Have I missed something?

[AgnesIO]

Habbox PLC here we come, on topic the newly worded roles seems fine to me, although I can see it proving unclear to new members

A good point, and one I haven't actually discussed in this thread.

Am I missing something, or does it really matter what we call habbo fansite news writers (assuming the name isn't offensive, which it isn't.)

[Mark]

A good point, and one I haven't actually discussed in this thread.

Am I missing something, or does it really matter what we call habbo fansite news writers (assuming the name isn't offensive, which it isn't.)

I don't think it really does. The only scenario i can think of when it becoming unclear is when someone wants to apply for a News Reporters role and can only find Content Staff

[xxMATTGxx]

Good news, we can carry on as normal.

Bad news, Bertie has gone missing.

[AgnesIO]

Good news, we can carry on as normal.

Bad news, Bertie has gone missing.

The VIP enquiries begin :L

[Nick]

Good news, we can carry on as normal.

Thank god for that.

[lawrawrrr]

From a content perspective I once again want to highlight how it doesn't make sense because writing news and writing content is a COMPLETELY different set of skills and most people don't have both. I suppose on a fansite like this it's not the end of the world as a lot of our ex-news reporters were content staff too at some point but it's something that could prove a little detrimental: some people will be better at news and the wiki/history pages will suffer, and vice versa.

But yeah. Not the end of the world.

[Kardan]

From a content perspective I once again want to highlight how it doesn't make sense because writing news and writing content is a COMPLETELY different set of skills and most people don't have both. I suppose on a fansite like this it's not the end of the world as a lot of our ex-news reporters were content staff too at some point but it's something that could prove a little detrimental: some people will be better at news and the wiki/history pages will suffer, and vice versa.

But yeah. Not the end of the world.

Surely writing content pages for Habbox.com and writing information pages on the wiki is different as well? And it's probably to be expected that there will be certain people better at news, and certain people better at the wiki etc. But who knows, people might be able to learn whilst doing some work for the other side of things, and maybe perhaps we'll have a better content team as a result. Surely more staff is a good thing

[lawrawrrr]

Surely writing content pages for Habbox.com and writing information pages on the wiki is different as well? And it's probably to be expected that there will be certain people better at news, and certain people better at the wiki etc. But who knows, people might be able to learn whilst doing some work for the other side of things, and maybe perhaps we'll have a better content team as a result. Surely more staff is a good thing

Not really, most of the things I was working on wiki/site-wise were exactly the same: it's a factual manner of writing. Yeah, doing guides and a history page are more different but at the end of the day they still pretty much have the same set of skills, whereas News is COMPLETELY different. I've had a lot of experience writing both but I'm not going to bore everyone with the differences unless you're terribly interested.

More staff is a good thing......... this merge has actually decreased staff though. Sam, for example, was staff in two departments, Jan in two, I don't know about the others but I'm sure there were more, so it's worked like this..

Content had 1 staff (I believe)
News had about 10 (ish, lets just use this as an example)
Graphics had about 5 (same thing)

so that's a total of 16 right?

But by merging them, Sam who was Content AND news means there are now only 15 total staff, Jan takes away another, and so on. And by having one manager managing both News and Content that means that the workload will probably be smaller than if someone was working in two departments - because it usually works out that someone is expected to spend 'x' amount of hours in Content and 'y' amount of hours in News, whereas now you're expected to do 'z' amount of hours in the Writer department of Content - and it doesn't necessarily follow that x+y=z. I'd actually argue that x+y almost definitely DOESN'T = z as you can't expect someone to put in the amount of work that two departments would traditionally ask of you.

It also doesn't take into account those people who might be outraged or annoyed by the decision and will subsequently leave.

Also, saying it'll be better... learning wiki writing skills will not make your news better. TRUST ME. I've been through that so many times. Once again a boring story.

[AgnesIO]

Not really, most of the things I was working on wiki/site-wise were exactly the same: it's a factual manner of writing. Yeah, doing guides and a history page are more different but at the end of the day they still pretty much have the same set of skills, whereas News is COMPLETELY different. I've had a lot of experience writing both but I'm not going to bore everyone with the differences unless you're terribly interested.

More staff is a good thing......... this merge has actually decreased staff though. Sam, for example, was staff in two departments, Jan in two, I don't know about the others but I'm sure there were more, so it's worked like this..

Content had 1 staff (I believe)
News had about 10 (ish, lets just use this as an example)
Graphics had about 5 (same thing)

so that's a total of 16 right?

But by merging them, Sam who was Content AND news means there are now only 15 total staff, Jan takes away another, and so on. And by having one manager managing both News and Content that means that the workload will probably be smaller than if someone was working in two departments - because it usually works out that someone is expected to spend 'x' amount of hours in Content and 'y' amount of hours in News, whereas now you're expected to do 'z' amount of hours in the Writer department of Content - and it doesn't necessarily follow that x+y=z. I'd actually argue that x+y almost definitely DOESN'T = z as you can't expect someone to put in the amount of work that two departments would traditionally ask of you.

It also doesn't take into account those people who might be outraged or annoyed by the decision and will subsequently leave.

Also, saying it'll be better... learning wiki writing skills will not make your news better. TRUST ME. I've been through that so many times. Once again a boring story.

Sorry but news is also supposed to be factual - the fact news reporters cram the articles with opinions that no one wants is a different matter.

You cannot tell me that these teenage volunteers genuinely have majorly different skill sets in either content or news..

[lawrawrrr]

Sorry but news is also supposed to be factual - the fact news reporters cram the articles with opinions that no one wants is a different matter.

You cannot tell me that these teenage volunteers genuinely have majorly different skill sets in either content or news..

I actually can, I noticed it during my time as News Manager and senior, a lot of people who applied after being in the content department found it extremely difficult to write in the right style.


I know news is meant to be factual, that's kind of my job to realise that, but there's a difference between writing factual accounts from a third-person perspective (content style) and writing more opinionated news stories with an exciting and interesting 'spin', which is how good news is written. It's just so different in so so so many ways. You don't put ALL the information in a news story, not in the same way you do with wiki pages or something.