[Theforum] Re: the future of admin

Warden, Matt mwarden at mattwarden.com
Fri Oct 26 17:36:10 CDT 2001

Elfur wrote:
>me not being emily, 

That's ok. I'm not emily either. ;-)

>but one example jumps up and down in my head right now
>... the user who kept submitting articles that weren't good enough, we
>struggled with them ... should we edit them to make them good (hence
>leaving basically only his idea for an article) or should we deny them.

Well, actually, I was asking for examples of this (smack me if I fail to 
represent the full context):

Emily said:
>There are also problems with consistency here. Should there really be  50
>people with the ability to edit articles? Eeek!

Then I said something about there not being editing guidelines, and then
she said:

>Right, and the "no guidelines" thing is a recurring problem.

IOW, i was looking for examples of how no editing guidelines other than
the three i mentioned (using —, using "evolt" and not "Evolt", and
trying to keep the articles basically in tact as far as style and only
changing grammar and spelling) was causing a problem.

But you bring up a good point. More people would make that decision more
difficult. But...

>What we did in this particular case doesn't really matter 

Actually, we'd probably go with the precedent. Maybe that should be
written down somewhere public. Maybe something added to the writers
guidelines linked to from teh submission page? I dunno. Thinking aloud...



More information about the theforum mailing list