Habbox news

[Lee]

Sticking up for news here.

The facts are 99.9% correct. Sometimes reporters, usually trialists tend not to do their research and put anything and hope noones finds it. Once someone has checked out it and edited it, they are messaged to say so and told of their wrong-doing having it being corrected. They will usually get a polite reminder to research in future. I've always used backed up facts in my reports, and most people did. It's one slip up out of the 100's of reports they produce

How ironic, that your statistic is also incorrect :L

I think trialists should have their articles approved for the duration of their trial. It's like the only solution to this problem.

[Mathew]

We don't need a major reform of the whole department just because one trialist got a date wrong. It was a mistake. It's been edited. Move on.

[Samantha]

No it's not the only solution at all.

Why should trialists be treated different than normal staff, normal staff make mistakes too and you don't seem to say make them have their reports approved first do you?

Oh actually, thought of why they shouldn't go on unpublished before being edited. Habbox only allows 3 articles on the front page, by the time me and/or grig see to it there may be more than 3 completed, I am not going to just publish the say 4 articles submitted after I have edited them due to that jot being fair to the one who posted first. Speaking from experience it is down right annoying when your report doesn't stay on the front page long or doesn't make it at all. That's not fair making the system more fomplicated. If they have no error in them what's the point of havinf it on unpublished also the fact that I'm usually offline by 10pm Sunday, if grig doesn't come on it means we can't edit the article thus it won't he publiahed for their minimum, that's when warnigs are sent out. Again it's unfair.

Managers, seniors, normal staff and trialists we're all the same overall, were all people so shouldn't have different rulea just because they're new to a departmwnt.

[Inseriousity.]

How ironic, that your statistic is also incorrect :L

I think trialists should have their articles approved for the duration of their trial. It's like the only solution to this problem.

It's only a problem if it's something that is constantly happening. As it seems to be a one-off incident, I really doubt something will change. That'd be like changing rules when a moderator makes a mistake. Nope, instead you clarify the rule then move on.

[e5]

So there isn't 100's of reports? :S or even 1000's

How ironic, that your statistic is also incorrect :L

I think trialists should have their articles approved for the duration of their trial. It's like the only solution to this problem.

---------- Post added 21-05-2012 at 10:10 PM ----------

very much a fact. I know that news work hard to use solid, backed up facts or asked not to use them at all unless clearly stating its a rumour or they are unsure.

I agree, if he is still a trialist his articles should be checked by fully fledged reporters or seniors/managers.


Everyone makes mistakes yes, but his wasn't a mistake to come out with a year you need to atleast know roughly but he didn't he clearly guessed.


Is that 99.9% a fact or a guess?

[lawrawrrr]

Oh comon everyone knows that when you say 99.9% it means nearly all of the time. Stop nitpicking. You never notice when other articles get edited, although I'd say at least half of them (yes im guessing) have at least one minor change. It's not a big deal, the article was only a few hours old when it was picked up on and changed STRAIGHT away.

[GommeInc]

I think people don't consider that he is a trialist and he is only learning, I will be editing the article (or Grig will) soon once I have overcome the lag on all sites and after I have finished eating.

He's not going to learn if you edit the article. Hide it from the public and suggest he re-writes it so it contains all the necessary facts. Just cutting the false bits out gives you more unnecessary work and deems all these trialists or junior writers a bit useless if the senior article writers/editors seem to not want to relinquish their duties. Otherwise you may as well just have senior editors and not bother with trialists or juniors.

[xxMATTGxx]

He's not going to learn if you edit the article. Hide it from the public and suggest he re-writes it so it contains all the necessary facts. Just cutting the false bits out gives you more unnecessary work and deems all these trialists or junior writers a bit useless if the senior article writers/editors seem to not want to relinquish their duties. Otherwise you may as well just have senior editors and not bother with trialists or juniors.

The reporters who has changes done on their articles do actually get a PM telling them what has changed and how they can improve it and so on. I also know that at certain times if articles do go unpublished they get simialr feedback and then they go back and make those changes.

[Samantha]

He's not going to learn if you edit the article. Hide it from the public and suggest he re-writes it so it contains all the necessary facts. Just cutting the false bits out gives you more unnecessary work and deems all these trialists or junior writers a bit useless if the senior article writers/editors seem to not want to relinquish their duties. Otherwise you may as well just have senior editors and not bother with trialists or juniors.

Grig is partly away therefore I'm mainly doing the edits. As matt said they get a pm and a recent occurrence did require me asking two reporters to rewrite the whole article.

[GommeInc]

It still doesn't seem like you're teaching them anything other than informing them of their mistakes :/ In order for them to learn, you really should have them edit the article. Do you just remove the offending information or do you allow them to edit the article at any given time to give updates or fix any wrong information? I imagine you don't have a system where they can only post articles and that's it - that would be pretty daft but Habbox does have some wonderfully bizarre systems in place