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This discussion has been archived.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.
No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it.
-- C. Schulz
(Score: 1) by Refugee from beyond on Friday May 29 2015, @07:51PM
Would be nice to change "Anonymous Coward" into "anonymous," for starters.
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=7683&cid=189733 [soylentnews.org]
Instantly better soylentnews: replace background on article and comment titles with #973131.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Friday May 29 2015, @08:50PM
i agree. there's nothing inherently cowardly in posting anonymous. its degrading and insulting and should be changed. a few assholes post a lot of inflammatory shit anonymously, but a lot more people post informative and insightful stuff anonymously.
(Score: 2) by juggs on Saturday May 30 2015, @02:53AM
I have to agree. Given what we now know regards surveillance and monitoring, posting anonymously makes a lot of sense and should not be seen as some kind of detraction to the value of the comment.