Rumors, Anonymous or Otherwise: Mod Team Vetting

Hello everyone.

The moderation team has been discussing the recent slew of rumors and how it has affected N4G based on upholding our guidelines on not allowing anonymous rumors and the community who want to discuss what appear to be credible rumors from many sources that we want to discuss but can't. Because, you know, no anonymous sources.

After approval from the BGFG Team, we are going to start a process of vetting anonymous rumors. This will be done by the moderation team and will take into consideration various factors. Does this rumor come from a credible YouTuber with a history of such things and they can't present the original source of the news entirely? Is this something that has been discussed by analysts but not officially announced? Or is this just something that has been reported similarly in the past and has had no legs to stand on? Among other considerations.

Why would you do this now?

The goal of Mod Team Vetting of rumors is to get more discussion on N4G, not to open the doors to anonymous rumors in general. There has to be a middle ground in this age of journalism where people can't reveal who told them what as well as weeding out the rampant rumor mill material that people say just to get attention. We can't trust everyone, but we can trust those sources with a lot of time in the world of journalism and with obvious sources to people in the know. Doing this now helps to get past a blockade on more credible rumors while helping us to prevent the less credible sort.

How will we know a rumor has been vetted?

A report on the submission will be made by a mod team member with the simple text of 'Vetted'. As always, you can see who is and who isn't a moderator from https://n4g.com/users/index... as well as admins from https://n4g.com/users/index... . If anyone not on that list makes such reports, please let the moderation team know via ticket or PM.

What if we disagree with something that was or wasn't vetted?

Disagreements are a part of our discussions about games in general. We're not always going to make people happy with those decisions, but we make them nonetheless with the goal of what is best for N4G and its community and what isn't. In the end, we want good and relevant news on N4G for the community to discuss and we feel that vetting this content is better than our strict 'no anonymously sourced rumors at all' rule.

If you have other questions or concerns, please ask them below.

Thank you,
Christopher

[Eonjay]

So this affected the PS5Pro because even though everyone knew it was real, the standards of proof were raised far higher than any other rumor required before it. So at some point with so much evidence and leakers, it becomes news not a rumor. You finally budged when DF said it was real with the same evidence as everyone else.

The original rumor came from Moore's Law is Dead (one of the most accurate leakers on YouTube) and cohobated by Tom Henderson (the most accurate leaker of all time).

Plenty of rumors have been reported by him and approved. There has been literal year of evidence of the PS5 Pro from the most accurate leakers on the internet. Far more reliable than any of the other rumors allowed on this site. This last stand by the mod team to act like it wasn't even worth of a rumor is silly don't you think?

Either way, I appreciate the policy change consideration.

[thorstein]

It wasn't just that. There were many rumors this year, and recently, from very credible sources that turned out to be true. My submissions included.

Then, very recently a rumor was allowed (not PS5 Pro) despite anonymous sources even though it was reported.

It was credible though and that's the right decision.

This is just a decision change.

[GamerRN]

Why not just wait until a reputable source does an article, wouldn't that be the easiest way to avoid anonymous sources popping up everywhere?

[fr0sty]

I agree with this, I attempted to submit the video of Moore's law is dead leaking the ps5 pro specs like 5 days before Eurogamer finally got around a reporting on it, and it got rejected.

[Christopher]

***So this affected the PS5Pro because even though everyone knew it was real, the standards of proof were raised far higher than any other rumor required before it. **

They were not. The sources were questionable zoomed in screen grabs that anyone could replicate and anonymous insiders all the way down.

You're conflating past rumors that weren't anonymous or had more credible information with this instance where we revisiting our opinion on how to handle anonymous-based rumors. One rumor to another isn't of equal value dependent on named sources, credible evidence, and the like.

[Eonjay]

"You're conflating past rumors that weren't anonymous or had more credible information"

But the information was 100% accurate. So this rumor did in fact have credible information. Also, what about Tom Henderson's track record would lead you to believe that he didn't vet his source? He has quite a reputation to upkeep. The source wasn't questionable. Moore's law doesn't deal in that arena. But I understand that you might not be familiar with him. These aren't random twitter accounts posting this information. If you see a rumor come out of either of these guys, I would say its automatically credible.

[Christopher]

***But the information was 100% accurate. So this rumor did in fact have credible information. Also, what about Tom Henderson's track record would lead you to believe that he didn't vet his source?***

That's not the goal of the anonymous rumors guidelines. Never has been. The guidelines existed to prevent all anonymous rumors as most are not credible and created for the goal of spreading sensation and getting clicks. An anonymously sourced rumor could be true. It was true about the Blade game, but we still failed it because it was an anonymous insider who leaked it. I even said as much after the fact. When a moderator fails a submission based on it being anonymous, that has absolutely nothing to do with whether we or anyone else thinks it is true, only its bearing on the N4G guidelines.

This amendment puts a stop on a straight 'no anonymously sourced rumors at all' and moves it into 'This person has a history, is credible, is known to only come forward when they have legitimate news, but are still not naming their insider sources so we can trust to vet this rumor.'

This has never been about 'this rumor was right, you should have allowed it'. We don't have crystal balls, we only have guidelines and, now, who we know to be more credible in regards to anonymous rumors that come from within the industry.

*** How does a mod go about vetting a rumor? ***

This is answered in the blog above, the second paragraph. There are known individuals with a history of credibility. Moore's law is popular on YouTube but not well known up until now for his leaks let alone credibility in them.

[Eonjay]

Fair enough and thanks for the reply. Also, to your other point. I am sure you are aware that some leakers have to protect their sources.

[Einhander1972]

I mean I guess this is getting a positive reaction, all I am really reading is that moderation is just going to pick and choose what they allow more.

Here is a jpg of what that means to me. And keep in mind this is about 1/4 of the failed articles on this topic. But note that every article in this jpg was of a completely unique topic even though they were all failed as duplicates. Then contrast that with the recent handling of the PlayStation layoffs where virtually every article was allowed including numerous opinion pieces.

https://ibb.co/9mxc3JJ

When you tell me that all articles will be treated the same under the rules and actually moderate the site like that then you'll have my approval... which I doubt you even want.

[Christopher]

@Einhander I mean, you could just look at failed rumors right now to see a different idea of what is failed more often from what platform https://n4g.com/channel/all... (hint: majority are about PS5/Sony)

But, having said that, you're allowed your perception, no discounting that, and I recognize it. But, this is made to allow more credible anonymous rumors from all sources. If you don't believe that, then there's not much I can do persuade you since you've cherry picked some examples to set your mind on our moderation (as well as the reports of your fellow N4G contributors). If you feel I'm here to promote Microsoft by hiding rumors about them, I'm certain a few people here will be shocked to hear this news.

[Einhander1972]

Well it only took one week to show exactly what I was talking about
https://n4g.com/news/259252...

You allowed digital foundry to talk about this leak when they spread nothing but misinformation trying to convince people that the PS5 Pro wouldn't be able to play games at 60 FPS using GTA6 as their example, anyone remember when they were talking up sliders to sell Series S for Microsoft? Yea, funny how the Series S can play games at 60 FPS but the PS5 Pro somehow isn't going to be able to...

Moore's Law Is Dead actually had leaked slides from PlayStation themselves realistic enough that Sony opened an investigation which you allowed an article about, but the article you allowed of course was filled with actually unproven information that Sony was going to cut the number of studios allowed to have early access.

So basically you have failed all the information that was likely accurate and portrayed the PS5 Pro in a neutral or positive light and only allowed the articles with no basis or verifiably or proven information, that were negative or likely to create a negative reaction towards Sony and the PS5 Pro.

Christopher2d ago
I'm definitely questioning it. Seems entirely unnecessary since there's been no sign of peak optimization by first-party, let alone third. This will just move more focus on more graphics push than fix steady 30fps/60fps modes.

Devs Reportedly Question Why PS5 Pro Is Happening
https://n4g.com/news/259209...

You made your position clear here with a negative comment filled with speculation that would have no effect other than to dissuade people from buying the product. And of course you just latched onto the popular argument that somehow devs aren't optimizing the hardware, which is stupid because that's exactly the type of development that would benefit most for raw power. And not regardless of optimization obviously the 33.5 TF PS5 Pro is going to be capable of better graphics across the board than an 11 TF machine.

[purple101]

Don’t know who downvoted you
This is how I see it too

It was posted
I was actually the one who re posted a different version, after Henderson also corroborated, both failed

Digital foundry, with the same info, allowed!

Amazeballs

[darthv72]

nice to see you are changing your tune regarding rumors. I know it can be hard to take a rumor as truth because many are just people spouting whatever they can to get attention. But some end up being true so having the option to discuss such things is nice. Like the 5Pro rumors and potential games that XB may release on other platforms... stuff like that.

[OtterX]

I think this is a good move, bc a lot of this news is being talked about even on the major gaming sites.

There are instances of certain leakers who have a high, high accuracy rate, such as Pyoro who always calls the Nintendo Directs before they happen, even with titles that have never been announced. Pyoro obviously has sort of connection to Nintendo, whether he's a Nintendo employee or someone just really close to one.

But of course, there's a lot of nonsense out there. It's good to vet.

[DOMination-]

Thanks Christopher for the update, sounds like a step in the right direction. Personally I think the community should decide what is and what isn't allowed and not just the mods but at least we have some progress.

[Christopher]

I get this opinion and I see the good intent in it. I also don't think a lot of people understand how much the community would allow through if not reigned in by guidelines like the ones we have and how that would disrupt the quality of news on the site. We're constantly trying to find a balance, we just hope people understand our goal is maintaining a place where people can go for relevant and up-to-date news from sources that put in the effort and work.

[-Foxtrot]

Finally

Rumors are everywhere and at least they cause a discussion while we wait and see if they are true or have can be disproven.

I can see these articles from Reddit to Social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter

When something turns out to be true, N4G just feels like they are behind.

[Petebloodyonion]

Good to see some changes on that front.

I'm no expert on the subject but may I suggest establishing a thrust rating that could be applied to media (IGN, Gamespot, DF, etc.) to validate the credibility of the article?

For example, a website that is part of an official news conglomerate (Gamespot, IGN, Bloomberg, Forbes, etc) could be labeled as trustworthy due to their own ethical obligations /laws etc, when posting or reposting articles.
In contrast, an unknown Youtubber could be described as not reliable.

[Christopher]

We're more focused on individuals rather than overall sources. IGN might have some trusted sources, but we don't want to apply that to IGN overall when they've promoted rumors that have been quite ridiculous as well. For example, I might have insider knowledge on a certain game, that doesn't extend to other moderators, though.

[1nsomniac]

N4G…. High standards of journalism…. 🤣😂

[Christopher]

Social news aggregators collect the most popular stories on the Internet, selected, edited, and proposed by a wide range of people. "In these social news aggregators, users submit news items (referred to as "stories"), communicate with peers through direct messages and comments, and collaboratively select and rate submitted stories to get to a real-time compilation of what is currently perceived as "hot" and popular on the Internet." Social news aggregators are based on engagement of community. Their responses, engagement level, and contribution to stories create the content and determine what will be generated as RSS feed.

[1nsomniac]

^ if you had to put into words why the industry is completely and utterly broken. Also, in a metaphorical sense also the complete breakdown of modern society. Wow. Outstanding.

[Christopher]

Oh, apologies, I just got the impression that you didn't know how aggregate sites worked.

[Sgt_Slaughter]

I was just wondering about this. It felt weird to me that any attempt to submit articles about potential PSVR 2 production issues were shot down instantly (with people going "um actually" in the reports), yet PS5 Pro rumors that were of similar nature were approved/allowed simply due to who it came from despite the "proof" being nearly identical.

I'm glad things are being opened up and discussions are going to be able to be had. Sometimes things have felt too choked off in what can and can't be submitted. I'd rather have articles and discussions about potential leaks and rumors instead of the same one or two people submitting articles about the latest bazillion dollar threshold for Star Citizen.

[S2Killinit]

Very cool, thank you!

[gold_drake]

to be fair, this should have happened a while ago. this weird notion that rumours are not news is wild to me. we even have a tag for it.

also more clarification on what counts as news would be nice too. because some of the tags make absolutely no sense at all. Like "article" for example.

also, and this is more on a personal note, are certain mods that think that approving stories and then get ban hammer for 6 days, because of "its like so obvious that this is a duplicate" needs to stop

ya aint god and if u feel like that, take a step back why dont ya. with so many new stories, its hardly on purpose or malicious.

just thought id throw that out there. you know who u are.

[Christopher]

1. Rumors have been allowed, just not anonymously sourced rumors.
2. Articles are explained in our guidelines (as are all article types) found at https://n4g.com/articles/ou... (look for Story Type heading).
3. It was blatantly obvious. The original was the top story and had the same title. If you're going to approve things, perhaps look at the top news item first? The goal here is to make sure people are not just blindly approving. Being a contributor means understanding the rules and helping to weed out such things. Perhaps don't do that? Surely it's our fault you didn't do that.

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

This would have been good back when we were constantly getting Switch Pro rumour articles, especially when said console never materialised (whether or actually existed, or was planned to is another question).

[Christopher]

Almost the entirety of those would not have been allowed, though, they didn't come from reliable sources known for vetting their insiders. We failed those old rumors, though.

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

I just remember seeing a lot of them for some reason, maybe I'm thinking of the internet as a whole then, but I swear I remember talking about it on here.

[Lavitz1989]

Took you guys long enough to do this.