Crap articles and moderators...


Recommended Posts

Neowin aint what it was 9 - 10 years ago that's for sure. Maybe it's because I was younger, but I remember news stories being limited to actually new WORTHY stories. I also remember it being alot less strict, it seemed people called talk about more liberal things etc. I suppose this added strictness could come with the site getting bigger and having more responsibility though....

Naziitistic may no be the best way to put it lol, but it's the right direction. It seems now people get warnings and posts deleted allot more easily and the mods are generally more sensitive and less open minded. I don't particularly care, as I mainly come here when I need an answer to a question or just to browse areas of my interest and laugh at people getting worked up over posts etc., it's just something I have observed and you can't really single anything out as an example because it's happened so gradually over a wide space of time.

Also I understand you don't need a whole mountain of comments posted each saying an article has it's facts wrong, but surely you need a few people to post that it's wrong, otherwise people won't know it's wrong until Neowin gets round to changing it.

If your just stating the facts about an article, whether disproving it or not, this surely still counts as discussion, and can be discussed....

edit: don't get me wrong, i'm not hating, Neowin's still my favourite place for anything geek related

If your just stating the facts about an article, whether disproving it or not, this surely still counts as discussion, and can be discussed....

It's not about quantity, but quality. There's a difference between "This writer sux" and "I think the facts might be wrong because xyz" I'm pretty sure those aren't getting deleted. One sparks meaningful discussion/corrections, one wants attention.

Tzvi I think what you're saying is completely incorrect, recently Neowin seems to be focussing on content over quality. In this thread you all seem to be ignoring the feedback your getting and just saying 'use the report button'. None of you have acknowledged that the quality has decreased in the past year or so, people seem to be writing ****ty articles just for the pay check.

There has to be some form of quality control in place as well as fact checking - so many articles recently have been incorrect / silly spelling errors. I'd point them out - but oh wait all the comments have been deleted? lol To be honest I'd go through and highlight them all but it's 2340 so .. night.

It's not about quantity, but quality. There's a difference between "This writer sux" and "I think the facts might be wrong because xyz" I'm pretty sure those aren't getting deleted. One sparks meaningful discussion/corrections, one wants attention.

That statement alone implies censorship without solid criteria. You just leave to the moderator to determine what's "meaningful discussion" and what's not. And with that criteria you're assuming that the quality of all the articles is good enough to warrant 'meaningful arguments', which is not the case.

And by the way, when people comment or point out typos, at least they can get replies. The report button is this obscure thing and the only way of knowing your message got through, is when the article is corrected. IF it's corrected.

Tzvi I think what you're saying is completely incorrect, recently Neowin seems to be focussing on content over quality. In this thread you all seem to be ignoring the feedback your getting and just saying 'use the report button'. None of you have acknowledged that the quality has decreased in the past year or so, people seem to be writing ****ty articles just for the pay check.

I'm pretty sure the topic of discussion is why we're deleting critical comments. The answer is that for most simple grammatical/misspell mistakes, the proper course of action is to use the report button. It is more effective, and keeps the comments section cleaner. If you think the writing is just horrible in general, I'm sorry to hear that. We're always trying to improve where we can.

There has to be some form of quality control in place as well as fact checking - so many articles recently have been incorrect / silly spelling errors. I'd point them out - but oh wait all the comments have been deleted? lol To be honest I'd go through and highlight them all but it's 2340 so .. night.

We won't catch everything. That's assumed. We actually depend a lot on the reports system to fix our own fails. We appreciate all the reasonable feedback from that tool, and we fix everything as quickly as possible. If you want the site to be better, use the tool and help us. We aren't perfect.

That statement alone implies censorship without solid criteria. You just leave to the moderator to determine what's "meaningful discussion" and what's not. And with that criteria you're assuming that the quality of all the articles is good enough to warrant 'meaningful arguments', which is not the case.

I'm not a moderator, so i can't comment on specifics, but it isn't random. There are definitely criteria, and the mod team is trusted to uphold certain standards of moderation. That's what they're hired for.

And by the way, when people comment or point out typos, at least they can get replies. The report button is this obscure thing and the only way of knowing your message got through, is when the article is corrected. IF it's corrected.

Well, isn't that the point? I hear what you're saying, recognition is nice, and maybe that's a feature we can implement down the line, but the response is almost always "fix'd". Is that what you would want?

Tzvi I think what you're saying is completely incorrect, recently Neowin seems to be focussing on content over quality. In this thread you all seem to be ignoring the feedback your getting and just saying 'use the report button'. None of you have acknowledged that the quality has decreased in the past year or so, people seem to be writing ****ty articles just for the pay check.

There has to be some form of quality control in place as well as fact checking - so many articles recently have been incorrect / silly spelling errors. I'd point them out - but oh wait all the comments have been deleted? lol To be honest I'd go through and highlight them all but it's 2340 so .. night.

We definitely do not do this for the pay check. I can tell you that much. Please cite your "content over quality" - you can't make these kinds of rash accusations without backing it up. Edit: You know Engadget and Giz make mistakes too right? They're just caught faster because people a) Report them b) They have an entire team dedicated to this.

On the "ignoring feedback" topic you are incorrect here. We accepted your feedback, and have told you our procedures. I'm confused as to how we're ignoring it when we're telling you how to rectify the issue.

We won't catch everything. That's assumed. We actually depend a lot on the reports system to fix our own fails. We appreciate all the reasonable feedback from that tool, and we fix everything as quickly as possible. If you want the site to be better, use the tool and help us. We aren't perfect.

This. (Y)

[...]

And by the way, when people comment or point out typos, at least they can get replies. The report button is this obscure thing and the only way of knowing your message got through, is when the article is corrected. IF it's corrected.

The comment section isn't the right place to mention any typos or other errors. In fact, it's not a good way to mention it at all. With the report system, there's an entire section dedicated to reported issues which can be seen by the staff to be handled accordingly.

I anybody copy/pastes, we sic lyle on them

What about NOT copypasting, but trying to pass something as news when it was first reported by someone else, without giving proper source? I mean I REALLY doubt any news is copypasted, but there's the typical case of news spreading like wildfire all over the net that are way too random to have been discovered at the same time by different 'news sites' like neowin. Properly citing the source doesnt hurt

I've been on both sides of the fence. The guys at Neowin do a good job and for no charge to you. I have posted comments (since I stepped down as admin) and some have been removed and yes it's frustrating for these to be removed as an ordinary member. I've also witnessed people bomb my stories at Neowin with stupid comments and that's even more annoying. No-one likes criticism but it's always best to take it on the chin and move along.

What about NOT copypasting, but trying to pass something as news when it was first reported by someone else, without giving proper source? I mean I REALLY doubt any news is copypasted, but there's the typical case of news spreading like wildfire all over the net that are way too random to have been discovered at the same time by different 'news sites' like neowin. Properly citing the source doesnt hurt

We do cite the source, we just do it inline, many others do this, and it looks tidier.

I've been on both sides of the fence. The guys at Neowin do a good job and for no charge to you. I have posted comments (since I stepped down as admin) and some have been removed and yes it's frustrating for these to be removed as an ordinary member. I've also witnessed people bomb my stories at Neowin with stupid comments and that's even more annoying. No-one likes criticism but it's always best to take it on the chin and move along.

(Y)

What about NOT copypasting, but trying to pass something as news when it was first reported by someone else, without giving proper source? I mean I REALLY doubt any news is copypasted, but there's the typical case of news spreading like wildfire all over the net that are way too random to have been discovered at the same time by different 'news sites' like neowin. Properly citing the source doesnt hurt

There was this same discussion months ago about this topic:

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/986524-please-neowin-start-linking-sources-properly/

My take is that some other sites place source links at the bottom, as what they actually write on their end is a small blurb (which more often than not tends to be sarcastic and humourous).

Agreed. I called a person a name ONCE a year or so back and I get a warning against me and my post edited/deleted. I see people doing it all the time and their posts are not removed at all.

There is a button called "Report" plus that mods here have real life too and can't be active 24/7 just to check every bad word on the forum. Most of the time when we delete, edit or warn users we get those reports from the users here in Neowin.

Next time report it and see what we do about it.

To get on the point immediately, what's up with you guys lately deleting comments that suggest a news post / article is wrong / crap? We can't give feedback anymore?

EDIT: Also, why not add a dislike button too?

I don't think "Crappy article is crappy." stands as 'feedback', but more bashing the author. This only leads to further negative comments from other members.

If anyone has an issue with the author/article, just shoot them a PM and explain why. Stating "Crappy article is crappy." isn't exactly leaving us with much to work off of. I've received an email in the past where someone told me to "f-off" and that my "article sucked". I immediately replied once I read it and asked why, turns out the sender was 'under the influence' and apologized.

It's really easy to tell somebody they suck, or a company sucks, or a certain product sucks, but hardly anyone explains why.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Well I've done a grand total of nothing, and it now clocks between 2010mhz and 1995mhz (stock is 1710mhz) and hovers around 80c, warmer than it used to, but tolerable clocks seem to have returned. Thanks for all the advice on this thread. Will review the evidence and make a choice.
    • Audacious 4.6.1 by Razvan Serea Audacious is a lightweight, open-source audio player that emphasizes simplicity, performance, and sound quality. Designed for Linux, Windows, and macOS, it supports a wide range of audio formats, internet radio streaming, and playlist management. Users can customize the interface with Winamp-style skins or modern themes, making it flexible for different preferences. Audacious also includes an equalizer, advanced audio effects, and a plugin system for extending functionality. Its low resource usage makes it especially suitable for older computers or users who value efficiency without sacrificing playback quality. Audacious key features: High audio quality – delivers clean, gapless playback with minimal distortion. Wide format support – plays MP3, FLAC, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, WAV, WMA, and more. Internet radio streaming – supports Shoutcast, Icecast, and other online streams. Winamp skin support – classic, nostalgic look for users who prefer the old-school style. Modern GTK-based interface – clean, simple UI with a more modern feel. Customizable themes – change appearance through skins and themes. Advanced playlist management – organize, save, and edit playlists with ease. Equalizer – fine-tune audio output with a built-in graphical equalizer. Audio effects – built-in DSP options like crossfade, replay gain, and more. Plugin system – extend functionality with additional components. File metadata support – displays and organizes music based on tags. Drag-and-drop support – quickly add songs or playlists. Global hotkey support – control playback without switching windows. Bit-perfect output modes – bypass system mixers for pure audio output. ReplayGain support – normalizes track loudness automatically. Cue sheet support – play entire albums from a single audio file with .cue. MPRIS2 integration – integrates with Linux desktop environments for media controls. Advanced resampling options – adjust playback quality with different resampler settings. Gapless playback – seamless transition between tracks encoded properly. Crossfade plugin – blend one song into the next smoothly. Last.fm scrobbling plugin – track listening history online. Remote control support – control Audacious via command-line or scripts. Lyrics plugin – display song lyrics if available. Alarm / timer plugin – start or stop playback at set times. SOX resampler plugin – high-quality resampling for audiophiles. Spectrum analyzer / visualization plugins – visual feedback while playing music. Headphone crossfeed effect – simulates speaker listening for headphones. Customizable buffer size – tweak latency and playback smoothness. Audacious 4.6.1 changelog: Use XDG cache dir to store temporary files (#1817) Accept embedded lyrics in more cases (#1818) Bump .so and plugin ABI versions retrospectively (#1819) Include Georgian translation (#1820) Fix build on systems using musl instead of glibc (#1823) Download: Audacious 4.6.1 | 48.2 MB (Open Source) Download: Portable Audacious 4.6.1 | 69.8 MB View: Audacious Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • I really wonder if this has to do with the built in VPN or "private DNS" of browsers that trip up legal requirements like cookie consent and Cloudflare (to avoid all the botnet attacks we get). And BTW some botnets still manage to get past Cloudflare, we are constantly having to tweak it to block malicious traffic that ultimately cause a DDoS.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      197
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      142
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      89
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      80
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!