Breaking News Forum Changes

[RedAkston]

The moderation team have revised the BN forum rules and we are consolidating the two forums (BN - MSM and BN - Non-MSM) into one forum.

Highlights of the changes:

- a quoted excerpt is no longer required as a properly formatted link shows a preview of the article automatically
- source definition has been simplified

---

Q: What about [insert source here]?
A: If the source is a "news organization or website" then it is acceptable, however the article must meet the other standards and not be overly partisan or biased and not be an op-ed or editorial

Q: Why isn't Twitter (or some other social media) a valid source?
A: Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites don't go through an editorial process the way newspapers, magazines and television networks/stations do. Social media posts can be used to support or dispute the actual source, but the actual source needs to be a "news organization or website". Tweets from a "news organization or website" will contain a link to the actual "news organization or website" article - use the article as the source, not the tweet.

Q: What does "properly formatted" mean?
A: Listing the link on a line of it's own shows a preview automatically

Proper formatting:

Example 1

Iran rejects offer of direct US nuclear talks, senior diplomats say

Iran's stance does not kill off all hopes of direct negotiations, diplomats claimed.

www.foxnews.com

My own unique content to spur discussion...

Example 2
My own unique content to spur discussion...

Iran rejects offer of direct US nuclear talks, senior diplomats say

Iran's stance does not kill off all hopes of direct negotiations, diplomats claimed.

www.foxnews.com

Improper formatting:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-rejects-offer-of-direct-us-nuclear-talks-senior-diplomats-say - my own unique content to spur discussion...

---

It is our hope that this makes it easier to post an OP in the (now single) BN forum without a fear of receiving points.

 

[lemmiwinx]

I'm afraid. Should I be or is this like a normal forum thingy? Sometimes I wake up in the morning with a nasty message from one of the mods.

 

[Redress]

I'm afraid. Should I be or is this like a normal forum thingy? Sometimes I wake up in the morning with a nasty message from one of the mods.

The goal was to make it easier for posters. I do not think there is anything for you to fear in this.

 

[lemmiwinx]

All clear has been declared as done. It's a conditional agreement so don't blame me if you got fooled.

 

[Chomsky]

Damn, thread-starting in BN used to separate the boys from the men! Not for feint of heart!

But yeah, I get why this is done. I've run across quite a few otherwise quality posters, who refused to thread-start in BN - due to previous inadvertent technical burns.

I do very much believe BN is the crowned-jewel of DP, and as such should have the highest standards. But conversely, thread-starters are the life-blood of the forum. So, let's hope it works out!

 

[Chomsky]

I'm afraid. Should I be or is this like a normal forum thingy? Sometimes I wake up in the morning with a nasty message from one of the mods.

By consolidating 'BN - MSM' & 'BN - Non-MSM' into one forum, the mods eliminated one of the prime minefields to inadvertently accrue technical points - that being having to hard-determine the source type. This will make it easier & safer to thread-start. Not requiring an excerpt for properly formatted sourcing, also will facilitate the ease, speed, and efficiency of BN thread-starting.

 

[swing_voter]

All my mod infractions were from posting to that forum.

I haven't posted there in a long time.

 

[lemmiwinx]

I stand mollified. Please count me among your forum sheeple. Awaiting further instructions....

 

[Montgomery]

By consolidating 'BN - MSM' & 'BN - Non-MSM' into one forum, the mods eliminated one of the prime minefields to inadvertently accrue technical points - that being having to hard-determine the source type. This will make it easier & safer to thread-start. Not requiring an excerpt for properly formatted sourcing, also will facilitate the ease, speed, and efficiency of BN thread-starting.

It's gotta be a good idea if it allows posting breaking news from RT.com as not being questioned over it being MSM. If a RT.com thread is deleted then it might need an alternative reason.

Threads that are close to being duplicates, does call for one to be deleted but it should be the earlier posted thread that survives.

 

[Redress]

It's gotta be a good idea if it allows posting breaking news from RT.com as not being questioned over it being MSM. If a RT.com thread is deleted then it might need an alternative reason.

Threads that are close to being duplicates, does call for one to be deleted but it should be the earlier posted thread that survives.

We rarely delete threads. BN violation threads would be moved, not deleted.

 

[Roadvirus]

Q: What does "properly formatted" mean?
A: Listing the link on a line of it's own shows a preview automatically

Proper formatting:

Example 1

Iran rejects offer of direct US nuclear talks, senior diplomats say

Iran's stance does not kill off all hopes of direct negotiations, diplomats claimed.

www.foxnews.com

My own unique content to spur discussion...

Example 2
My own unique content to spur discussion...

Iran rejects offer of direct US nuclear talks, senior diplomats say

Iran's stance does not kill off all hopes of direct negotiations, diplomats claimed.

www.foxnews.com

Improper formatting:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-rejects-offer-of-direct-us-nuclear-talks-senior-diplomats-say - my own unique content to spur discussion...

For some reason, i can't get my links to do the "proper formatting".

 

[Montgomery]

We rarely delete threads. BN violation threads would be moved, not deleted.

Yeah, I should have mentioned that. It's just that it's' come to be the same thing for me because of the points thingy.
Anyway, it's a move in the right direction.

I don't even know who all the moderators are yet so could you tell me? And maybe add their political leaning too? I'm a pretty leftist Canadian but I would probably be considered a commie by US standards. You too I'm guessing, judging on how you describe yourself.
(we should talk in private about that because it's rather misinformation IMO)

 

[Redress]

For some reason, i can't get my links to do the "proper formatting".

Put the link on a line by itself.

 

[RedAkston]

For some reason, i can't get my links to do the "proper formatting".

Your post was formatted properly - the preview didn't come through for some reason. Don't sweat whether the preview comes through or not. So long as you format it properly there won't be any issues.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Yeah, I should have mentioned that. It's just that it's' come to be the same thing for me because of the points thingy.
Anyway, it's a move in the right direction.

I don't even know who all the moderators are yet so could you tell me? And maybe add their political leaning too? I'm a pretty leftist Canadian but I would probably be considered a commie by US standards. You too I'm guessing, judging on how you describe yourself.

I agree it is much easier having just one forum for all breaking news no matter who reported the stories.

Moderators have at least one colored badge under their avatars. Some just have the word Moderator and others have additional labels for Administrator or Dungeon Master. (Naturally that section needs extra moderators.)

Feel free to PM me too about your political ideology.

 

[Montgomery]

Your post was formatted properly - the preview didn't come through for some reason. Don't sweat whether the preview comes through or not. So long as you format it properly there won't be any issues.

Preview? Link?
I post the link and I guess that shows what is known as a preview?

I post the title that is the title that shows in the link and then I make some comment that relates to the title. If that's not good enough then I'll either stop posting in that section or just consider that it's worth the points to make a mistake.

And if that's not good enough then it's the forum's loss of content, not mine.
Why is this confusion necessary at all?

 

[Chomsky]

It's gotta be a good idea if it allows posting breaking news from RT.com as not being questioned over it being MSM. If a RT.com thread is deleted then it might need an alternative reason.

Threads that are close to being duplicates, does call for one to be deleted but it should be the earlier posted thread that survives.

Usually they're combined.

 

[Montgomery]

Usually they're combined.

I haven't noticed. The whole issue could use with some overhaul but I don't care enough to try to help do it, nor do I choose to suffer the flak by criticizing. Any idea on who would be the right leaning mods? Or is it not a good reason to say?

 

[Chomsky]

I haven't noticed. The whole issue could use with some overhaul but I don't care enough to try to help do it, nor do I choose to suffer the flak by criticizing. Any idea on who would be the right leaning mods? Or is it not a good reason to say?

Might even be better reason, to need to ask! The Mod staff here is remarkedly fair & unbiased in carrying-out their duties. No need to seek one out based upon real or perceived political lean.

 

[Redress]

I haven't noticed. The whole issue could use with some overhaul but I don't care enough to try to help do it, nor do I choose to suffer the flak by criticizing. Any idea on who would be the right leaning mods? Or is it not a good reason to say?

It is pretty irrelevant. We strive for consistency, and partisan positions are not moderated.

 

[X Factor]

I haven't noticed. The whole issue could use with some overhaul but I don't care enough to try to help do it, nor do I choose to suffer the flak by criticizing. Any idea on who would be the right leaning mods? Or is it not a good reason to say?

If it has to do with moderation, the lean doesn’t matter at all and I speak from more experience than I really should have.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Preview? Link?
I post the link and I guess that shows what is known as a preview?

I post the title that is the title that shows in the link and then I make some comment that relates to the title. If that's not good enough then I'll either stop posting in that section or just consider that it's worth the points to make a mistake.

And if that's not good enough then it's the forum's loss of content, not mine. Why is this confusion necessary at all?

It is much easier to post the link than copy and paste a body of text anyway, so what is your problem with that?

The preview is what you see when you post the link on a separate line.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

If it has to do with moderation, the lean doesn’t matter at all and I speak from more experience than I really should have.

I think being a moderator is what makes you much easier for me to respect than the average conservative and Cowboys fan.

 

[Allan]

Damn, thread-starting in BN used to separate the boys from the men! Not for feint of heart!

My first two warnings on this forum were for messing up the BN rules. Now I'm more careful than a mouse in a cat lady's house.

 

[Allan]

Can we still post selected text from the article if we want, or is the automatically generated preview the standard now?