Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Add a "Move back to Edit Queue" button

By megid in Meta
Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 01:32:46 AM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)

When I vote for an article, it sometimes happens that an article is not bad per se, but is so poorly formatted, lacking links, or full of spelling errors that I do not like this article to be on the front page (or the section page, for that matter).

Therefore, I propose a "Move back to Edit Queue" button, similar to the "Move to Vote" button.

There are many articles that I would want to see on the front page -- IF they had tons of good links, solid explanation, balanced view, proper spelling, good structure, etc. etc. etc. But I only have the choice to vote it down or up.

This is not the message that I want to give to the author. The message is: "Edit that damn thing. Thank you.". A "Move back to Edit Queue" button, forcing an entry into said queue, seems a good solution.

Why should I want this?

Assuming a minimum of respect for your fellow k5er, to give him/her the right incentive instead of simply discouraging her/him from writing articles. To not loose what could become a good article.

Why should I not want this?

This button is visual clutter (ok, little visual clutter. Weak argument). I want to punish premature posters (ok, 15th century sugar/cane thinking, more on the side of the cane). We would have MoveVote/MoveEdit wars as an addition to +1/-1 wars. It would be useful just for a tiny minority of stories. It is a change -- and I do not like changes.


Decide for yourselves whether that would be a useful addition. Or vote this down.


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


Back to Edit button useful?
o Definitely Yes 72%
o Definetely No 18%
o I wouldnt use that anyway 8%

Votes: 171
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Also by megid

Display: Sort:
Add a "Move back to Edit Queue" button | 54 comments (45 topical, 9 editorial, 6 hidden)
Troll wars, a new hope? (2.27 / 11) (#2)
by nkyad on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 12:22:38 PM EST

It would be very funny to see stories bouncing back and forth in the queues as hordes of dupes try to dump/save it. It would also render both buttons useless and make the life of many helpful users a lot worst.

Don't believe in anything you can't see, smell, touch or at the very least infer from a good particle accelerator run

Reposted from last meta arcticle: (2.66 / 12) (#5)
by templurkeracct on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 12:41:23 PM EST

When designing a system one key goal is to make it simple as possible. I'm no programmer but I know that is an important element of UI design. I consider the new comment ratings a success because it simplified the process. Fewer, more meaningful choices are always better than a greater amount of more trivial choices.

I personally think the story voting process is already too complicated. Section and Abstain votes should be eliminated. A story should be moved to Front Page based on the ratio of +1 to -1 votes.

What you are suggesting will not help. It will only give more busy work to Scoop contributers and make it easier to "game the system."
I was the original drduck back before mod-bombing was cool.

I'd love to vote it down (1.28 / 7) (#6)
by My Other Account Is A Hulver on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 01:18:38 PM EST

So go to vote already.  If it's an unpopular idea, leaving it festering in edit isn't going to help keep it alive.

I believe drduck is a genuine account, and I don't delete him because I'm a hypocrite. - rusty
Unpopular Idea (1.60 / 5) (#7)
by oat5tout on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 01:32:50 PM EST

No, an unpopular idea would get -1ed. A good idea that just needs that certain little something could get sent back for editing without losing all the current discussion.

Free Rush! -speek
Parent ]

The object of the game (2.22 / 9) (#9)
by nkyad on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 02:44:35 PM EST

Suggestions about the process should be aimed at enhancing the system usability, not its playability.  Your idea makes the system far more playable by turning it almost unusable at times.

Don't believe in anything you can't see, smell, touch or at the very least infer from a good particle accelerator run

how about a simple comment? (1.60 / 5) (#14)
by kerasineAddict on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 08:05:05 PM EST

If the article is just barely not making the grade (ie glaring grammatical or spelling mistakes), why not voice this to the author. I'm sure we'd all assume that the authors keep a close eye on their articles as they move through the modsub, so why not post a comment?

"this is a well thought out article/interesting/erotic article, BUT there are X and Y wrong with it...why not resubmit it to editing, I'm sure it'll get more +1's if these couple thigngs are fixed..." A couple more like that would make me resubmit an article, cleaned up at least.

Resubmitting Loses Comments <nt> (1.66 / 6) (#22)
by oat5tout on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 10:52:39 AM EST

Free Rush! -speek
Parent ]

a "-1 Edit" poll option (2.76 / 34) (#16)
by polyglot on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 11:15:18 PM EST

like there's +1FP, there should be -1Ed. When hitting -20, the ratio of -1Dump to -1Edit votes determines if it gets sent back to editing or binned - just like the FP ratio determines if a story is frontpaged or section.
"There is no God and Dirac is his prophet"
     -- Wolfgang Pauli
Agreed. Submit this for consideration! -nt (1.40 / 5) (#19)
by Kasreyn on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 02:07:31 AM EST

nt means NO TEXT
"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
Excellent idea (1.25 / 4) (#29)
by The Smith on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 06:45:01 AM EST

Excellent idea, and not open to abuse either.

[ Parent ]
Move to edit should be the default, (2.50 / 10) (#18)
by la princesa on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 01:34:50 AM EST

instead of edit queue first.  And it is simple enough to allow that option to only be invoked a fixed number of times, perhaps only once or twice in the life of a story submission.  Additionally the edit queue should be separated entirely from the voting queue.  There's nothing wrong with lots of articles to be edited.  However, it does clutter a queue set up in the current format.  It's hardly a problem if people spend a couple of days with an article in edit and then send it on to voting if the edit queue is a separate page and set of links.  I mean, people like to bring up 'oh the evil crapflooders and trolls will ABUSE THE SYSTEM!', but that's basically bullshit.  That sort of submission is too small a percentage of all submissions to be that big a deal.  Anyhow.

<qpt> Disprove people? <qpt> What happens when you disprove them? Do they disappear in a flash of logic?
We need a... (2.50 / 14) (#20)
by truth versus death on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 02:56:35 AM EST

"Send to Purgatory" button

"any erection implies consent"-fae
[ Trim your Bush ]
Why I don't want this (2.12 / 8) (#21)
by Argon on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 10:25:33 AM EST

Because it will allow bad, or trollish, articles to stay on-line a litle bit longer.

Because it will force me to vote twice for the same story, and there are articles that don't even deserve the time I spent on the first vote.

But it's only my opinion...

Up and Down (2.00 / 5) (#24)
by svampa on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 07:38:26 PM EST

I can see a story jumping from the edit queue to voting queue, and once again to the edit queue, and once again to the voting queue, and once again to de edit queue and..........

Sounds ok to me (1.75 / 4) (#26)
by simul on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 01:34:35 AM EST

Read this book - first 24 pages are free to browse - it rocks
[ Parent ]
No problemo (2.25 / 4) (#35)
by bugmaster on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 01:08:02 PM EST

This won't be a problem if the edit queue timer still ticks as long as the story is in the queue, and the votes are tallied in the voting queue. Also, there should obviously be a timer that doesn't allow you to move the story more than N times per hour -- a simple anti-bot measure.
[ Parent ]
would turn me into a troll (2.33 / 9) (#25)
by livus on Thu Nov 27, 2003 at 08:45:44 PM EST

I can see your point but such a system would transform an innocent user like me into a trollish one. Because whenever I saw a minor, yet irritating, error such as your "loose" for "lose" above I'd hit the Move Back To Edit button. Even though it doesnt essentially detract from the point of your article, I'd be unable to fight the urge to ask for correction.

Really I'd rather people just used the edit queue properly the first time round, rather than leaving their ill-spelt article in there for 5 minutes at midnight before unleashing it on us.

HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

How do you tally it? (2.00 / 4) (#27)
by simul on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 01:40:14 AM EST

Idea #1: If "Keep" - "Dump' - "Move to Edit Queue" = -40 ... then it moves back to the edit queue. Ignored for other counts

Idea #2: For the posting count, it's equivalent to "Abstain". For the rejctions count, it's equivalent to "Dump it". If it gets rejected, and there are 20% "Move to Edit Queue" votes, then it gets kept.

Either way, it is used to rescue a story that's getting voted down.

Read this book - first 24 pages are free to browse - it rocks

Oh yeah, and not just a spelling error... (1.85 / 7) (#30)
by skyknight on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 07:27:18 AM EST

Not only does this author misspell "lose" as "loose" in a piece in which he discusses spelling issues, but the same sentence both is a fragment and contains a split infinitive.


Move back to edit queue!

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
I was just about to post that very message :) (1.50 / 4) (#34)
by redrum on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 11:43:17 AM EST

Hehe, lovely :D

[ Parent ]
give the guy a break (2.00 / 3) (#38)
by muyuubyou on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 05:36:08 PM EST

I wish spelling was the main problem with the stories posted here.

It is when I struggle to be brief that I become obscure - Horace, Epistles
[ Parent ]
-1: move back to edit queue (1.50 / 4) (#39)
by skyknight on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 07:00:03 PM EST

Author should have employed subjunctive verb mood:

I wish spelling waswere the main problem with the stories posted here.

... but yeah, I agree. Still, though, if you're going to make a point of mentioning spelling, at least proof read what you're submitting.

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
-1 grammar nazi (1.00 / 4) (#41)
by muyuubyou on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 09:56:28 PM EST

Firstly, you're right; but I couldn't care less.

I actually think people have limited attention spans. Dedicating too much of it to spelling is retarded, especially when there are so many foreigners posting here.

If it's easy to understand, don't nitpick. Nitpicking is retarded in such cases. Moderation is not for spelling (I think I'm changing my sig to that).

Have a nice day.

[ Parent ]

It depends on the context... (1.75 / 4) (#42)
by skyknight on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 10:01:12 PM EST

If you're quickly banging out a reply, or making a casual diary post, then perfect polishing would be reasonably deemed excessive by most people. I was just teasing you. However, in the case of stories that get posted, there really is no good excuse for spelling errors. I don't think that the author bothered to have it in the edit queue for an adequate period of time. How's that for irony? Different standards are appropriate for different things.

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
Split infinitives (none / 2) (#44)
by izogi on Sat Nov 29, 2003 at 05:49:22 PM EST

Not only does this author misspell "lose" as "loose" in a piece in which he discusses spelling issues, but the same sentence both is a fragment and contains a split infinitive.

Bah! To arrogantly prevent splitting infinitives is merely a draconian rule imposed upon us by those who think that what's not possible in other languages shouldn't be allowed in English. :)

- izogi

[ Parent ]
There you go, splitting infinitives... (none / 3) (#45)
by skyknight on Sat Nov 29, 2003 at 05:57:19 PM EST

To arrogantly prevent... *tsk* *tsk* Seriously, though, as a rule it is as silly as it is useless. I became less of a language snob after reading Stephen Pinker's The Language Instinct. I also endorse such grammatical travesties as using "they" as a gender neutral third person pronoun, simply because it makes sense and our damned language needs such a thing.

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
they (none / 0) (#51)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 02, 2003 at 01:42:26 PM EST

The use of "they" as gender neutral goes back to Chaucer. It's not a new invention at all so I've never understood the discrimination against it.

Also, would Star Trek be the same if Captain Kirk aspired instead "boldly to go where no man has gone before?"

I drank what?

[ Parent ]
OK, combining two of the above options: (1.75 / 4) (#40)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Fri Nov 28, 2003 at 07:22:44 PM EST

We would have -1 re-edit and -1 dump. If a story reached -20 (or whatever), then a fancy bit of math will calculate whether to send it back to the edit que, or dump it as a diary entry.

Yes, that means crap will be posted into the diary section, but that already happens anyway.

Hmmmm, perhaps 3 options? -1 re-edit, -1 diary, -1 spam/crap.

-1, Fiction too. (none / 0) (#50)
by V on Mon Dec 01, 2003 at 10:30:39 PM EST

Maybe we should use the fictions section as a dump.
What my fans are saying:
"That, and the fact that V is a total, utter scumbag." VZAMaZ.
"well look up little troll" cts.
"I think you're a worthless little cuntmonkey but you made me lol, so I sigged you." re
"goodness gracious you're an idiot" mariahkillschickens
[ Parent ]
i'd like a move to diary option.. -nt- (2.25 / 3) (#46)
by Suppafly on Sun Nov 30, 2003 at 12:10:10 PM EST

Playstation Sucks.
should just be a checkbox in story submission (none / 2) (#52)
by infinitera on Tue Dec 02, 2003 at 01:59:29 PM EST

[x] Post as diary if dumped.

[ Parent ]
...checked in by default [n/t] (none / 0) (#54)
by fritz the cat on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 10:50:31 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Education Is The Answer? (2.75 / 4) (#47)
by mcc on Sun Nov 30, 2003 at 10:17:17 PM EST

It may be a bit late in this discussion for this comment to be at all productive or for anyone to read it, but...

As I see it, the problem right now that should probably be addressed before adding new features to the Edit Queue is the simple fact that just too frequently people don't know how to use the Edit Queue. These are the two problem scenarios I see:

  1. Someone new to the site dumps a story into the edit queue, then, apparently unaware of how the edit queue works, walks away, and never returns to add edits or read the comments. The story piles up a large glob of editorial suggestions, which are never read or acted on. The story then is automatically moved to voting, where it dies. (See also: the Hilbert problem submission from last week.)
  2. Most of K5 seems totally unaware of the existence of the editors@kuro5hin.org mailing list, and seems convinced that once something leaves editing for voting it can't be changed at all ever.
I think most of the problems could be solved by 1) turning on "request editorial help" by default, 2) putting up some kind of banner text that first-time story posters have to click through before the posting is completed that explains how the edit queue works and pleads to actually follow editorial comments (yes, there's some text on the submission page already, but no one seems to be reading it) and 3) putting both in this banner text and in the "this is your story" text an open written offer from editors@k5 to send a story back to edit queue if the circumstances are worthy. I think having the story author have to manually invoke the "go back to edit queue" is superior to some kind of automated method, since if the K5 readership is the one who decides to drop it into Edit, what is there to ensure the story author will actually edit it once it is there? Or even notice?

Anyway, this is just my 4 cents in whatever italian money is called.

Aside from that, the absurd meta-wankery of k5er-quoting sigs probably takes the cake. Especially when the quote itself is about k5. -- tsubame

not to mention (none / 1) (#53)
by aphrael on Wed Dec 03, 2003 at 02:40:21 AM EST

that peter and i are usually more than happy to provide *advance* editorial advice.

[ Parent ]
Better solution (none / 1) (#48)
by curien on Sun Nov 30, 2003 at 11:05:52 PM EST

Just allow authors to move from voting to edit. This should only be prevented by a critical mass of SPAM^WMove to vote clicks.

Screw teh tiger woods! I am teh Lunix Tarballs!
Add a "Move back to Edit Queue" button | 54 comments (45 topical, 9 editorial, 6 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!