SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This is a topic that comes up all too often in comments, lambasting editors or praising them.
As it stands, editorial is a black box, they accept submissions, fettle them, then they appear as stories. Recently, the Original Submission link appeared on stories so you can see what went in and what appeared out of that black box, yet still the complaints come.
Just how much transparency is necessary? (This is an open question not rhetorical)
I like to believe that SoylentNews is the people that form it as a community, and the editing should reflect that.
Should we adopt some version control for subs so everyone can see who edited what through the pipeline that goes from sub to front page?
Thoughts on a postcard please.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
META: Editorial Transparency - What do you want?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 93 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"The subspace _W inherits the other 8 properties of _V. And there aren't
even any property taxes."
-- J. MacKay, Mathematics 134b
(Score: 2) by turgid on Friday May 29 2015, @10:08AM
It doesn't matter what you do, people are going to complain, so don't worry..
I like the new (current) system where the original submission is linked from the bottom of the story. I don't think you should try to "improve" this. You'll just end up making things complicated and open yourselves up for more complaints.
The whole point of sites like this is to aggregate stories and to provoke discussion. Having the original submission linked to the edited one gets the ball rolling, so to speak because straight away you have two different views.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].