My editorial style mostly comes from what I saw was horribly wrong with summaries over there... Far too many were superficial, inaccurate, one-side pablum, which resulted in the vast majority of comments being readers trying (much like Sisyphus) to correct the misinformation or slant of the summary on each story.

I've been considering a slight tweak to the pipe submissions and story edits to combine them and give them more of a "wiki" style. This would mean that pretty much everybody would get an "Edit" button and would be able to make changes to a story. Obviously, like a wiki, abusive edits would need to be easy to identify and revert but it could potentially alleviate some of the easy editing problems. Far too often, I see an editor get blasted in comments about a simple spelling error or a similarly trivial problem. Editors, like evilviper and zaffiro17, spend a lot of time and effort to create wonderful summaries and it's discouraging to see the first 10 comments quibbling about a spelling error! But what if users could easily fix it themselves? Would empowering users with editing abilities be more of a help or a hindrance?

Look at the recent Sourceforge Gimp article on Slashdot. The editor is attacked by the users for:

1. Being late at accepting the submission
2. Not editing the two merged submissions enough
3. Being part of a some type of cover-up or conspiracy
4. Slanting the story to favor the corporate overlord

Perhaps normal users wouldn't see themselves and editors as such distinct classes if everyone where more equal. Almost like promoting someone to their level of incompetence.