Editor Log: January 2005 (idea)

I’ve been carrying a mop and bucket around the place for a while now, and have had time to formulate a few editorial credos (thought I was going to say “philosophies”, eh!). Here’s some of my thoughts …

Second Opinions: I believe wholeheartedly in second opinions – both here and IRL. Of course, I’m willing and able to put my foot down, make decisions, and stand by ‘em - something that never endeared me to IT management. However, I’m not perfect (yeah, it was news to me, too) and sometimes I like to test my thoughts against those of my fellow admins. Frequently this turns into a learning experience for both of us, and almost always the database wins.

Supersession: When I’ve encountered a writeup that seems to have been superseded by other writeups in the node, my first thought used to be whether that writeup should go, and sometimes go it did. However, another point of view (from a wiser but not presumably older head) opined that often such writeups can act as a quick summary of the subsequent writeups. Now, I consider whether the writeup in question does indeed provide such a summary – and if so, I leave it alone, or get a second opinion. Mostly, though, I leave the WU alone.

Signing Klaproths: From reading old editor logs, I got enough opinions on this one to last me for the rest of my life. In fact, I got plenty of opinions on everything and Everything. Therefore, I’m adding mine to the pile. Current policy appears to be that klaproths should almost always be signed, and I agree. In fact, I held that belief long before I became an editor. It’s one of my principles that things said and opinions expressed can’t mean much if a person’s not willing to “own up” to having said them. I mean what I say, and I approved this message.

Possible copyright violations: I’m not making the call – that’s what the Content Salvage Team does. I’ll refer any questions to that desk.

Cools: If a writeup is outstanding, I C! it because I think it needs to be seen by as many readers as possible, or it should be brought back to attention. I admit to being a bit reserved with C!s, because I want them to mean something: for example, to highlight exceptional quality, or to encourage more of the same.

Fixxin Tyops and Problums: As I mentioned, I’ve fixed many typos on the fly – minor ones, mind you – without messaging the noder. Grammar or formatting problems always get a message to the noder. After reading the various opinions, and thinking about it, I’ve decided:

1. If the user hasn’t been seen for a while, I’ll go ahead and fix it. One can only see so many “it’s” before the urge to fix takes over.
2. If the user is current, I’ll send a message, because I believe pointing the problem out may cause the noder to consider why there’s a problem. If not, I’m glad to explain and help.

In other news:

• Welcomed and assisted still more new noders. Keep 'em comin'!
• Audited: Palpz
• New mentee: wilsoniandemocracy
• Trimmed the hedges:
  • Sunshine: advised noder of multiple “it’s” that should’ve been “its”. Noder quite cooperative.
  • fickle: a one-line definition, that added nothing to Webster’s, by an apparently fled noder.
  • gone crazy: Another daylog in the wrong place.
  • money jungle: old writeup superseded by new one.
  • Journal of Mundane Behavior at the noder’s request.
  • karaoke: first two writeups superseded by new one.
  • inktomi: first writeup (by fled noder), superseded by subsequent writeups.
  • Assisted The Member of the Wedding with the cleanup of to anyone contemplating suicide
  • platonic solid: no justification for the first statement and nonsense for the second.
  • lemon curd: first writeup superseded by the second.
  • Nikolai Gogol: many errors fixed, noder apparently fled.

Happy New Year, everyone. Write well.