An interesting development in re the Wikipedia article on ODP: Another
Wikipedian created a link from the Wikipedia article on the Open Directory
Project < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Directory_Project > to a new
Wikipedia article about "David F. Prenatt, Jr." (aka Your Humble XODP
Moderator), which I redirected to my Wikipedia user page <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Netesq >. Shortly thereafter, another
Wikipedian claimed the _David F. Prenatt, Jr._ article was a "vanity page," and
I responded with my position that as long as the link to the _David F. Prenatt,
Jr._ article existed it should link to my Wikipedia user page, as I am not a
public figure and have no desire to be. After a return to the _status quo
ante_, some Wikipedian used my Wikipedia user page as a template for the _David
F. Prenatt, Jr._ article < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_F._Prenatt%2C_Jr.
>, and I waited to see what would happen next. I didn't have to wait long.

The Wikipedia article on David F. Prenatt, Jr. has been listed on Wikipedia:
Votes for deletion < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion
>. As the subject of this article -- which I did *NOT* create -- I am quite
ambivalent about its existence. Simply put, I do not want or need celebrity
status, but I do understand that there are people who consider my activities as
an XODP editor noteworthy, including the founders of ODP whom I met in person
recently at the Search Engine Strategies Seminar in San Jose. Basically, my
position is that I'd rather not have the Wikipedia article featuring me, but
that position is based on privacy concerns and my desire to avoid enabling
online stalkers such as those who set up the now defunct Netesqsucks.com Web
site.

The flip side of this coin is that I am clearly the most notable critic of ODP,
and XODP is clearly a watering hole for critics of ODP. As such, to dismiss me
and/or XODP as not being worthy of note is to say that criticism of ODP is not
worthy of note. In reality, it is ODP itself that is not worthy of note, and it
is XODP's criticism of ODP that has brought this fact to the attention of
thousands of XODP editors and frustrated ODP submitters.

In a recent XODP post entitled "The Future of Search" <
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xodp/message/2246 >, I pointed out reasons why
XODP remains a viable entity. In essence, while XODP was inspired by ODP, it
should not be defined by ODP. Rather, XODPers can and should offer their ideas
and commentary on what is beyond the next horizon and discuss progressive ideas
about how the Internet _should_ be indexed.

Humbly Yours,

XODP Moderator netesq