NewsBiscuit : Quality control anybody?

Quick links: NewsBiscuit Home • Chat Room • Writers' Room • Top Ten

Quality control anybody?

(23 posts) (13 voices)

Started 2 years ago by Gerontius
Latest reply from IABP

Tags:

Gerontius

offline
Member

How about a separate little tick box tacked on to the end of the 5* score boxes...that can be used to make the idiotic subs disappear.
If enough people tick the box (say 10) then the sub (although they are usually lame one-liners) gets democratically wiped out.
Maybe just limit it to one-liners.
Might help stop people posting tiresome puns too. But only gets removed if enough vote it off.
The site is getting bogged down with too much not very inspiring content and the good subs often get buried before there is a chance to catch them.
The limit of 10 votes should stop any individual from carrying out a vindictive hatchet job on the competition.
It might help get rid of this prick that is doing his best to sabotage the site. At the very least we would have a collective means of throwing out the trash and having some democratic quality control.

(Oh do tell him to fuck off Ed, he’s always whining on about something)

Posted 2 years ago #
bonjonelson

offline
Member

It doesn't take long for the idiots to create 10 accounts and delete all the good stuff.

Unless this purge ability was restricted to trusted regular users of the site - ie not me.

Posted 2 years ago #
Zadok the second

offline
Member

Yeah - uncomfortable about deletions - one man's meat and all that.

On the other hand, now that we are getting spammed it would be useful to have a 'report this post to the moderators' option. You could have a few reasons in tick-boxes:

a) spam
b) not very funny
c) better than anything I could have written, you bastard

Posted 2 years ago #
IABP

offline
Member

Yes because we are all great judges of comedy and have passed exams to prove it.
Get rid of spam but most of the funny stuff is one liners anyway but maybe not to some.
Surely you know who you like by now so don't read the people you don't.
I mean that for everyone, not you personally.

Posted 2 years ago #
Sinnick

offline
Member

I fully agree that the recent spate of adverts demands a mechanism for quick removal, though I doubt that the ed & admin are watching the screen continuously - they'll have better things to do. I hope this proposed mechanism is easy & cheap to implement.

Perhaps a quick PM to admin would do the trick.

I don't mind the occasional mad rant or argument, as long as it doesn't run into days. It's one of the features of freedom-of-speech.

I have to disagree on judging which posts are funny. We all do gags which don't work -they seem good at the time. This is how newbies get started - they either improve or disappear.

Personally, I rather like much of the quick witted humour - puts me in the mood for something greater (not that it translates into quality that often).

Posted 2 years ago #
rikkor

offline
Member

If your dangerous scheme were implemented, I would not know anything about South Beach Diet Eggnog.

Posted 2 years ago #
MrChigleysAunt

offline
Member

I thought I'd take a look back at the stuff you've written, to see 'where you're coming from'. But looking at the list of your postings, I'm pretty sure I haven't read any of them. I guess that's because, for whatever reason, the headlines didn't grab me. That's not a criticism, it's just evidence of a difference in taste.
We don't have time to read everything, so why not spend time reading things you think you'll enjoy, without trying to stop other people reading what they enjoy?

Posted 2 years ago #
Gerontius

offline
Member

You have to read them to know if you will enjoy them or not.
Maybe I should spend my time more constructively, but I do actually read most of them.
The idea was an attempt to engage people and encourage them to actually read the subs.
Get people involved by taking a more active, accountable role.
It’s not about censorship. We all read the names we recognise but why have most of them disappeared in recent months?
Not so long ago 75% of the content was good to excellent and 25% poor to piss poor
Now the equation is in danger of being reversed.
If you’ve endured reading my stuff then you can’t have dismissed the idea lightly.

Posted 2 years ago #
bonjonelson

offline
Member

I think we just need to go back to the old way of just humiliating those who write things that aren't funny enough.

Posted 2 years ago #
saltire

offline
Member

Great idea. When can we start ?

Posted 2 years ago #
Gerontius

offline
Member

I don’t think it was ever JOf intention to simply make Newsbiscuit the funniest satirical site on the web. His ethos runs a little deeper than that. If that was his intention, he could do it overnight.
It was set up to encourage people to write. You and me.
The whole point of NB is that anybody can have a go and we all get to be published.
Other spoof websites just cream off the best contributions of the day and discard the rest. That only encourages the elite and crushes dreams.
How many of us have tried our hand elsewhere, been rejected or ignored and ended up back here at Newsbiscuit?
OK, you can put your hands down now.
Newsbiscuit has the romance of the FA Cup – that’s what makes it so compelling. Turning it into the Champions League would go against everything it stands for. OK, so one of the top four will probably win the FA Cup but they have to compete with the non-league teams to get there - and long may it continue.
Lots of very good writers have cut their teeth here at Newsbiscuit, found success and then moved on. That has to be good, that’s what it’s for.
But if 10 people independently vote something off because they think it’s shite – then it’s probably shite. Is that so bad? A little pruning of the deadwood encourages new growth. Just an idea, things have to evolve to stay alive.
My fear is that one day we’ll all wake up and find NB is no longer there, then what do we do?
I’ve tried getting a life and it didn’t work. And if you’re still reading this then you must be in the same boat. Here, take this paddle. Your turn to row.
Just trying a few constructive thoughts (or not). It’s a chat room, just thought I’d chat.
I would hate to see the cunt sending all the spam end up as WOTM one day.
You can start taking the piss now.

Posted 2 years ago #
MrChigleysAunt

offline
Member

I don't have a problem with any of that. It was just your apparent equation of one-line submissions with spam that ruffled me. Yes, lots of the one-liners are crap (including mine) but so are many of the longer submissions.
Remember, a short one is much more likely to raise a laugh than a nice long one. That's my experience anyway.

Posted 2 years ago #
FormerlyAlOPecia

offline
Member

Wow Gerontius, great stuff until you get to the voting subs off bit, totally contradicting the eloquent and passionate argument adduced to that point.

I'm still looking forward to the "found success" bit so that I can move on.

Posted 2 years ago #
Gerontius

offline
Member

OK, maybe not voted off (that is a bit draconian) but moved to a 'work in progress' sub-section

Posted 2 years ago #
Sinnick

offline
Member

In my experience, the more complex a system is, the more problems it gives. Let's keep it simple.

It would be nice to lose the spam a little quicker, though, it's irritating

Posted 2 years ago #
wallster

offline
Member

Gerontius, you occasionally make good sense. Clearly not had enough to drink yet.

This'll never happen, but for what it's worth, I think the eds should have a little more say over who gets a login around here. Perhaps people should be required to submit 3 good quality subs before they're allowed the keys to the writers' room.

That way we're at least going to avoid the spammers, the failed christmas cracker gag writers and the pricks who think it's fair game to take the piss out of our armed forces on the one day of the year when most decent people are paying their respects.

Posted 2 years ago #
thisisall1word

offline
Member

Well, one way to get rid of the adds would be to have a few more of us as mods and give them the ability, not to delete anything, but move stuff from the chat and writer's forums into a 'spam' forum. Where it would be left to be deleted by proper admins at the end of a busy/workshy week.
Having mods who can just delete stuff would be open to accusations of bias against users submitting dodgy content - but if the stuff isn't deleted but moved then at least that author could say to the rest of us (and a proper admin) 'Oi - suchandsuch moved by sub which isn't spam/adverts' and then we could all shame the mod into apologising by labelling them a fascist comedy nazi or something. Mods should only move spam not contributions.

Thoughts?

Posted 2 years ago #
bonjonelson

offline
Member

These are all good ideas, even the shit ones, but who is going to do all the work? Adding this sort of functionality into the site isn't a trivial task.

Posted 2 years ago #
Stan Laurel

offline
Member

All subs, good, bad or ugly are read by the Editorial team, who seem to know what they're looking for, so I'm pretty sure you'll find that the quality control bit is down to them. I don't see the need to filter the subs for them.

You find out if your sub or other people's are any good when/if your sub makes it to the front page as a FP, NiB or ticker.

Of course, we all have to put up with some pretty crappy/puerile efforts but they've always been around and I can't see things are any worse now than before. Ignore them and the kiddies will soon get bored and advance to more constructive things such as dropping fire extinguishers off tall buildings.

Instead of whinging, how about doing some subs yourselves?

Posted 2 years ago #
the coarse whisperer

offline
Member

What Stan said. Voting subs off just sounds like a devious way of hijacking the editorial role; we're JOF's guests here and his completely inexplicable and irrational preferences go - get over it already.

Also, what is the problem some people seem to have with one liners? They can often express a comedic idea better than a long story. And if there's the germ of a good idea in a one liner why not embroider it with a longer piece yourself rather than whinging about the dearth of long subs? Isn't that the point of this whole collaborative comedy schtick?

Posted 2 years ago #
rikkor

offline
Member

JOF? I think that's how Scientology got started, referring to LRH like that.

Posted 2 years ago #
Sinnick

offline
Member

btw, I think we are the work-in-progress subsection. The FP is the finished product after we factory-workers have thrashed around with an idea. The young & temporary apprentices can be spotted a mile off - some of them learn quickly, some don't.

Posted 2 years ago #
IABP

offline
Member

If this thread had that new button, I think I'd use it.

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.