson article about
> removal of editors is no longer available at ODP.

The article is available once again at <
http://dmoz.org/newsletter/2000Sep/removal.html >; the last time I checked the
link I got a 303 error, but that could have been a problem with the Lindows
system that I was using at that time.

[Polyppa:]
>
> There have been two stunning threads at Webmasterworld in the past
> two months. One was called
>
> "Editors Getting Offered or Expecting Compensation?"
>
> and the other was "ODP On Verge of Collapse?"
>
> both started by Webmasterworld owner Brett Tabke. (I really think
> if anyone else had started them, they would have been deleted.)

Editors Getting Offered or Expecting Compensation? - <
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum17/2140.htm >.

ODP on Verge of Collapse - < http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum17/2184.htm >.

Very interesting reads.

[Polyppa:]
>
> Now I very much doubt there is much bribery going on at ODP, but it
> was hilarious to read the reactions and defenses the cult came up
> with in response to a suggestion of misconduct.

[Polyppa:]
>
> It's hard to be mad at ODP these days.

Although few would believe it, I have never been "mad" at ODP, but I do know
quite a few people who have been very, very angry at ODP, nd as I stated earlier
in this thread, I know of more than one person who has filed suit against ODP, a
trend which seems to be gathering more and more steam.

Other things being equal, one can safely ignore ODP. OTOH, one can learn quite
a bit from ODP's feckless attempts to deal with its endemic problems of
scalability and quality control. The solution is to be found in a decentralized
system of small scale Web directories or annotated link lists covering specific
topics. These link list can then be spidered, analyzed, and ranked by powerful
search engine algorithms like Google. Of course, this presumes that there is a
significant number of infomediaries who are willing to publish their own
independent link lists.

In the final analysis, a worthwhile search engine algorithm cannot work in a
vacuum. It requires a database of trusted URLs, and those trusted URLs must be
reviewed and evaluated by human beings to be deemed trustworthy. The problem
arises when the work of indexing and annotating Web sites becomes secondary to
the political machinations of a large scale project like ODP.

Humbly Yours,

XODP Moderator netesq