SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Mighty Buzzard writes:
Congrats to the wannabe APK noobtard for advancing the site's codebase despite me having extremely limited time to play. I added three lines of code and now Spam modded comments (and comment trees) auto-collapse and you can still moderate a comment as Spam even if it's already at the minimum score. Honestly, the folks using any other downmod on obvious Spam annoy me more than the noobtard does but that annoyance at least is now history. Changes are to hot code only, I'll put them in the repo as part of my next pull request.
Suck it, noob. --TMB
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Meta: Loser Noobs and Their Contributions to the Site
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 117 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Ten years of rejection slips is nature's way of telling you to stop writing.
-- R. Geis
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 05 2020, @07:20AM (8 children)
I had no intention of putting words in your mouth. I interpreted "viewpoint based moderation" to mean that people are modding based on whether they agree or disagree with something rather than the quality of the comment. When it comes to political articles, that can be a real issue. Let me just say I apologize because you intended something different, but that my interpretation was made in good faith.
As for ari's objection, reducing the amount of mod points assigned to users should affect right wing and left wing posters evenly. It doesn't quite follow logically how it should target one side versus the other. I have no interest in suppressing his participation on this site. I'll go so far to say that I think his submissions are often rejected on the basis of the user submitting them rather than the actual quality of the content. I think some of his QAnon submissions deserved to be posted and were useful. I'm sure an extra story could be fit in from time to time to accommodate worthwhile content. I will happily admit that I'm the AC who posted this comment [soylentnews.org] a couple of months ago. I said many of the things ari did in his journal entry. I will leave it as an exercise for the readers to determine if that comment is the work of an RWNJ.
I'll even make another editorial suggestion beyond what I've already posted here. I've seen a number of articles submitted that are based on content from sites like Zero Hedge, which are not exactly known for the reliability of their content. I'll bet this idea could eventually be automated to a large degree, but I'd like to see when possible that links to articles in stories also include links to fact checking sites [mediabiasfactcheck.com] that provide a more direct way to evaluate the quality of sources. Not every source will be on there but I think it's worthwhile to provide some guidance for the readers about the quality of sources when possible. I'd support a policy of rejecting stories with sources that don't meet certain objective minimum requirements for source quality. For example, I'd propose that unless Zero Hedge is linked to for the purpose of providing an example of fake news, stories that rely on it be automatically rejected because it's classified as a conspiracy-pseudoscience site [mediabiasfactcheck.com]. Again, I'll leave it as an exercise for the readers to determine if that's something an RWNJ would propose.
I think you and ari are good posters so I'll apologize for misinterpreting your comment and leave these ideas here in good faith.
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Saturday September 05 2020, @08:06PM
No you got that bit completely correct ;-) It was the bit agreeing with me on restricting mod points. I puzzled for a second when I saw that, but just figured it was a minor misread or I said something poorly (common if I revise my thoughts mid compose), it wasn't significant to the conversation anyway and so I didn't give it another thought until Ari quoted and went after it. I didn't take it in any negative way whatsoever and did not mean to imply any intent.
/Nod.
I didn't address that either way - my thinking was that the suppressive functionality of metamod would amplify majority views over minority ones in a small population.
I suspect there is some truth to that, but more in that they have developed expectations rather than it being some intentional slight.
If there is a sub from Ari you can expect it to have certain recurring characteristics that make it unsuitable or at least that would cause it to require a significant amount of effort to make an acceptable article. Contrariwise the eds may be so sensitized to him doing the squeaky wheel thing that they give his posts more consideration than they are due trying to avoid it.
I've come to the conclusion that a lot of subs by Ari (and several other political article submitters) aren't really expected to reach the front page, they're just some sort of stick it in the queue in hopes of increasing visibility type of statement.
(DISCLAIMER - I'm not an editor and I don't play one on TV, but I write-up and submit when I can)
IMO it isn't particularly difficult to figure out what has a good chance of being accepted and what doesn't. To wit:
- The editors are overworked volunteers. If they can read a topical sub over once and check the links and post it as is, that's gold. The less revision, the better the odds.
So what is needed to get something posted as is/with minimal revision? There is a write up [soylentnews.org] about this, but these are some points folks miss (or just bear repeating):
- This isn't a political site.
You can get a political article in now and then, particularly if it has a geek angle, but it's much harder.
I once read an IRC by one editor that they try to limit political articles to ~1/day. (Limited slots, lots of competition, stick with the nerd stuff!)
- Try to avoid Fox News, Breitbart and other source sites that are controversial to a center-left audience just because of the source (not the content) of the article.
- If the write up is slanted - the editors have to rewrite it. The longer it takes to whip a sub into shape, the worse the odds it will happen. Steal the NPOV concept from Wikipedia for write ups.
- A fully written up sub will have the best odds, and even better when the accepted articles queue is nearly empty, or eds are trying to get articles queued up so they can enjoy the weekend, or some editors are down (sick, vacation, rocking back and forth in their safe space, whatever)
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday September 06 2020, @02:58PM (6 children)
The emphasis on this site is STEM, however we do cover other stories when they have a general interest to the majority of our community. Occasional political stories that are based on fact and not simply an expression of an individual's personal views are published when we receive submissions that are suitable. Aristarchus' submission are often his own political views - accompanied by selected quotations that support his personal views - and after we have discussed them a few times there is nothing new in them. As Ari himself well knows, when he provides submissions that are factual, original and of general interest then we do publish them.
We recognise that some people might want to discuss such topics even though they are outside our usual interests and we have provided a journal so that those in the community who wish to discuss such topics can do so. If you do not look further than the front page then you might be missing much of what this site has to offer. As it is, currently too many of the stories that do get published end up twisting the topic into yet another political debate. Everyone is entitled to their own political view but they should be discussed in those stories that are in the Political nexus or in journals - not in every story that gets published.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday September 06 2020, @05:15PM (1 child)
Keep that in mind when dealing with the Three-Gorges-Dam-size crapflood Runaway ("notherguy") inflicts on the subs queue.
He thinks you're stupid, you see. He'll drop in a fairly STEM-looking, neutral-ish article about mountain lions or the Indus River Valley people here and there, but embed that in literally dozens of alt-right disinfo screeds disguised as articles. Don't fall for the bait. He's replaced Ari as chief shitposter and unlike Ari he has a dangerous, destructive agenda. That, and he's not funny either 9_9
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday September 07 2020, @07:08AM
We cannot stop people from submitting whatever they want. However, as you well know, if there isn't a connection to our main areas of interest and there is no overriding reason for accepting a particular story they either get edited severely or rejected outright. By all means criticise us for our choice of stories that are published, but not for the content of submissions.
Whatever makes you think that we don't see political bias in stories? We do. It is a main reason that many stories are edited. But politics does impinge on many aspects of the world around us, for better or for worse. If the political information is relevant then it might well be justified in being quoted in the story. For example, new military weapons or increased arsenals of nuclear warheads are certainly topics with a technical interest - but it is politicians who decide which weapons are funded and how many nuclear warheads a country might think it needs.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2020, @03:28AM (3 children)
Pure poopycock, this is! Not personal views, objective facts and news that are outside the SN bubble, and that paint TMB with a broad brush! No aristarchus submission has been accepted in recent memory, except from the imposter on IRC! STEM is a false front for creeping fascism, a Peter Thiel type delusion that has ruined American Democracy. And the chaos and carnage are coming to roost on ex-pat English speakers all across the world.
But we already knew that janrinok was beyond the Pale, along with several other editors. Right, chromas?
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday September 07 2020, @06:57AM (2 children)
Er, shouldn't that have said 'outside the SN area of interest'? - which is another reason that they get rejected.
As you have been advised many, many times - PUT THEM IN YOUR JOURNAL, please.
Finally, you seem to be under the misapprehension that if you submit more rubbish we are duty bound to eventually publish one of them. This is untrue. You know the standard required to be published and, as RandomFactor clearly explained in an earlier comment, if you want to be published then quote the article, leave out your personal feelings (they belong in the comments), edit the submission in accordance with our guidelines, and make life as easy as possible for the person who has to process the submission.
(Score: 3, Touché) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2020, @08:37AM (1 child)
I have no such misapprehension! Perhaps you have me confused with some nutherguy?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 08 2020, @05:56PM
...I regret that I have but one +1 Touche mod to give for this post. Fucking *ouch.*
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...