Skrenta appears to no longer be staff at DMOZ

now a meta instead of an admin?

[cornwall]

I noticed that over the past couple of days Rich Skrenta has moved in editing terms at DMOZ from "root" ie staff, to "meta".

On Friday he was listed as having "root" privileges, but on Saturday they were downgraded to "meta"

Anyone care to say if there is any particular significane in this?

[orlady]

There's no particular significance. Rich Skrenta hasn't been staff for a couple of years (2002 or so). The "root" permissions level has been updated in recent weeks to reflect the access needs and activity of various former staff members.

[cornwall]

So its nothing to do with the complaint that Doug Heil made about inclusions in DMOZ in return for interviews :)

There seems to have been a fairly lively debate about that over the last few days at RZ

[choster]

Editors with root privileges are also known to swap in and out of other permissions, and off and on skrenta's edit statistics have been given as "I am the walrus!" Such habits are incidental, at best, to the administration of the directory.

[LizardGroupie]

Silver wings, etc.

[cornwall]

"I am the walrus"

A little more of the Lennon and McCartny lyric that is perhaps pertinent to this situation

"Boy, you've been a naughty girl
you let your knickers down

I am the eggman
They are the eggmen
I am the walrus
Goo goo g' joob "

;)"

[orlady]

Think about it this way:
If Rich Skrenta were being punished for "naughtiness," would he be listed as a meta editor?

[JuniorOptimizer]

What exactly is the penalty for "naughtiness" at DMOZ?

[victor]

Depends on how naughty.

People suggesting sites to completely inappropriate categories may create signifcant delays for themselves.

People spamming the Directory may have all their sites delisted.

Editors who abuse their trust will have their editor privileges revoked.

Downstream users of the ODP data (such as Google's Directory) who break the license conditions attached to the data, may face a legal response.