SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the prevention-goes-a-long-way dept.
So, every once in awhile, if things have been quiet, I like to pop a post seeing what the general feelings of the community are towards the site, seeing what we could do better, etc. I think its been a few months since the last time I posted in Meta, so I think this is a good time to get a pulse on the community, and provide a venue to get any feedback (good or bad).
On the staff side, I know things have been relatively quiet over the summer due to most of us being busy with life and such, which is why we haven't made a major site upgrade since the original rehash upgrade at the end of May. For myself, I've been working at a new job, and dealing with a fair bit of non-Soylent related things to the point that I really only have the time or energy to post, and occasional check in, and I'd like to thank the rest of the staff, and mrcoolbp in particular for holding down the fort for me.
Anyway, in contrast to my usual posts, I'm going to cut this off here, and will be looking forward to your comments below.
73 from NCommander
(Score: 3, Informative) by n1 on Tuesday November 17 2015, @10:56PM
[My opinions as an editor and a member of the community is as follows, general response to the above comment and the thread in general. Not ranting at you, TheRaven!]
The timing of articles is extremely difficult for a few reasons. There is only a small editorial team, we always like to have two sign-offs before a story goes on the front page. We would like to have a story every hour of every day on the front page, thats the dream. There are about 6 of us working on it regularly, i've been slacking the last few months due to paying the bills. Each of us have our own commitments and obligations. We are also limited by submissions, always have been, I don't want to be submitting stories all the time.
Finding the balance between timely articles, quality articles and submissions not from staff or regular submitters is not easy. Rarely is an editor 'on-duty' we do what we can, when we can. Due to the desire to maintain a constant stream of new stories, giving each a fair shake, we often run 12hrs ahead in accepted submissions. This gives time for another editor to check them over and accept new submissions and keep consistent.
Many submissions are not time-sensitive and it can be beneficial, in my opinion, to give a story time to digest if it's been seen elsewhere, before discussing it here.
Recently, I accepted a submission and pushed it ahead of already accepted submissions, this story was about the events in Paris as they were happening. This was an exceptional case, it just happened I was online and someone mentioned it on the SN IRC channel. Checked the submissions and there was one, edited it extensively as it was out-of-date even by then. I updated the story twice with additional information as I watched the popular news/media watch Twitter...
This is an example where our process could fail but thankfully did not. If the story was not submitted, the process does not allow me to just run a story as quickly as it was. It has been done, skipping the editorial policy, but it's very rare. This was an exceptional case that would merit that. Most stories are not time critical and the '$1 code' certainly is not. If SN had it a week before the other site, it would not make it subjectively better.
The quality of articles to me is, as it appears to be for you also, extremely important. I feel the site suffers as relatively few of the community make submissions. A small number of people make a lot of them, and this can lead to a drop in quality. I'd like a higher bar for quality and diversity in all forms of content on the site. This is where it gets tricky again though, I do not know what makes a good story. I accept stories about topics I know extremely little about and have limited interest in, I put myself in someone else's shoes and see how they fit, is it interesting? Sometimes I get it wrong, sometimes I do not know. Lack of discussion and views is generally a negative in deciding if a story was a success in the community. Science should be popular, and by this comment section, apparently is, but there's not much to talk about and they get less views as a result.
I made a couple of submissions the other day, CIA Inspector General’s Report on Engagement with the Entertainment Industry [soylentnews.org] was one. This story generated little interest although I find it a fascinating subject that has several elements of interest to the community here, I would have assumed anyway. The same goes for Facebook Data Requests from Governments are Surging [soylentnews.org]. The submission I expected to be least popular was California and New York Are Poorer than You Think [soylentnews.org]. That was the most active and viewed, by a long way.
None of those stories I submitted may be your cup of tea (or coffee, water, beer). That's why I do not submit stories or comment too often.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday November 18 2015, @12:34AM
What n1 said with this addition: of all the sources we pull from, the other site is not one. None of us on staff, editors or otherwise, read the other site anymore as far as I know, so we have no idea what it is running or not running.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Wednesday November 18 2015, @04:49PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams