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This discussion has been archived.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.
Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday May 29 2015, @10:51AM
I hope that you didn't think that I was suggesting that was your intention - I wasn't. Thanks for your kind words. I will confess that I wish that this entire sequence of events had never occurred (I will have to be more careful with my edits in future).
I was simply intending to give an alternative point of view regarding the possibility of the community taking some role in the editing of stories. While I am pleased to see suggestions that will both enhance the quality of this site and involve the community more, in this instance I feel that the extra editorial workload, additional coding effort and the establishing of the appropriate procedures and controls are not justified by the perceived benefits. That is only my view however - I am not speaking for other editors nor for SN.