My vote of 1
-
What happens if they post a sub-standard article, get a few 1-votes with suggestions but don't get around to editing their article for a few days? What happens when they finally do edit their article? Does it show back up in the needing approval list?
Todd Smith
Todd Smith wrote:
What happens if they post a sub-standard article, get a few 1-votes with suggestions but don't get around to editing their article for a few days?
That's why I liked the other suggestion that once they've dealt with the issues the associated 1-votes can get removed.
I just love Koalas - they go great with Bacon.
-
Todd Smith wrote:
I was referring to the flood of poorly written articles being submitted which get 1-votes and constructive criticism yet no change in content
What do you think about my idea of handing these over to the community? Anything with X 1 votes and a score of under Y gets opened up - immediately. Anyone can edit and fix (and have their name associated with the fixes). We have rating filters in place in the 'Latest' articles, the newsletter, and the search page, but I guess it's the stream that appears on the homepage and the moderator list that is the problem? Oh, and I do need to make public the name of the person who approved an article. That's important. [Edit: re: plagiarism. I've been insanely busy the last couple of weeks but I'll talk to Sean and the other editors to put in place a 1 strike and you're out policy]
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I like that we can vote when writing a meaningful message with a meaningful subject. I wonder if the other mechanism can be removed. I don't like that such messages get removed if/when an article gets approved. I don't like that approval requires only one person, regardless of how many times the article has been reported. I also don't think that unedited articles should be released to the public. My understanding of the approval process was as a kind of triage for the humans who edit the articles. Having the gold (and above) members give a quick "this is a good article, edit it and make it public ASAP" or "this article is crap, don't bother with it".