Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal Short Circuit's Journal: Slashdot now a little less private, or "Watch What You Say" 22

Journal by Short Circuit

At 11:02 -0500 2006.12.04, Michael Mol wrote:

The "Submit" checkbox in journal writting is currently being
ignored---and treated as CHECKED.

That's not a bug, but a behavior change. Journal entries without a
checkbox are sent to the firehose, but come in at a lower score.

Thanks,
--
Chris Nandor chqtr@cbobk.pbz uggc://chqtr.arg/
Slashdot chqtr@fynfuqbg.bet uggc://fynfuqbg.bet/

(I ROT13'd part of the sig, to keep away the icky spiders.)

So, there, you go. Anything you write in your JEs now goes to the submission queue. Including this JE. (Hiya, editors! Love your work!)

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashdot now a little less private, or "Watch What You Say" More

Slashdot now a little less private, or "Watch What You Say"

Comments Filter:
  • And by interesting I mean what the fuck are they smoking?

    Journal != Submission

    If I wanted to submit a story, I'd use the goddamn submit story link.

    • Obviously, since the editors can't find any decent stories for the front page, they decided to increase their scope.

      Good to know. Now, the interesting bit. The checkbox has a little disclaimer that:

      Allow journal to be submitted as a story? If you do this:

      * Comments must be enabled
      * Discussion cannot be deleted (though journal can be)
      * If accepted, anyone will be allowed to post comments

      So, if they "accept" your submission
      • It definitely becomes an interesting matter should someone share with the zoo their thoughts in say, oooh I don't know, hiring a new person? Let's say the editors decide that it's an interesting subject suitable for the front page and post it there along with the usual trolling write up.

        Considering the quality of submissions to Slashdot in general, and Ask Slashdot in particular, I don't think it's a far fetched scenario.

        • That too. Despite all the "ask subset" JEs I do, it would never cross my mind to do an "ask slashdot". Uggg....
  • Ow. Now I have a big red handprint on my forehead where I slapped it.

    I'll just skip over all the ways in which I think this is a bad bit of UI implementation, and suggest that everyone who reads this (and is subscribed) go to the Firehose and give this JE a thumbs-up. JE writers really ought to know about this behavior change, so let's see if we can tell 'em.
  • What was "private" about journal entries?
    • Like a dim bar with a back-alley entrance, a Labyrinth, or even the Internet itself before Yahoo and Google, the Slashdot journalspace has been a place where you can chat with friends with a certain degree of privacy, and even anonymity.

      Journals were never easily accessible from the front page, and until the Firehose incorporated journals, there were only two ways you might encounter the journal of someone you didn't know. Either you clicked on one of their comments, or you happened across it through a key
      • Journals were never easily accessible from the front page, and until the Firehose incorporated journals, there were only two ways you might encounter the journal of someone you didn't know. Either you clicked on one of their comments, or you happened across it through a keyword search which isn't that easy to find in the first place.

        Or, like a few of us do, you can just "search" JEs with an empty keyword, and get a list of JEs organized chronologically. This [slashdot.org] link should do the trick.

        As for your summ
    • The journals have always been available online, but typically don't gather the attention of a front page posting. It's the difference between having a conversation between friends at a table and notifying the entire restaurant what exactly we're talking about.

      That seems less private to me.

      If I wish to ask my friends for advice, and in fact limit the ability of people to participate to those I consider to be friends, an editor can override that and open the discussion to a few hundred thousand people.

      That se
      • and that overrides the very purpose of having a 'no foes' restriction.
        • If I wanted trolls, I would just post to the front page to start with.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jamie ( 78724 ) *

          That is a very good point and is pretty clearly a bug. I've submitted this as a sf.net bug [sourceforge.net] which references this journal posting and brings up the other issues raised here. So we're aware of this now and will try to figure out how best to resolve it.

          Thanks to everyone for bringing this to our attention.

          • Thank you. My email about it got the standard response of, "But anyone can submit any URL as a story, so this is nothing new, what's the problem?"

            The problem is that we rely on the editors to know the difference between a story and an anecdote, and to ignore those which we purposefully designate as limited-response anecdotes... and to respect that difference. I think one reason for the backlash on this one is that it gives an appearance- accurate or otherwise- of that control being ignored, and for those of

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by jamie ( 78724 ) *

              Yeah, we all (Rob and the programming team) talked this over at length today. We all understand that this is an issue and don't want to alienate users who prefer their journals remain private, so we all agreed from the start that we have to change this somehow, so the talk was about how it's going to change. I think we've come up with a good solution and we'll try to push that change live as soon as we can, but that probably won't happen until next week. This week's commits are scheduled to be complete with

              • As a bona fide community, we appreciate your attention. Is there anywhere we can go to get details on the new behavior, once a solution has been worked out?
                • Thanks. I think some communication on it would go a long way towards resolving it, actually. I know it has worked that way on me. Editorial silence is the worst loyalty-killer in the world.

                  Not that we need to be babysat (No matter how much we may claim that we do) but that the sense of inclusion is important.

                  I'll watch for later stuff on the subject.

                  s

  • I voted this journal entry up in Firehose.
  • slashdot and its collection of editors prove to the world, and more importantly, their own dedicated user base, they don't have the first clue as to how to run a website.

    good job everyone. splendid move.

    this is a stupid idea. stop acting like a digg wanna-be. that's really it isn't it? digg is really starting to eat away at your market share, so now you've got to come up with *something* to continue to be relevant?
  • I wondered why people I didn't know, who weren't listed as friends, were commenting in my open journal entries, even when I hadn't written any comments in /. stories recently.

    • I saw one of your JEs get posted to the front page...That was a bit of a surprise. :)
      • "The real surprise was how few trolls I got." :)

        No, really, which one?
        More likely, if you're not joking, you saw a JE of mine, rejected, before an article by someone else on the same topic, sometimes a day or two later.
        That's happened at least 3 times. :(

Slashdot Top Deals

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine

Close