[Imc-web] Re: Feature, and a Question

[Wendy Edwards]

I also noticed that it had been "de-featured" and had no
idea who'd done that.  Is there any possibility that it
could have been an accident?  Also, I agree that posts
showing up in more than one place is undesirable.

wendy


On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 02:35:52PM -0600, Mike Lehman wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> I don't know who de-featured it. Nobody is telling me anything or 
> posting it to the IMC-web list, where it _should_ be, and I am starting 
> to wonder WTF is going in general with editing, as long-established 
> policies are being ignored right and left.
> 
> I suspect someone has somehow gotten editor privileges and, like you, 
> isn't on the IMC-web list. I am going to cc my reply here to you to 
> IMC-web anyway, in the hopes that somebody will fess up and we can get 
> this straightened out before I or somebody else gets POed, instead of 
> just frustrated with people screwing around with editing who obviously 
> are clueless about how this is accomplished.
> 
> I will note a problem that is easy to fix and that is your posting new 
> articles as both an article and a comment. This gets very confusing to 
> readers, who will comment in on place and then find the same thing is 
> somewhere else, thus leading them to copy their comments, starting an 
> endless circle of duplication that is mroe confusing to readers than it 
> is enlightening. If you want people to be aware in older articles of new 
> info, it's best to just post a link to the new info/article as a 
> comment, instaed of the entire new article being duplicated as a 
> comment, too. That way things don't get anymore chaotic than the website 
> really needs to be. If you need to know how to do that, let me know.
> 
> There is plenty else to discuss, but this will need to wait until we can 
> meet, as I have other commitments right now and there's plenty of 
> relatively complicated editing issues to explore. I do NOT want to make 
> it seem like the way things have been done is the way it needs to be 
> done in the future. But we do need to agree on things together if we're 
> going to start making changes in web editing policies and procedures or 
> we'll all end upset by something if we don't get on the same page soon.
> Mike Lehman
> 
> Brian Dolinar wrote:
> >I edited my report on Sheriff Walsh this morning
> >and it was taken down off the page.
> >Did I do something wrong?
> >Someone need to click a button to make it happen?
> >
> >Thanks. BD
> >
> >On 2/7/07, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>Brian,
> >>OK, but this raises the question of who granted you editing privileges:
> >>
> >>1. Without notification and/or discussion among the other editor's from
> >>IMC-Web. This is not a big deal, but it all too easily leads to
> >>misunderstandings. Web editing has the longest history of any media
> >>activity at UC IMC and is fraught with a number of understood but not
> >>always written policies. New editors are typically briefed and always,
> >>just like trhe rest of us, subject to proper notices when certain
> >>decisions are made.
> >>
> >>2. The problems that can be caused when someone is made an editor, yet
> >>has apparently not been briefed on policy.
> >>
> >>I would suggest that you do not engage in further editing until we've
> >>had a chance to have these issues discussed and settled. You are not
> >>even a member of the IMC-Web list, so you're effectively out of
> >>communication with the rest of us. Editing can all too easily create
> >>issues that other posters will raise if it seemingly results in a vanity
> >>press. I think you took entirely the wrong cue from my discussion about
> >>the regalia article and that is definitely leading to further
> >>misunderstandings.
> >>
> >>Since you apparently didn't receive the email with my concerns about
> >>Featuring announcements from Monday, I'll copy it below. This is just a
> >>start on a variety of things you'll need to learn and apply as policy if
> >>you're going to be join in editing
> >>Mike Lehman
> >>
> >>Subject: [Imc-web] Policy on Featuring Announcements
> >>Date: 2/5/2007 1:30 PM
> >>I want to raise a couple of concerns about featuring announcements.
> >>First, I've seen no messages regarding Brian Dolinar's two stories being
> >>made into features, as they should be sent to this list per policy.
> >>
> >>The main issue is that both stories are basically announcements and
> >>really offer little new info about either long-running story. It has
> >>been our policy for some time that announcements should not be featured,
> >>with exceptions being available for IMC events. If an announcement
> >>provides substantive new info related to an ongoing story, then an
> >>exception can be made, but I don't really see that in either of these
> >>cases -- and if it exists, it should be noted in the feature email sent
> >>to imc-web when that is done.
> >>
> >>Another factor is that we now have the "Upcoming Events" news wire that
> >>provides even more exposure than simply offering Local Newswire space
> >>for announcements.
> >>
> >>Brian sent me a message about featuring both of these a few days ago. I
> >>have noted current policy on this to him before and advised him that I
> >>didn't think either really qualified for an exception. I also advised
> >>him that he should send such requests to the imc-web list, so that more
> >>people could be involved in making such decisions, rather than making
> >>personal requests of individual editors without input from others. I
> >>haven't seen such a message.
> >>
> >>I also advised Brian that he could move his stories up to the Upcoming
> >>Events newswire, just so long as he added a date to the headline. I went
> >>to the trouble of explaining what he needed to do, since when he's
> >>signed in as a regular user, this means he won't be so dependent on
> >>waiting for us to fix issues with his many stories.
> >>
> >>If people think we should review the existing policy, then we should
> >>meet and do that. At a minimum, such requests should be made to the
> >>imc-web list and any decisions made to feature them should be documented
> >>with a message from the editor doing so back to the imc-web list, giving
> >>the reasons why an exception should be made.
> >>
> >>Please note that this in no way constitutes a judgment about the
> >>importance of either event or action. It's just that this issue has a
> >>long history that may not be apparent to all of those with current
> >>editor privileges. It has always been somewhat of a problem with people
> >>being motivated to use our site for announcements, but being far less
> >>motivated to file an actual news story afterwards telling our readers
> >>what actually happened. I know we take a very wide view of what
> >>constitutes news on Indymedia, but there is a clear difference between
> >>that and an announcement that I think is worth respecting. If nothing
> >>else, then we're going to start receiving complaints from those whose
> >>announcements did not get featured, as well as filling up the feature
> >>section with stuff that isn't really news.
> >>
> >>A final factor to consider is syndication. Right now, I don't think it's
> >>working, so it's not an issue, but we really do desperately need to get
> >>it working. Then, anything that is an announcement here will be even
> >>less suitable for syndication. If you review what is featured elsewhere
> >>in Indymedia, you'll see that other IMCs follow a policy on featuring
> >>announcements that is very similar to our existing policy. In any case,
> >>there is little additional value in syndicating announcements -- and it
> >>would tend to make US Indymedia a far more boring read and less
> >>compelling to return to, for instance, if it was full of mostly locally
> >>oriented announcements like those I've been discussing here.
> >>
> >>I realize this is a complicated issue with a number of nuances that are
> >>hard to address via email. I think it might be good to have a meeting,
> >>if there is a perceived need to change the existing policy. But in the
> >>meantime, I think existing policy has served us well and I request that
> >>we try to follow it as best possible in the meantime.
> >>Mike Lehman
> >>
> >>Brian Dolinar wrote:
> >>> Hello Wendy.
> >>>
> >>> I've taken cue from Mike on his Chief regalia article
> >>> that the most newsworthy stuff be at top of features.
> >>> I would like to see the Patrick Thompson trial announcement
> >>> as the first thing you see when you pull the page up.
> >>> After today's events, others can go to the top.
> >>>
> >>> I don't know who made my Taser update a feature.
> >>>
> >>> Thats all for now.
> >>>
> >>> See you in the courtroom.
> >>>
> >>> BD
> >>>
> >>> On 2/7/07, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>> I made this a Feature:
> >>>> http://www.ucimc.org/node/910
> >>>>
> >>>> It's an article, and a bit of an opinion piece, on an ongoing 
> >>story that
> >>>> has drawn strong readership and comment. In the absence of other
> >>>> reporting on the Feb. 1 Forum, it's what we got and should be 
> >>featured.
> >>>>
> >>>> OK, now the question. I see that Brian has another story featured:
> >>>> http://www.ucimc.org/node/911
> >>>> which is cool, considering this one is really news and not just an
> >>>> annoucement. However, as I mentioned in my note the other day about
> >>>> announcement policy, I think everyone would appreciate it if any 
> >>editor
> >>>> making a Feature would please follow established policy and send a 
> >>note
> >>>> to this list.
> >>>>
> >>>> Brian, I'm curious if you know anything about this? I want to 
> >>avoid the
> >>>> obvious way to enforce policy, demote any Features that aren't 
> >>properly
> >>>> noticed, and avoid getting you caught in the middle. The way it 
> >>was done
> >>>> is also a bit of a disservice to a commenter who reacted to this 
> >>posting
> >>>> since it was already posted as a comment in your 
> >>Feature/Announcement of
> >>>> the hearing.
> >>>> Mike Lehman
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-Web mailing list
> IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-web