Cat (User)

  • NetworkManager
  • 10 bubbles
  • 68 in CRank
  • Score: 1660425
"Maternity leave! :) Contact cgoodno"

Contributors: First v Equal

Cat | 1345d ago
User blog

When I first became a Moderator on N4G and went to work in Pending I followed a "First takes precedence" policy, approving the first accurately submitted news story on a topic. Some time ago when I was still a News Admin Dusty told me that this approach wasn't necessarily consistent with how they intended the Guidelines to be read, and that the original intention was for submissions in Pending to be considered equally and approved based on their relative quality. So I was wrong, and we switched. It was a big adjustment, took a little time to catch on, but it's a policy our regulars are familiar with - for better or worse.

Well, we've given it its fair shake. There is no perfect system, but we think this particular policy works less perfectly in practice than the "first" policy did. The competition on N4G coupled with sheer volume makes it impractical, unmanageable, and more susceptible to exploit than "first". So, we're switching again. From this point forward preference will be given to those submissions hitting pending first.

A couple points:
- All N4G Guidelines (like Sourcing and Editing) still apply. For example, if a submission is "first" but with the wrong source, it shouldn't be approved. http://n4g.com/site/newsgui...

- How to tell order of submission: the 6 digit number in the submission URL

- Do not create a placeholder submission. This means that if you create a submission on N4G before the NPD releases, or one that links to a blank page that "will be updated" it's a no go. C'mon, members always notice this stuff, you won't get away with it so spare yourself the misery - and the restriction.

- This does mean that if there are two submissions in Pending submitted correctly and yours is the later one it should be reported and failed as Duplicate. There is a duplicate title checker that pops up when a title is entered, pay attention to this to see if the same story has already been submitted.

- Submissions can be edited, moved or deleted without notice at the discretion of staff - so make sure that submission is a good one, because it can be replaced by a better source!

In conclusion, here's a video of Anaconda rasslin':

SmokeyMcBear  +   1345d ago
thats not wrestling, thats rassling.
Cat  +   1345d ago
The edit has been made :)
Nate-Dog  +   1345d ago
Thing is though most of the main articles that hit the top page with new news about games (say the incidents we had with some of the Uncharted 3 news and trailers a few weeks or months ago) do the placeholder thing but with a really poor article (half the time that isn't even an article, I can't tell you how many times I've seen articles that have 2 or 3 lines on something but still get approved), make sure they get their approvals, and then later decide to update the article with the info that articles that are submitted just about 5 minutes later already have but are reported. I know it ain't easy to check everything but it does happen quite a lot and it's sad to see people making an effort with smaller sites and with news and submitting it later and then being ignored because someone else put in barely any info or effort but pressed "submit" earlier and quicker because they made a half-assed attempt at it.
JL  +   1344d ago | Helpful
If you notice that happening, report it to us and the issue will be looked into. It would be even more helpful if you could provide proof (ie screenshots) and then offenders will definitely be taken care of. That's something that won't be tolerated under this rule.
#2.1 (Edited 1344d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Nate-Dog  +   1344d ago
Cool that's good to hear. I usually actually end up reporting more articles than approving (don't know if that's a good thing or not... :P ) but if I ever manage to catch anything like that from now on I'll make sure I do that. Cheers.
JL  +   1344d ago
Don't worry. As long as you're reporting accurately, then it's no big deal. In fact, having more reports than approvals probably means you're reporting accurately (as a majority of submissions just aren't submitted right at first).

Back when I was even more active in the pending section I did far more reporting than approving. I'm sure you can find some people around that will testify to that and still hate me for it lol
Aclay  +   1344d ago
"Back when I was even more active in the pending section I did far more reporting than approving. I'm sure you can find some people around that will testify to that and still hate me for it lol"

LMAO. Yep, there was a few times I was thinking to myself, "come on gimme a break" when I first started to submit articles on FilmWatch.

I was just initially surprised at the amount of tags that needed to be added to certain stories (like the tag of the Movie Actors and such), but I know the ropes of Filmwatch a bit better now.

You'd definitely report a lot, but of course, you were just doing your job as a Mod. :)
#2.2.1 (Edited 1344d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
JL  +   1344d ago
lol Yea I know. Just my job, though. I know it can be a bit rough initially getting the hang of it, so I always try to be lenient (ie not dishing out restrictions or anything and making sure to try to explain why the correction needs to be made).

Glad you hold no grudge over it ;)
Max Power  +   1345d ago
Finally! It never made sense to me that the articles that were first were pushed back, and I believe I complained as much on the suggestion thread in to forum.
cyborg  +   1344d ago
I'm with this
this will prevent many users to exploit the system and get their submissions approved, even if they've submitted later.
The Hunter  +   1344d ago
I like to see this blog post also on 11x2 (and other newsboiler sites) Its always better to point this out, also because there was problems about this in the past on 11x2 http://11x2.com/user/blogpo... (highlights cheating).. :)

Really helpfull!
LostDjinn  +   1342d ago
Good!
God knows I don't need anymore sassy replies. :P
Jinxstar  +   1342d ago
My 2 cents. Whats so wrong about approving off of what site it is? seen in terms of quality journalism. I mean at least for the "Strict" option which I choose. i.e. Maybe have a vote or a round table on which sites have consistently good quality articles. i.e. Giantbomb, Epicbattleaxe, gametrailers, ign, etc.... And make those priorities over a site like "360vsPS3.com". Personally I love a site like GB as they are in the industry and they are quality journalists and don't do this a hobby or for attention. They do it because they love gaming and make a living off of it.

I do see this to a large extent. i.e. I have yet to see a hiphopgamer or other such site reach into the strict section and I really appreciate it but is that based off of his site or because every article he generates is possible flamebait or of low quality? Such as his recent endeavor to talk about how females in the gaming industry would be in bed.

I'm always excited to see updates and mods really trying to make this a good community and there are always people who "Just wanna argue" and I will admit that from time to time it can be fun to jump into the fray and keeping these people out of "Quality" articles by imposing stricter rule sets for these articles may also be an option?

Anyway not trying to sound like a nit picker as I think you do a great job with the site and I do see your efforts and constant changes and appreciate them.

How about a trophy system of some kind though. Like if you have been here for a year you get a good star next to your name. 2 years you get a diamond 5 years a something else. I would love to see something like that. Might just be me though =D
FlashStepSteve   1341d ago | Spam

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember