Re: Submitting is work

Submitting is work (Score: 1)

by kwerle@pipedot.org on 2015-10-19 15:27 (#QYXN)

The story submission process is kinda static - until a |. editor gets ahold of it. Why not make submitted stories editable in the same way wikipedia articles are?

Re: Submitting is work (Score: 2, Informative)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-10-19 15:50 (#QZ12)

If there's something wrong with a submission, you can resubmit a better one easily enough, and vote-down the original. A wiki would be all kinds of extra complexity (ownership, 3RR, POV pushing, etc.) that isn't needed for something so ephemeral.

I've been operating the pipe as the first option describes, over the past few weeks... Submissions (even my own) sit there until they get to +3, then published to the front page. I haven't seen any problems, yet, though a threshold of +5 is probably more practical.

Re: Submitting is work (Score: 1, Interesting)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-10-19 16:56 (#QZ7M)

I have to agree with this. I'd be very annoyed if I submitted a story and had some douche edit my summary to say things that weren't even in the linked articles. This swings both ways on the right-left political spectrum, but ideology pushers, either extremely religious (right authoritarian) or extremely social justice (left authoritarian), have a way if weaseling into a community then supporting each other while belittling everyone else to keep out any wrong think. In the end it always ends up as a minority of moderators / editors pushing their personal views while suppressing the majority of the community.

I've been fortunate enough to have the few things I've submitted accepted with some minor, and very appreciated, edits. I don't need someone butchering a summary to make an example out of me because of my stance on proactive diversity or feminism or gamergate or some other insignificant issue everyone else may or may not care about.

Story

Preview