Archive

Posts Tagged ‘rating’

Article Screening & Rating

December 16, 2010 6 comments

I belong to a web site where articles need to be screened and rated by members before they are published. While the article is in the screening room, the author’s name isn’t visible but the country it is directed at is. If it is directed at the global community there is no flag, otherwise a small image of an American, Canadian, Australian, etc flag appears next to the article name.

There are members who publish articles daily, weekly and sometimes occasionally. Some of these members never screen articles, and if they do, it seems that they only screen the articles their friends have posted. I have no proof of this, but just something I’ve observed.

Now, I don’t know if it’s the same people, because the screening is anonymous, but there are members who pick and choose the articles they will read. If the article has an American flag on it, it goes through the screening process fairly quickly. If it’s designated as global or another country, it can sit in the room for hours, sometimes days.

A fellow member published one yesterday as American and it went through the screening process in 7 hours. It actually had 3 screenings, within about 5 minutes of it being posted. Yet others will sometimes sit for hours before even one person will take the time to screen it and rate it.

At this time, there are 8 articles that need screening, 2 global, 3 American, 1 Philippines, 1 New Zealand and 1 Indian, they were all screened by someone at 353am, but at 637am, someone went in and screened just one of those articles and it has an American flag.

Selective screening. I detest people who behave in this manner. What makes them think they are better than others?

One article was posted on Dec. 14 at 10:05PM,, marked from New Zealand and discussing the tragedy at the mine. It finally cleared the screening room on Dec 16th at 3:53AM. Almost 30 hours, yet the American flagged one cleared yesterday in 7 hours, it was posted after this one. The odd thing about this article from New Zealand is that it had only needed one additional screening since Dec 15th at 5:18PM. Lets list it out so you can get a better picture of the times.

  • Dec 14th at 10:05PM – posted to screening room
  • Dec 15th at 5:18PM  – needed just one more screening
  • Dec 16th at 3:53AM  – finally published

Why are these things happening?

I have my own little story about what happened with one of my articles, but then some are holding a grudge, so I’ve decided to report on this one. I hadn’t planned to cover this article, it’s just what I’ve observed.

Because I like seeing the good in people, I did not want to believe that members are doing this to other members.

This is as good a place as any to say this. So here goes!

If you want to play games, go ahead. You don’t want to screen, just run around following people, go ahead.

FYI    Since returning to the web site just over two months ago,  I have read, screened, rated over 1250 articles, including the archives! This doesn’t count the many I couldn’t rate or had no wish to comment on.

When I went into the screening room, I read and rated every article. I also provided feedback when necessary.

What’s that equal? About 500 per month average?

Well, no more. There is no requirement to screen at the site before posting articles, so maybe I will do like the rest of them.

Now I know I am only one person, but like I showed you in the example above, just one person is all that’s needed sometimes to finally get your article published.

This is what’s bugging me today!

🙂

leave a comment »

© 2010-2011 Things in life I find annoying

Advertisements