Newshounds: I need your help

ODP / Netscape related article

[rcjordan]

We have a thread [webmasterworld.com] discussing the the paid staffers at ODP. The problem is that the "source" is limited to a single slanted article. Here's where the plot thickens... Within the last two weeks, I have read somewhere, that one of the senior paid staffers at ODP has been terminated by AOL/Netscape and she has declined to step down from her position in ODP. I cannot find this article. Can you?

[skibum]

Haven't heard of anything related to an ODP staffer per se, but might this have been the article?

[theregister.co.uk...]

[rcjordan]

That's not the specific article, and I can't recall enough of the details of the first article to be sure it's the same subject matter. But I wonder if I've confused the AOL payrolls of ODP and Mozilla? It seems likely that I have.

[andrewg]

The main reason I'm posting, though, is to object to the repeated insinuation that there is a "slant" to the articles I'm posting about ODP, and that for this reason they should not be taken as credible.

Keep in mind that I have written upwards of 200 articles about the search engine industry and the Internet sector in general. I don't have any particular focus on ODP. What was striking to me is how wounded ODP's defenders acted in response to my early criticism. I was also taken aback by their penchant for "ganging up" on dissidents. I found the groupthink mentality disturbing and distasteful. I was open enough to identify myself, but many of the random hornets who attacked me and my colleagues were hiding behind various forms of anonymity, and the safety of the mob.

Many of these articles take positions, but these positions are intended to be contributions to rational debate. You cannot have a rational debate when you're too preoccupied with singing the company song. That company is AOL, now, of course. If someone wants to sing the AOL company song in your spare time, I can't stop them!

Unfortunately, dmoz is a closed community, and gaining access to the full story is not always easy. Thus one's frustration in getting "the real story" about what is going on inside the Supposedly Open Directory.

I didn't publish the most recent article lightly, and would not have done so if the person in question were "just another disgruntled editor."

This source's information is highly credible, in my professional judgment. The source is highly placed. And that's all I can say about that.

If the truth of the article isn't in question, what, then, IS the question?

It's clear to me that AOL is not a particularly logical home for ODP.

And if that opinion seems "slanted" to you, try wandering into an ODP forum and expressing a contrary opinion, or simply read over the ODP Social Contract, or any of the mainstream news articles which simply reiterate ODP rhetoric as opposed to examining it. Now THERE'S slanted for you.

The bottom line is that I published some facts on my web site, and certain people don't like these facts, and are doing best to deny them, and to cast aspersions on the credibility of the source.

In the spirit of healthy, open debate,

Andrew Goodman
[sorry, no sigs -rcj]

(edited by: rcjordan at 8:25 pm (gmt) on Sep. 13, 2001

[brownsmurf]

XODP members aside, I haven't heard of any ODP staffers being let go, however I do know of the one prolific Mozilla staff member being let go.

I think you may have them confused.

[rcjordan]

Andrew,

Your article does have a slant, my works have a slant, we don't write encyclopedia text. I personally found that article to be credible... credible enough to ask for help finding a second, supporting source for the general theme of paid staffers.

>It's clear to me that AOL is not a particularly logical home for ODP.
>
Agreed. But I can't fault AOL simply for bank-rolling them. My concern at this point falls more along the "undue influence / lack of disclosure" theme.

[Brett_Tabke]

First, welcome to the forums Andrew - thanks for stopping in, and thanks for "spirit of healthy debate". We've all seen threads like this go down in flames about the ODP, and we are as sensitive to it as we can be.

Anyway, back to RC's original question: I remember you mentioning it to me at the time, but I don't think it was a story. Wasn't it a forum posting somewhere?

[Laisha]

>...the repeated insinuation that there is a "slant" to the articles I'm posting about ODP, and that for this reason they should not be taken as credible.

Welcome to WmW, Andrew. I just want to point out that I think there is a "slant" to every article, for my part, I did not mean it as derogatory. I also want to reiterate that regardless of "slant," if it contans truth, it contains truth.

Having already commented on the article, I will stop there.