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This discussion has been archived.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.
I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a prefrontal lobotomy.
-- Fred Allen
[Also attributed to S. Clay Wilson. Ed.]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday May 29 2015, @03:56PM
It's enough of a challenge to get people to submit articles and other people to edit them. Building crowd-sourcing functionality for the editorial process would be a lot of development time for something that nobody would use, except those who would want to skew the system for their own ends anyway.
The best thing to do is maintain open dialogue between the editors and the community, which you already do.
Washington DC delenda est.