Top
N4G Admin & Community Manager .::. I read every PM, I just may not respond to every PM.

Christopher

NetworkManager
CRank: 20Score: 692810
1050°

N4G User Poll [Closed]

Hello everyone.

It's time to bring a topic back up for discussion. We've had a long time rule regarding rumors that anonymously sourced rumors will not be allowed on N4G. We know some agree, some disagree, and some don't know.

In an attempt to gauge where people stand right now, we ask that you provide a vote on this question about the topic.

Should N4G allow anonymous sourced rumors?

1. Yes.
2. Yes, but only from major news sites.
3. No.

---

The Results are as follows:

1. 7.8% of votes
2. 19.9% of votes
3. 72.2% of votes

Thank you everyone who participated!

The story is too old to be commented.
VenomUK525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

In the run up to the next generation there have been so many rumours, that are really speculation, being pedalled and publicised, often contradicting each other. You just have to look at the fan boys sharing made up rubbish just because it supports there favourite console. I don’t want N4G to degenerate into that.

The major gaming news websites are no better, most don’t have trained journalists, they often hire people who are friends and they are lacking in experience, skill and credibility. So for me my answer is:

THREE.

Nitrowolf2525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

This is the current rule they have in place, which TBH I think is "fair"

It is technically Number 3, except for one bit

b) spoken or written word rumors must come from a credible source with a history of being an insider in the industry or the like and not from any random Internet user;

But i'm more so leaning towards only if they can provide evidence like images, ect and have a track history rather than some random guy on 4chan/reddit.

Rumors should have some sort of "backing" to them. To many times i see a website report on a random reddit posting. It's how the GTA 6 rumor keeps popping up cause soem random guy types what people have already stated.

I say only allow them if there is a track history that's proven more right than wrong. Not "they were right that one time"

neutralgamer1992525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

3

And can we get a poll about gaming bolt and their random developer comment for clicks

Forbes and gaming bolt shouldn't be allowed to submit

There should be some sort of system where if a site is taking advantage of click bait articles they should be banned

And can we bring back the bubble system and open zone on n4g

Hold-The-Door524d ago

Or just give users more control of their own view, like Lurkit or Gameon

ziggurcat525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

"Should N4G allow anonymous sourced rumors?"

No.

Major news sites shouldn't be immune, either. Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day, but that doesn't make it a reliable or credible source for telling the time.

-Foxtrot525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

I say 2 - Mostly because if a big site is talking about it then it might have more weight to it.

Can't you guys like have a rumour tag and when you select it highlights the title of the article in orange or something to let the article stand out. Then when it's true the colour can turn green and if proven 100% false it turns red. I don't know spit balling.

I'm kind of surprised to have a poll, it's nice to allow the community to have a say however why not ask if to allow video game film news from big sites since Filmwatch is a ghost town or why not allow big Youtube streamers like Jim Sterling or Angry Joe for example to be posted on here? Least with someone like Jim Sterling whether you like the guy he researches and tells you about shitty MT's, lootboxes or anti consumer pratices, it gets the word out.

Could we maybe have a vote on those topics please.

ziggurcat525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

"... if a big site is talking about it then it might have more weight to it."

A major news site reporting on something that was made up on 4chan doesn't give that information any more weight.

-Foxtrot525d ago

I said "might" and considering the amount of shit 4 chan spews it's not like everything reported.

Besides I wasn't talking about 4chan, I was talking about journalists who have contacts who give them information, like Jason Schreier at Kotaku. I hate Kotaku but Jason is the only decent person there and the guy does his research into things.

Anyway it's iwhy I said the article could be marked to show how it's a rumour and not to be taken seriously.

ziggurcat525d ago

"I was talking about journalists who have contacts who give them information, like Jason Schreier at Kotaku. I hate Kotaku but Jason is the only decent person there and the guy does his research into things."

You mean like the HZD thing that turned out to be nothing more than the game showing up on PSNow?

-Foxtrot525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

@ziggurcat

What about his lengthy Anthem report...huh?

Some are true

Some are not

That's just how rumours go, which the entire point of this poll

ziggurcat525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

If I am not mistaken, that time he named his sources, and those reports were approved here because of that IIRC.

rainslacker525d ago

Most major sites will use named sources for such articles, or at least provide enough validating information to make it so it doesnt fall under the rule of unsourced rumors. They may say that the source is from a particular place, but not give a name. In those cases, I believe the rules call.it a valid source...although such things are rare so I may be wrong.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 525d ago
darthv72525d ago ShowReplies(2)
bluefox755525d ago

You find the big sites more trustworthy? I don't.

-Foxtrot525d ago

Rather than little sites looking for clicks by posting any shit they see on reddit or 4chan...

annoyedgamer525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

Bro major news is like the mafia, they are worse they take lies and re post it amongst themselves to give it credibility in ways no noob internet poster can do.

Nacho_Z525d ago (Edited 525d ago )

I'd say 2 as well, if the big sites are reporting on something they've either done their homework or it's something interesting that you would like to hear about whether it turns out to be true or not.

The reason I trust them more is that they've got more to lose if they're wrong so they're naturally motivated to research articles.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 525d ago