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This discussion has been archived.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 came, I saw, I deleted all your files.
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Friday May 29 2015, @06:16PM
When well-intentioned submissions do not comply with the Submission Guidelines [soylentnews.org], I would prefer that we editors be allowed to edit them until they do.
There shouldn't be any 'tone' or 'view'. The submission should be neutral, balanced, fair and supported by links to factual material. The tone, view or personal thoughts belong in the comments! When we edit we are often trying to correct one or more of these deficiencies so that we can release it as a story. Its probably why they call us 'editors'.
Before you continue spouting about what the Submission Guidelines should say, perhaps you ought to read them to see what they do say. Concentrate on the first requirement if you are too busy to read it all.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.