Former DMOZ editors who have been kicked out for corrupt practices very often form the core of those wanting to inflict damage - they got caught so they want the project to burn in hell. The truth, as joe-561 well knows, is that there are a small number of corrupt editors who number less and less as they are caught and removed and the techniques improve to prevent their re-entry. The truth is that it is impossible to get away with abusive editing in a prominent commercial category as too many eyes are watching. The truth is that the majority of DMOZ editors are not commercial webmasters. And DMOZ is now run by Admins who were picked, amongst other reasons, because they have no possible conflicts of interest.

However, to give joe the benefit of the doubt, he may have been editing in a different era to me, and picked up exaggerated conclusions from observation of a small number of very prominent editors who have long-since been ejected. The metas now in place, as a group, are extremely intolerant of abuse and the techniques involved and systems in place for selecting new editors and monitoring existing ones are extremely effective. I don't say corruption wasn't once endemic within DMOZ - I can't comment on before my time, though I think it is probably wildly exagerated. But if ever it was so, it most certainly isn't an accurate portrayal of DMOZ in 2004.