The blog attached

[RandBlade]

Not currently active, now we're at this site it could be interesting to have a blog that people update - may even ultimately attract new members, though just for a pure thing as to what could be interesting for us it could be good.

Any rules/guidelines as to who can post on the blog, what/when/where/why it should be done etc. And how?

[DecoyMilk]

Loki as an entry receiver/editor, one would presume?

[Loki]

I believe we had some guidelines before, but they're not set in stone. It should be something like 300-600 words (though we can make exceptions on the upper range of that); should be on something politics-related (contrary to Timmy's views, that includes most things that are policy-relevant, including high finance, and major technological breakthroughs); you should analyze the situation, giving some background, and perhaps mention something about the future; the place is geared toward an educated audience that's not an expert on the topics in question; and we don't have procedures for posting it yet, though I'm thinking we should post it here first, have people look through it for obvious mistakes, and then post it. Everyone who writes something will be given their own account on the blog. Let me know if I left something out.

Everything I said above is up for debate by the way.

Edit: another idea is to have a committee vote on each proposed blog post, with a 2/3 necessary for it to be approved. The only criterion would be the quality of the blog post.

[RandBlade]

Given that we are going to be the main people reading the blog as well as the forums, I think posting blog posts that have been posted already as threads is a tad redundant.

[Flixy]

Given that we are going to be the main people reading the blog as well as the forums, I think posting blog posts that have been posted already as threads is a tad redundant.

Well, if the blog is meant to attract new people that might still be a good thing?

[Loki]

Given that we are going to be the main people reading the blog as well as the forums, I think posting blog posts that have been posted already as threads is a tad redundant.

The idea is to get new people, as Flixy says. Plus there's no reason not to debate the blog in here after it's been posted. But when it's first posted here, people would only look at its quality and typos, not the substance.

[RandBlade]

As soon as somethings posted people will discuss and debate immediately, nor just point out typo's and such.

Why not just have members post directly onto the blog? Possibly have the blog be the first post on a new thread? If that's technically possible.

[DecoyMilk]

As soon as somethings posted people will discuss and debate immediately, nor just point out typo's and such.

Why not just have members post directly onto the blog? Possibly have the blog be the first post on a new thread? If that's technically possible.

It's definitely technically possible, as I have seen it on other websites

[Loki]

As soon as somethings posted people will discuss and debate immediately, nor just point out typo's and such.

Why not just have members post directly onto the blog? Possibly have the blog be the first post on a new thread? If that's technically possible.

Because we want some standards? I trust you to write intelligent things, but what happens when other people (especially new people) ask to do so? The reputation of the blog depends on the quality of its posts, and we don't want to be discredited because of some dumb people.

Another way of doing it would be to have the person make the post in General Discussion (or a sub-forum created for this purpose), and the same post in the editing area. People can automatically discuss it in the former, while in the latter, a few people would look at its quality and either approve it, offer some suggestions for revising, or reject it. The process should take no more than a day, and hopefully less.

[Flixy]

Because we want some standards? I trust you to write intelligent things, but what happens when other people (especially new people) ask to do so? The reputation of the blog depends on the quality of its posts, and we don't want to be discredited because of some dumb people.

Another way of doing it would be to have the person make the post in General Discussion (or a sub-forum created for this purpose), and the same post in the editing area. People can automatically discuss it in the former, while in the latter, a few people would look at its quality and either approve it, offer some suggestions for revising, or reject it. The process should take no more than a day, and hopefully less.

Or you could grant people blog-posting powers after submitting a certain number of accepted blogs, which proved they can post quality?

[Loki]

Or you could grant people blog-posting powers after submitting a certain number of accepted blogs, which proved they can post quality?

That's another option. It still entails an editing committee until that point is reached.

[Flixy]

That's another option. It still entails an editing committee until that point is reached.

That could consist of those with blog posting powers

[RandBlade]

Well, this is your idea, so go with what you say, but there are a few things you could do.

1: Allow pre-approved people to put up blog posts. New users would have to apply to be approved/prove themselves.

2: Alternatively act like slashdot/a science journal, have a way for people to post but they're not approved until someone else checks it. That way they're not automatically put through, but they're not discussed to death before they are.

Oddly enough, blogs (especially new ones) will struggle more from being inactive, than having typo's! The one blog I check daily, now Britain's biggest political website its so popular, the owner/prime-blogger frequently has typo's. But that doesn't take away from what he writes. Being first to the punch can also be an advantage for a blog, which approval-by-committee would deny. But most people here already watch out for typo's anyway.

[Loki]

Well, this is your idea, so go with what you say, but there are a few things you could do.

1: Allow pre-approved people to put up blog posts. New users would have to apply to be approved/prove themselves.

2: Alternatively act like slashdot/a science journal, have a way for people to post but they're not approved until someone else checks it. That way they're not automatically put through, but they're not discussed to death before they are.

Oddly enough, blogs (especially new ones) will struggle more from being inactive, than having typo's! The one blog I check daily, now Britain's biggest political website its so popular, the owner/prime-blogger frequently has typo's. But that doesn't take away from what he writes. Being first to the punch can also be an advantage for a blog, which approval-by-committee would deny. But most people here already watch out for typo's anyway.

1. I believe that is possible.

2. The problem with that is that it entails only one person checking it, and I don't think anyone wants to be at the whims of one person.

3. That person is also much better at what he does than we are at what we do. We shouldn't make mistakes that can be avoided.

[DecoyMilk]

Which blog is that, Rand? WOuld be interested to read it (And this one once it gets runnng too)

[Loki]

http://theworldforgotten.com/

[Flixy]

I do think it is important that if you do not accept a blog from someone, you should give clear and educational feedback, so he/she will try again. Otherwise it will discourage people from trying again.

One more thing: how about posting blogs in the forums as well, and instead of reactions on the blog, link to the forum thread? That way it is still discussed, but also more integrated with the forums.

[Loki]

I do think it is important that if you do not accept a blog from someone, you should give clear and educational feedback, so he/she will try again. Otherwise it will discourage people from trying again.

One more thing: how about posting blogs in the forums as well, and instead of reactions on the blog, link to the forum thread? That way it is still discussed, but also more integrated with the forums.

You mean have a link to the thread where the post is being discussed on the blog post? And yeah, I think the two should be integrated.

[RandBlade]

Well, blogs generally allow comments on the original blog-post, the comments could be a link to a thread here.

[Loki]

I'd support that.

[Hazir]

What happened to my post in this topic?

I suggested not allowing every member to post on the blog AND to use the forum as a breeding ground for the blog.

[Loki]

What happened to my post in this topic?

I suggested not allowing every member to post on the blog AND to use the forum as a breeding ground for the blog.

Kat deleted it.

Can you be more specific?

[Hazir]

Well, I can see your point of wanting to have some standards for the posts that wind up in the blog. I think you could try to achieve that by vetting members before they get posting rights on the blog. Posts on the blog could still be 'OT' for the forum and people could sharpen their (pen)knives in the forum. That way the people who hold the keys to the blog can get to know them and their aptitude in expressing their ideas. The forum then could work as a breeding ground for writing talent for the blog.

[Loki]

Well, I can see your point of wanting to have some standards for the posts that wind up in the blog. I think you could try to achieve that by vetting members before they get posting rights on the blog. Posts on the blog could still be 'OT' for the forum and people could sharpen their (pen)knives in the forum. That way the people who hold the keys to the blog can get to know them and their aptitude in expressing their ideas. The forum then could work as a breeding ground for writing talent for the blog.

So you don't think anyone should look over the blog posts of members who've posted before? I mean, everyone can have a bad day...

[Wraith]

I like Hazir's idea. Pre-approved authors only, with the forum as the talent breeding grounds. It'd probably be good if the blog articles went through a quick editing phase. The author keeps full control, but an editor or two goes over it to look for ways the writing can be cleared up, and maybe have somebody play devil's advocate with the author so the author has a chance to strengthen their article before it goes live.

Ideally, the time between submission and publishing should rarely be more than a day though.

[Loki]

I like Hazir's idea. Pre-approved authors only, with the forum as the talent breeding grounds. It'd probably be good if the blog articles went through a quick editing phase. The author keeps full control, but an editor or two goes over it to look for ways the writing can be cleared up, and maybe have somebody play devil's advocate with the author so the author has a chance to strengthen their article before it goes live.

Ideally, the time between submission and publishing should rarely be more than a day though.

That's basically what I had in mind. In a vast majority of the cases, the blog posts will either be good enough (or nearly so) or blatantly poor. Another pair of eyes helps a lot in terms of form and substance. I was thinking that we'll have maybe 5-6 editors, and as soon as say 2 give it a green light, it gets published (unless as many other editors disagree). The turnover should be pretty quick that way.

[wiggin]

In principle, I like the idea. I've posted a sample blog piece on the 'General Discussion' board, prefaced by a 'B:'. It's currently unpublished on the main blog page, but it can be upon acclamation. I imagine that in a normal vetting process, glaring errors or untried writers (whether factual or logical) would be gently addressed until the writer had improved to the point of reliably producing publishable material, after which they'd be added to the 'regulars' list. I think it would be nice for seasoned writers to cross-post such material to the forum for broader discussion as well, though of course not for editing (Wordpress commenting is a bit clunky compared to phpBB).

What do you guys think?

Ender

[Steely Glint]

Does anyone other than me know anything about making wordpress themes? 'cause it doesn't look that professional at the moment.

[Wraith]

Does anyone other than me know anything about making wordpress themes? 'cause it doesn't look that professional at the moment.

Almost no effort's gone into it yet. You volunteering to pretty it up?

[Steely Glint]

If there are other users that also know their way around wordpress, I'd rather do it in a collaborative mode.