[Imc-uk-features] unhiding 374918

[charley allan]

On 3 Jul 2007, at 23:43, mish wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 23:09 +0100, charley allan wrote:
>> i've always been against the promoted wire (it's undemocratic - still
>> no guidelines afaik - and it's clearly editorialising)
>
> We did have an email process to create promotion guidelines.  Look at
>
> https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/editorial.html
>
> and look for
>
> "Articles may be promoted for the following reasons:"
>
> mish
>

thanks mish, but that's just a couple of lines about showcasing "the  
best of the newswire" and "good posts" - then adding "original"  
reports or analysis - but it's too vague to mean anything. who  
decides what's "good"? are the mods editors now? "original" i can  
understand, but that's applied very inconsistently. generally, the  
posts that are promoted are the ones that the mods personally think  
are interesting and important, which is fine except that it goes  
against the principle of open publishing and is elitist, imho.

On 3 Jul 2007, at 23:45, richard hering wrote:

> That's not my understanding at all of the purpose of the promoted  
> wire (which I was against as well, btw).  its purpose was not to do  
> away with the need for guidelines.  As far as I'm aware the  
> guidelines still exist.  In the case of 374741 it was a case of it  
> not being understandable by anyone.  In the case of 374918, whether  
> I agree with it or not is irrelevant - it's simply that it was not  
> news, merely uncorroborated speculation, so falls foul of the  
> guidelines.  I haven't seen anyone suggest that the promoted  
> newswire means we should loosen the guidelines.  is that what  
> you're suggesting?  And do you really enjoy this stuff?  visit some  
> sites and blogs - there's lots of it out there.....
>
> richard
>

about the guidelines, "not being understandable by anyone" is not  
actually in them - even if it was true. and you fail to explain how  
"uncorroborated speculation" falls foul of them as well. they're  
supposed to be quite loose anyway and i'm sure that one of the  
arguments in favour of setting up the promoted wire was that mods  
wouldn't have to spend so much time hiding stuff. some of the non- 
promoted posts are great, which is one of the reasons why i could  
never look at the promoted wire.

>
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features