Tip.It Times - 11th December 2011

[The_Fray]

Here's an idea: if, when reading, you find you don't like something, stop reading it. Or offer some thoughts on how the article could have been improved. Not simply "it shouldn't have been published." No, you have no right over that. You are the reader, not the publisher. Your only right is to offer criticism of the content being published. "It shouldn't have been published" isn't a criticism, it's a vacuous complaint that doesn't tell anyone what was wrong with the article that could have been dealt with in other ways besides removing it/withholding from publication. If the article in question was libelous, your objection might actually hold some ground, but in that case I'd figure that issue would have been pre-emptively dealt with. Just, really? <.<

 

With regards to the other interpretation of the statement. Fine, I see your point. Then again, is it hard to click the back button?

I cannot provide "thoughts" on how to improve something that was completely based on someone's subjective misinformed opinion.

 

I have been a reader for a long time, if I see an article that is clearly below the standard then I reserve the right to call out the writer and/or post criticism. This includes the statement "this shouldn't have been published" as in such an article was not worthy of being posted for the Times.

 

"Then again, is it hard to click the back button?"

 

Yes it is. I look forward to reading the Times every week.

[RU_Insane]

Here's an idea: if, when reading, you find you don't like something, stop reading it. Or offer some thoughts on how the article could have been improved. Not simply "it shouldn't have been published." No, you have no right over that. You are the reader, not the publisher. Your only right is to offer criticism of the content being published. "It shouldn't have been published" isn't a criticism, it's a vacuous complaint that doesn't tell anyone what was wrong with the article that could have been dealt with in other ways besides removing it/withholding from publication. If the article in question was libelous, your objection might actually hold some ground, but in that case I'd figure that issue would have been pre-emptively dealt with. Just, really? <.<

 

With regards to the other interpretation of the statement. Fine, I see your point. Then again, is it hard to click the back button?

I cannot provide "thoughts" on how to improve something that was completely based on someone's subjective misinformed opinion.

 

I have been a reader for a long time, if I see an article that is clearly below the standard then I reserve the right to call out the writer and/or post criticism. This includes the statement "this shouldn't have been published" as in such an article was not worthy of being posted for the Times.

 

"Then again, is it hard to click the back button?"

 

Yes it is. I look forward to reading the Times every week.

 

Here's the thing though. Tip.it Times EP is not solely concerned with the quality of an article, that I can assure you. Criticizing an article for its supposed lack of literary quality (real or subjective) supposes otherwise. For some objectively bad articles, it's easy to see why they should not have been published on basis of quality, but maybe a few passed the test because they filled a quota. Likewise there are some articles that have been praised for their quality (in various aspects) that I think, while not severe enough to be withheld from publication, were not immune from criticism.

 

The Times is not a professional publication, which makes it even harder to pinpoint a certain threshold of quality that passes a candidate article onto publication. The EP is handled by non-salaried staff each with varying degrees of literary experience, taste and skill. There's no magical precedent of objective quality against which a prospective article may be accepted for further dissemination -- that is solely up to the people handling EP policy, which is concerned, again, with more than the raw literary quality of an article, taking into account quotas (if the spaces for this week's articles are filled, your article may be bumped back to next week) and perhaps other factors.

 

Even if you don't take the criticism literally, I still agree with Crocefisso when he says you presuppose knowledge of EP policy with that claim, because then you get into two different ideas behind policy -- one concerned with "quality" and the other not so much. And when I say your opinion doesn't reflect reality, I'm not saying that since your opinion's subjective, it's invalid; I'm saying your opinion's irrelevant when you consider the criteria behind the selection process, despite the fact it may be correct about the quality of the aforementioned article.

 

Thus, you and I were addressing two different points in your criticism. I should have clarified this; my apologies.

[The_Fray]

Here's an idea: if, when reading, you find you don't like something, stop reading it. Or offer some thoughts on how the article could have been improved. Not simply "it shouldn't have been published." No, you have no right over that. You are the reader, not the publisher. Your only right is to offer criticism of the content being published. "It shouldn't have been published" isn't a criticism, it's a vacuous complaint that doesn't tell anyone what was wrong with the article that could have been dealt with in other ways besides removing it/withholding from publication. If the article in question was libelous, your objection might actually hold some ground, but in that case I'd figure that issue would have been pre-emptively dealt with. Just, really? <.<

 

With regards to the other interpretation of the statement. Fine, I see your point. Then again, is it hard to click the back button?

I cannot provide "thoughts" on how to improve something that was completely based on someone's subjective misinformed opinion.

 

I have been a reader for a long time, if I see an article that is clearly below the standard then I reserve the right to call out the writer and/or post criticism. This includes the statement "this shouldn't have been published" as in such an article was not worthy of being posted for the Times.

 

"Then again, is it hard to click the back button?"

 

Yes it is. I look forward to reading the Times every week.

 

Here's the thing though. Tip.it Times EP is not solely concerned with the quality of an article, that I can assure you. Criticizing an article for its supposed lack of literary quality (real or subjective) supposes otherwise. For some objectively bad articles, it's easy to see why they should not have been published on basis of quality, but maybe a few passed the test because they filled a quota. Likewise there are some articles that have been praised for their quality (in various aspects) that I think, while not severe enough to be withheld from publication, were not immune from criticism.

 

The Times is not a professional publication, which makes it even harder to pinpoint a certain threshold of quality that passes a candidate article onto publication. The EP is handled by non-salaried staff each with varying degrees of literary experience, taste and skill. There's no magical precedent of objective quality against which a prospective article may be accepted for further dissemination -- that is solely up to the people handling EP policy, which is concerned, again, with more than the raw literary quality of an article, taking into account quotas (if the spaces for this week's articles are filled, your article may be bumped back to next week) and perhaps other factors.

 

Even if you don't take the criticism literally, I still agree with Crocefisso when he says you presuppose knowledge of EP policy with that claim, because then you get into two different ideas behind policy -- one concerned with "quality" and the other not so much. And when I say your opinion doesn't reflect reality, I'm not saying that since your opinion's subjective, it's invalid; I'm saying your opinion's irrelevant when you consider the criteria behind the selection process, despite the fact it may be correct about the quality of the aforementioned article.

 

Thus, you and I were addressing two different points in your criticism. I should have clarified this; my apologies.

I don't give two shits about the EP poilicy. I should have clarified that, my apologies. Unless you post such a policy for me and the users to look at, I will just disregard it as a figment of your imagination. You cannot hide behind something you have not divulged to rest of us.

 

I am simply commenting as a long time reader... For me there is already a standard, something that has been established by previous writers. Lately I feel the quality has dropped off, hence my comments about some articles failing to meet the standard.

[Guest jrhairychest]

I personally invite those who have a different opinion to write a guest article and submit it to be published on the websites. I do sense the frustration of seeing a lot of the same opinions being put out without opposing arguments, so please, do write an article. I personally am not able to adequately write one supporting the opposing argument, and would like to see one who has a strong opinion for this side to do so.

 

Did that recently by submitting an article on players subjecting themselves to grinding. The EP felt that my article was more suited to a rant topic, even though there was no actual ranting within the article. They also felt the format was unsuitable even though I'd introduced, stated points/arguments then concluded. It seemed they wanted more of an essay, probably with citations, even though the article was purely an opinion based piece and I wanted to push more questions at the community to itself. There was no feedback on the article suggesting improvements. If my article was crap then fine, but I get the feeling its a little more to it than that ;-). Feel free to take a look at it if you want as at least I'd get some sort of feedback on it.

 

From my own point of view, there seems to be some sort of political motivations behind what the EP panel publishes. They're very quick to push out their own articles even though at times the quality is questionable and the length at times is ridiculous. I don't particularly enjoy reading a lot of it these days. The various guest articles are much more to the point and are a much more enjoyable read. It seems that the EP are also allowed to rant in their own articles, mainly about Jagex, without question. This, on a fansite :-s

[ForsakenMage]

[hide]

Some additional things that need to be established:

 

a) The Times has always been a subjective publication - people may wish it to be otherwise, but it's not.

 

b) 'Appropriateness' is something that only those with some knolwedge of the Times' Editorial Policy can really claim to be fit to speak on. Anything else is just a judgement, not some sort of concrete statement of the sort that we often see thrown around these threads. (Eg: "That shouldn't have been published.")

If the Times is subjective then we should be able to give our subjective opinion on whether something should be published or not. "That shouldn't have been published" can just as easily be in interpreted as a subjective opinion.

 

I personally invite those who have a different opinion to write a guest article and submit it to be published on the websites. I do sense the frustration of seeing a lot of the same opinions being put out without opposing arguments, so please, do write an article. I personally am not able to adequately write one supporting the opposing argument, and would like to see one who has a strong opinion for this side to do so.

 

=P Just make sure it's readable so that editing doesn't hurt our heads and I'll love you just for that hehe.

 

Some people have to bear in mind as well that sometimes opinions that are stated (as in, objective ones, not the subjective ones that have been described) can hit a nerve and come off as more offensive that intended. So please do make sure that when you do read these articles that you try to take it with a grain of salt as well. We all don't need to agree, but be able to at least see the different view points being presented.

 

Again, I personally would be happy to see another article showing this "other side" that many are mentioning already, and will even be happy to communicate further on the matter as well should you provide us with an article that you want some feedback on before sending. :)

If this is the case then why cannot some writers manage to take opinions posted over here with "a grain of salt".

 

I do agree that the Times needs a wider range of writers though, it seems to have the same feel every time. I do not know where we will find such writers though. I am just a reader, like many other simply does not have time to write articles for the Times. I appreciate those who put an effort into writing these articles but when I see something published that I find lacking to my taste then I am more likelier to make a post. There are other weeks when I like the articles being published but I do not comment because I see no point in making posts such as "Good article, I agree." as they seem increasingly repetitive.[/hide]

I cannot answer for those who cannot take criticism very well, so I won't be able to address that point. Criticism, both good and bad, in my opinion, does help. In general though, threads for the articles should focus on the content of the article, so to avoid further discussion that would derail this discussion thread, please feel free to PM me if you wish and I'll forward that feedback to the EP.

 

[hide]

I personally invite those who have a different opinion to write a guest article and submit it to be published on the websites. I do sense the frustration of seeing a lot of the same opinions being put out without opposing arguments, so please, do write an article. I personally am not able to adequately write one supporting the opposing argument, and would like to see one who has a strong opinion for this side to do so.

 

Did that recently by submitting an article on players subjecting themselves to grinding. The EP felt that my article was more suited to a rant topic, even though there was no actual ranting within the article. They also felt the format was unsuitable even though I'd introduced, stated points/arguments then concluded. It seemed they wanted more of an essay, probably with citations, even though the article was purely an opinion based piece and I wanted to push more questions at the community to itself. There was no feedback on the article suggesting improvements. If my article was crap then fine, but I get the feeling its a little more to it than that ;-). Feel free to take a look at it if you want as at least I'd get some sort of feedback on it.

 

From my own point of view, there seems to be some sort of political motivations behind what the EP panel publishes. They're very quick to push out their own articles even though at times the quality is questionable and the length at times is ridiculous. I don't particularly enjoy reading a lot of it these days. The various guest articles are much more to the point and are a much more enjoyable read. It seems that the EP are also allowed to rant in their own articles, mainly about Jagex, without question. This, on a fansite :-s[/hide]

I don't recall your article off the top of my head, but I'll go have a read through and PM a response when I can. :)

 

Let's just get back on topic, guys. Let's focus on the content of the article. Any worries about how the EP is being run, forward concerns to Tripsis please. :P

[Bxpprod]

I grow weary - at an increasing rate - at the same things being posted over and over again. It has been made abundantly clear that the a solid majority of TIFers do not like the metagaming sub-community (or just the plain lovers of efficiency), as demonstrated by the undeniably one-sided, repeated statements of this position made in the times and on the forum itself (not to mention that members of said sub-community were cahsed off the forum).

 

I can't speak for others, but personally, the point was made previously, quite clearly. We don't like it. So why, I must wonder, why is it repeated over and over in the Times? Surely we have a bigger scope of topics than simply EFFICIENCY IS BAD YOU SHOULD BE PLAYING FOR FUN (but if they tell you to play for efficiency, they are bad ;) )

 

tl;dr?

 

[Troacctid]

Well, the article was written by someone who pretty clearly didn't understand the topic very well. I think that much is abundantly transparent. It would be nice to see an article about efficiency from someone who knew what they were talking about, rather than knocking down strawmen. No offense meant, of course.

[tripsis]

Guys, please. I'm going to make one final comment before I want everyone to please quit jumping down each others throats, harassing the Editorial Panel, making unfair/speculative claims about "policy," and just get back on topic.

 

You guys are perfectly welcome to dislike articles and disagree with them. Articles are there to present ideas and sometimes, generate controversy. Any kind of response from an article is appreciated - be it "great article - I love those ideas" or "I really disagree with those opinions! Here's a counter idea ..."

 

The members of the Editorial Panel are volunteers and have to work under strict deadlines. Right now we have barely over 5 regular authors and 5 regular editors. These guys are responsible for writing at least once a month. When you write that often about a game that doesn't always have significant changes, you honestly run out of fresh ideas and new perspectives. It's understandable that every now and then we beat a dead horse or do our best to write articles but occasionally come up short.. and the best part is, we get very little help from the community.

 

Our readers are so incredibly critical and yet they do very little to help. It's easy for you to sit back and judge or criticize the Editorial Panel, but could you do what they do? Could you write a new article every 2-4 weeks? If you could, then why aren't you? Why aren't you submitting guest articles? We do get the occasional guest article and we do our best to publish as many as we can, but we also try to be selective so we can please our community by providing them with quality entertaining work. On the one hand we get butchered for turning down work, but on the other hand we get butchered for not having "good enough" work. Which one do you guys want?

 

I beg you guys to please be respectful and understanding of the effort we put in to make the Times available to you guys regularly. If you want to see it improve, then be the improvement. Send me a PM with a guest article, apply to join the panel full time, send authors PMs with topic ideas, or at the very least, be respectful when commenting on these threads. I am not asking you to like all our articles or agree with what is written, but I am asking you to respect the volunteers who work so incredibly hard to make this feature available to you all every week of the year.

[Bxpprod]

These guys are responsible for writing at least once a month. When you write that often about a game that doesn't always have significant changes, you honestly run out of fresh ideas and new perspectives. It's understandable that every now and then we beat a dead horse or do our best to write articles but occasionally come up short.

 

With all the aspects of the game we could delve into, it seems far, far, far too convenient that the one that spikes its head up over and over is the efficiency argument, and more correctly - efficiency is BAD.

 

There may not be many changes to the game, but there is MUCH more to talk about than simply the same buzz topic that is going to draw many pats on teh back for being anti-efficiency (as well as heated contention from those who a) dont give a hoot about being told how to play the game - either efficient or otherwise - or b) are infact, part of the efficiency crowd, who, are simply being attacked the whole time, regardless of a lack of names, we know who is being spoken about).

[tripsis]

These guys are responsible for writing at least once a month. When you write that often about a game that doesn't always have significant changes, you honestly run out of fresh ideas and new perspectives. It's understandable that every now and then we beat a dead horse or do our best to write articles but occasionally come up short.

 

With all the aspects of the game we could delve into, it seems far, far, far too convenient that the one that spikes its head up over and over is the efficiency argument, and more correctly - efficiency is BAD.

 

There may not be many changes to the game, but there is MUCH more to talk about than simply the same buzz topic that is going to draw many pats on teh back for being anti-efficiency (as well as heated contention from those who a) dont give a hoot about being told how to play the game - either efficient or otherwise - or b) are infact, part of the efficiency crowd, who, are simply being attacked the whole time, regardless of a lack of names, we know who is being spoken about).

As was said before, if anyone wants to submit a pro-efficiency article, they are welcome to. But guess how many we have received. Zero. That's why we have published zero (at least recently). And I assume that none of our current authors are that big on efficiency themselves so it's difficult for them to write from that perspective.

 

The Editorial Panel has nothing against efficiency and we welcome all topics when it comes to articles. As long as an article is well written, well argued, and respectful, we will have no problem with publishing it.

 

And if you have ideas for topics (which you implied that you do), I would encourage you to PM some authors with your ideas. Most things worth talking about get discussed here in General Discussion before the Times is released so by the time publication comes around, it's considered a dead horse.

[Lose No Hope]

Our readers are so incredibly critical and yet they do very little to help. It's easy for you to sit back and judge or criticize the Editorial Panel, but could you do what they do? Could you write a new article every 2-4 weeks? If you could, then why aren't you? Why aren't you submitting guest articles? We do get the occasional guest article and we do our best to publish as many as we can, but we also try to be selective so we can please our community by providing them with quality entertaining work. On the one hand we get butchered for turning down work, but on the other hand we get butchered for not having "good enough" work. Which one do you guys want?

 

I beg you guys to please be respectful and understanding of the effort we put in to make the Times available to you guys regularly. If you want to see it improve, then be the improvement. Send me a PM with a guest article, apply to join the panel full time, send authors PMs with topic ideas, or at the very least, be respectful when commenting on these threads. I am not asking you to like all our articles or agree with what is written, but I am asking you to respect the volunteers who work so incredibly hard to make this feature available to you all every week of the year.

I think I know better than most people posting on this thread how the EP system works and about the deadlines, stress, and occasional last minute frenzy the EP faces. In my time on the editorial panel, which was almost a year, this was the type of article I didn't want to see. So no, any pro-efficiency article submitted would only do similar but with the tables turned against those who aren't metagamers. I don't mind articles about types of gameplay that simply observe them. What I do mind are ones that criticize a group or make assumptions that they are not having fun and are only grinding the game miserably. I'm tired of both sides fighting over which way of playing the game is better. We all have different tastes when it comes to what we enjoy doing, so why can't we just accept each other's way of playing?

[sees_all1]

There may not be many changes to the game, but there is MUCH more to talk about than simply the same buzz topic that is going to draw many pats on teh back for being anti-efficiency

How about you write an article about something different? We would love to have a different perspective.

[Alg]

I'm tired of both sides fighting over which way of playing the game is better. We all have different tastes when it comes to what we enjoy doing, so why can't we just accept each other's way of playing?

Oh god, this.

[Fresi]

The Sisyphus Effect article:

 

Interesting read :) I personally think we might have to wait 6 or more months before we see the next big change to any of the clan stuff that has come out this year. Maby they did not manage to hit everything spot on, but i think they at least made a good effort whit the time given, and I enjoy all of the new clan features, but would not mind some tweaks here and there.

jagax is not known for making things perfect the first time over, but they do listen and they do change :)

Btw, i like the clan world idea, as long as you can create ally between clans, allowing smaller clans to also have a chance to fight together ;), I can see clans coming together plotting surprise attacks on different cities :D

 

The Critique of Pure Efficiency article:

Some consider getting fast xp fun, something i think the article is missing :) And even those that usually aren't that efficient, like me, sometimes go for the fastest way, how ever boring it might be, to reach some goal fast.

Oh and the food, yes u go to a restaurant to enjoy the food, but some eat the hot meal real fast to get to the dessert :D

 

Ty for writing the articles, enjoy seeing what others think, even if it might not agree with my own thoughts. :lol:

 

edit: i use far to many smileys :P

[The_Fray]

Our readers are so incredibly critical and yet they do very little to help. It's easy for you to sit back and judge or criticize the Editorial Panel, but could you do what they do? Could you write a new article every 2-4 weeks? If you could, then why aren't you? Why aren't you submitting guest articles? We do get the occasional guest article and we do our best to publish as many as we can, but we also try to be selective so we can please our community by providing them with quality entertaining work. On the one hand we get butchered for turning down work, but on the other hand we get butchered for not having "good enough" work. Which one do you guys want?

 

I beg you guys to please be respectful and understanding of the effort we put in to make the Times available to you guys regularly. If you want to see it improve, then be the improvement. Send me a PM with a guest article, apply to join the panel full time, send authors PMs with topic ideas, or at the very least, be respectful when commenting on these threads. I am not asking you to like all our articles or agree with what is written, but I am asking you to respect the volunteers who work so incredibly hard to make this feature available to you all every week of the year.

I think I know better than most people posting on this thread how the EP system works and about the deadlines, stress, and occasional last minute frenzy the EP faces. In my time on the editorial panel, which was almost a year, this was the type of article I didn't want to see. So no, any pro-efficiency article submitted would only do similar but with the tables turned against those who aren't metagamers. I don't mind articles about types of gameplay that simply observe them. What I do mind are ones that criticize a group or make assumptions that they are not having fun and are only grinding the game miserably. I'm tired of both sides fighting over which way of playing the game is better. We all have different tastes when it comes to what we enjoy doing, so why can't we just accept each other's way of playing?

I agree with this wholeheartedly. You phrased it more eloquently than I ever could. This was my point from the start, the article was just waiting to be flamed from the efficiency crowd. An article doing the opposite would incite a similar response from the other side.

 

Which brings it back to my point, if such an article is just going to cause headaches and arguments (including posts being removed), why have it on the Times? I know the Times people can't satisfy everyone, but the least they could do is not incite flaming by alienating one side.

 

I will admit that I can step too far at times, but I never take an argument personally and I hope that none of you do the same. I have nothing against the writer of the article nor anyone on the EP.

Edited December 13, 2011 by The_Fray

[Bxpprod]

There may not be many changes to the game, but there is MUCH more to talk about than simply the same buzz topic that is going to draw many pats on teh back for being anti-efficiency

How about you write an article about something different? We would love to have a different perspective.

 

YOU (or any member of the editorial panel) could write one just the same, from a "hey, maybe the efficiency people aren't actually that bad" or "efficiency: here's why it's good" stance. Instead, the approach moving forward is to attack the topic with blinkers on.

 

Your response puzzles me - as does Tripsis'. We are asked to provide praise or constructive criticism through these topics, and yet, instead of taking heed, it simply becomes a matter of "well, it's not our fault we repeat the same stuff with the same view, YOU should fix it, not us." Now, if you don't want to hear the criticism - or are going to treat it the same way - why exactly ask for opinions? "TipIt Times is now up. Here's the link" Lock thread.

 

Surely you as a team, could look outside the tiny realm of OH METAGAMERS ARE BAD into other arenas. Heck, the creative pieces aren't repeating the same thing over and over, maybe, just maybe, if we have run out of topics and are resorting to repeating the same opinion, we should move solely to comics and creative pieces.

[Troacctid]

There may not be many changes to the game, but there is MUCH more to talk about than simply the same buzz topic that is going to draw many pats on teh back for being anti-efficiency

How about you write an article about something different? We would love to have a different perspective.

 

YOU (or any member of the editorial panel) could write one just the same, from a "hey, maybe the efficiency people aren't actually that bad" or "efficiency: here's why it's good" stance. Instead, the approach moving forward is to attack the topic with blinkers on.

 

Your response puzzles me - as does Tripsis'. We are asked to provide praise or constructive criticism through these topics, and yet, instead of taking heed, it simply becomes a matter of "well, it's not our fault we repeat the same stuff with the same view, YOU should fix it, not us." Now, if you don't want to hear the criticism - or are going to treat it the same way - why exactly ask for opinions? "TipIt Times is now up. Here's the link" Lock thread.

 

Surely you as a team, could look outside the tiny realm of OH METAGAMERS ARE BAD into other arenas. Heck, the creative pieces aren't repeating the same thing over and over, maybe, just maybe, if we have run out of topics and are resorting to repeating the same opinion, we should move solely to comics and creative pieces.

So what you're saying is, if you don't have anything new, interesting, or constructive to say about this topic, why write articles about it?

[Alg]

YOU (or any member of the editorial panel) could write one just the same, from a "hey, maybe the efficiency people aren't actually that bad" or "efficiency: here's why it's good" stance. Instead, the approach moving forward is to attack the topic with blinkers on.

Their response makes sense given the context. The article that everyone seems to have an issue with was a guest article. One of the readers wrote it and submitted it, and we're asking others to do the same, because very few people actually do. There really aren't many EP writers and we all have different areas of expertise, but I'm not sure if any of us are real metagamers.

 

Unless you're willing to wait a few months for one of us to adjust our playstyles or get involved with Xp-Waste... :mrgreen:

[Lose No Hope]

YOU (or any member of the editorial panel) could write one just the same, from a "hey, maybe the efficiency people aren't actually that bad" or "efficiency: here's why it's good" stance. Instead, the approach moving forward is to attack the topic with blinkers on.

Their response makes sense given the context. The article that everyone seems to have an issue with was a guest article. One of the readers wrote it and submitted it, and we're asking others to do the same, because very few people actually do. There really aren't many EP writers and we all have different areas of expertise, but I'm not sure if any of us are real metagamers.

 

Unless you're willing to wait a few months for one of us to adjust our playstyles or get involved with Xp-Waste... :mrgreen:

While I understand where you are coming from, the fact that it is a guest article gives even more reason to double check that it is something the Times wants to publish. Even though the author isn't EP, it is still being posted on the website and in a sense represents EP. By publishing it you are essentially saying that you find no problems with what it says and don't expect major issues to arise from it. Guest articles haven't been published in the past for multiple reasons, and I would expect one that touches such a controversial topic and could possibly start what happened here to not be published or at least be double checked as I said before.

 

If there was a topic I didn't know much about or lacked experience in, I'd try to get someone who does have experience in that matter take a look at it. At the very least, the article could be looked at to see how subjective it is for or against something/someone.

[Alg]

Ltk: 1, Alg: 0

:razz:

 

The point being that if people are tired of seeing guest articles that they don't agree with, they have the option to write one that they do.

[Bxpprod]

Ltk: 1, Alg: 0

:razz:

 

The point being that if people are tired of seeing guest articles that they don't agree with, they have the option to write one that they do.

 

I'm tired of seeing the SAME articles over and over. Disagree or agree, if it's just rehashing the same general points - and this on my behalf only - it seems rather pointless.

[Serpent Eye]

I liked both articles! :thumbup:

 

I'm not big in the Clan world, really, but now that I'm running a fairly large Friend Chat, I'd definitely like to see some more improvements to the Chat systems. I hope Jagex doesn't give up come 2012.

[Blyaunte]

Ltk: 1, Alg: 0

:razz:

 

The point being that if people are tired of seeing guest articles that they don't agree with, they have the option to write one that they do.

 

... and at the same time, one does not need to be consistently barraged with the same inane message, repeatedly, ad nauseum.

 

"... no beer and no TV make Homer something something ..."

 

Not to mention that I don't even know where to submit anything if I wrote it ... :unsure:

[Kaida23]

Not to mention that I don't even know where to submit anything if I wrote it ... :unsure:

You simply have to PM it to Tripsis or any other member of the EP. :)

[Guest jrhairychest]

Our readers are so incredibly critical and yet they do very little to help. It's easy for you to sit back and judge or criticize the Editorial Panel, but could you do what they do? Could you write a new article every 2-4 weeks? If you could, then why aren't you? Why aren't you submitting guest articles? We do get the occasional guest article and we do our best to publish as many as we can, but we also try to be selective so we can please our community by providing them with quality entertaining work. On the one hand we get butchered for turning down work, but on the other hand we get butchered for not having "good enough" work. Which one do you guys want?

 

Yes we are critical, readers are. What has ever been done about it? Have the staff ever sat down and thought 'What are we doing wrong.....how do we solve this?'. This is a fan site first and foremost correct? If so, then perhaps the Tipit Times needs to change.

 

Many of the previous articles are too formal and most of those are written by the EP. In some cases it's used as a tool for some writers to try to prove how intellectual they are instead of keeping the topics as a fairly easy read. If I want to read heavy going stuff, I'll go read some academic journals. Less is often more as it leaves more open for discussion.

 

if you want more submissions from the community as guest articles then push it big time! Use the editorial panel to edit the articles and give feedback to the submissions so if they're not up to standard then let those who submit know. An editor edits, right? Use them. Don't just dismiss articles because they don't read like an essay - People will be more likely to submit their works if they're helped out more in telling them what you want and giving them encouragement. In the end it'll pay dividends as you'll have a pool of aspiring writers who want to write becuase they feel supported.

 

Have you thought about who you recruit for the EP? Is it really in the best interests of the community and good articles to have staff who are....a little ignorant of what the community thinks and take every criticism personally? Do some feel they can't submit an article because EP staff aren't approachable in some cases?

 

Have you ever thought about targeting individuals who you think would write a decent article? If there's a discussion thread going on and a poster feels passionately about something, what's wrong with sending them a pm? Why not just ask them to write an article and give them an idea of how you'd like it structured. Target those who regularly post about subjects that haven't been discussed from their point of view.