Re: [Bug-gne]Right/Wrong if editorship in GNE/Nupedia

[Christopher Mahan]

What I'd like to know is what happens when the author get 3,000 emails from 
every Dick, Joe, and Bill's attorneys about changing this comma, this 
heading, this sentence.

And I could have a couple of buddies just log on and "accept" my article.

If someone has a beef with an article, let them write their own, hopefully 
better. I would rather have both these people's views.

If I write an article about the Renaissance in 15th Century Europe, I 
guarantee that no matter what I write, or no matter how well researched and 
"solid" my article is, I'll get upward of a thousand emails asking me to 
rewrite it. And that will make me use my junk mail filter more, because I 
just won't read any more than the first 3 and dsimiss the whole thing with a 
shrug and a "If you want to write an article like that, be my guest" 
attitude.

As far as editing, that's a great idea. I think that we should have a pool 
of volunteer editors that authors can contact. Even better, the GNE system 
should allow the author to designate one or more editor for the article, 
with the final "Publish" button for the author only.
People willing to edit articles then could make themselves available, via an 
editors listing, for example, to be contacted directly by the authors. They 
would have to work with each other for remuneration, if any.

Chris



> From: Tom Chance <address@hidden>
>
> But GNE really isn't about being a web index. The
> thing about the web is that it is full of so much
> useless info, people's tacky homepages and corporate
> adverts, that finding information on any topic is
> impossible, even with the best of the search engines
> and web directories available.
>
> GNE would become a directory of information, all with
> the same layout etc. and all carefully presented in an
> easy to access way, and easy to search. The articles
> themselves will obviously pass an "acceptance stage"
> whereby they will need at least 1 or 2 people to vote
> "yes" for an article to be submitted (with either no
> "reject" option, or a very limited one). So you won't
> get complete drivel, but they will not be edited and
> so the whole resource will hopefully over time carry
> no central bias. If people aren't sure about the
> quality of their writing etc. we can offer helpers, so
> you send the work to them, they send back to you an
> ammended copy, and you submit your ammended copy
> taking into account the suggestions of the helper. But
> this is quite different from actually editing the
> work, as here the author gets the final say and the
> "helper" won't get to rework the direction of the
> article.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com