Guidance Requested: Do It Yourself vs. Reporting

In good faith, I attempt to expand the database and improve on existing entries in accordance with the guidelines and management directives as I understand them, and I trust that many others have the same goals.

During a recent exchange: https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/43147

Bastien make it clear that his direction and expectation is that contributors handle all matters within their respective authorities (i.e. not defer to editors), otherwise take no action. Up until that exchange, I would handle smaller edits myself, yet defer to editors via reports regarding pics, more detailed bios, basically anything that may depend heavily on individual editor subjective preferences and when the missing info was a mix of changes I could handle myself and those requiring an editor anyway. Now I either make smaller edits or take no action.

This morning I scanned a string of reports by Bastien that seem to directly conflict with his direction. Some examples:

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/44309

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/44314

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/44308

I am struggling to reconcile all of this, so assuming there remains some confusion on my part. With the goal of better understanding, requesting some guidance and clarification....

Here is a great one from today!!

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/44256

Some days I have to count to a 1,000 backwards and then go take a blood pressure pill!!

An explanation about why you think it is wrong would be really helpful!

How does the example below reconcile. What am I missing?

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/45100

Guidance Requested: Do It Yourself vs. Reporting

VV, why should every move you make be defined (I struggle to find the exact wording)

Speaking for myself, I fill gaps and correct little things almost daily. I only report when it involves a "big" change or when I don't know the answer myself... The very few complaints I get are briefly discussed and adjusted when needed.

There's also a third option of just letting it go.

Last edit: 2021-06-05 10:32:05 UTC by walt

Quote from walt

VV, why should every move you make be defined (I struggle to find the exact wording)

Recently, Bastien tends to complain that I don't respect how things are done on site and that I tell him how SHS should be:

a) How am I to understand when things like this example makes no sense to me (and I assume others);

b) I make suggestions (and there are two dedicated areas in the forum for this purpose), some general for the site and some entry specific; and

c) B does seem to often tell me what I should be willing (and sometimes able) to do for SHS.

Speaking for myself, I fill gaps and correct little things almost daily. I only report when it involves a "big" change or when I don't know the answer myself... The very few complaints I get are briefly discussed and adjusted when needed.

As explained earlier, that was roughly my logistics as well, until directed by B not to defer. Since that exchange I have seem both B and sebcat file bio reports deferring to the assigned editor and now your same position.

There's also a third option of just letting it go.

As stated in the original post, that is exactly what I now do, namely make no edits nor reports for found missing bios, etc.; however, these are lost opportunities, which I personally hate. It's been almost two months now, so ignoring is now easier.

Sometimes some random matter grabs my attention:

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/46370

Though I can now just file error reports on bio matters, the when to edit vs. when to report would continue to escape me, so I assume it escapes others as well.

Like walt, I fill gaps and correct little things almost daily, and rarely write error reports to other editors. I thought the job of an editor was to correct things. I looked around and I don't see or missed any guidance of what editors are suppose to do when they find mistakes by other editors.

VV got demoted as CC2 because he wouldn't change certain items he thought would be best changed by an editor. I would think the same logic should also pertain to editors. Thus some rules.

VV, I can understand why Bastien wrote an error report to Sara (coz she is new and wants to teach her to look for different items to fill out)

But error reports like the following, is like, really???why, what am I missing here??

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/46347

Oldiesmann missed filling in label series. He has been here since 2016, obviously he didn't do it on purpose, he just missed it. It took longer to write up the error report than to correct it. Why not just change it?

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/46220

Oliver wrote this one to me because I misspelled one word. An error report for one word??

Your an editor, change it! What is the deal?

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/46219

This one really scared me. Threatening an editor.

There are a lot more petty little error reports written up that just boggles my mind.

So Bastien or anyone else, is there any such rules or guidance that we should follow when editors should write up other editors. It would certainly clear up a lot of confusion and animosity.

DB... Yes, I have always made allowances for learning curve reports, so I must have missed that in the most recently referenced case. Nevertheless, that doesn't explain previously referenced reports and the cases you cited.

To be clear, I'm not complaining about my current status, as the end result is lower expectations and far less work on my part at the cost of a few inconveniences. I can't operate in an environment of often illogical rules with almost always random applicability anyway. Moreover, I don't want authorities over which I don't have reasonable discretion.

On the other hand I seem to have some kind of Pavlovian response to inconsistencies. Can one get professional help for that?

|On the other hand I seem to have some kind of Pavlovian response to inconsistencies. Can one get professional help for that?|

VV, there are professionals known as "bartenders" for that and the help is called "drinking", but that just causes a whole set of other problems.

Quote from DashBoardDJ856

|On the other hand I seem to have some kind of Pavlovian response to inconsistencies. Can one get professional help for that?|

VV, there are professionals known as "bartenders" for that and the help is called "drinking", but that just causes a whole set of other problems.

Dr. Jack Daniels perhaps?

Anyway, Bastien has now been tagged several times for some guidance to no avail. Perhaps Managing Editor sebcat can be of assistance?

Generally said: As long as changes by others are backed by evidence (and are not, f. ex., just based on personal preferences), I'm surely fine with them. I 'reserve the right' to correct changes (whch way ever) not suiting, though.

Vice versa, I do many amendments (which partly even takes more of my time than adding new stuff). Also, like Walt and others, I only file error reports in 'major' cases or if in doubt, but not (like yet others) for minor details.

PS: Absinth... (not for me, really, but...)

And still no guidelines for editors writing error reports.

On a related note, Management apparently prefers having no bio than respecting a deferral to an assigned editor by a generic member:

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/45951

Good luck making sense out of all this....

Still looking for guidance here. Easy enough to ignore found missing bios for artists assigned to Bastien ..., but should this be my general rule? Example of one assigned to artsinspired ...:

Loch Lomond

https://www.discogs.com/artist/984202-Loch-Lomond

sebcat We're approaching three weeks since you were tagged requesting some thoughts....

Quote from VirileVagabond

sebcat We're approaching three weeks since you were tagged requesting some thoughts....

I've not seen this discussed previously. I see three reasons for editor-to-editor error reports.

1. Clear errors with an entry that the responsible editor needs to address.

2. Training new editors.

3. Driving up standards across the editorial team, such as blank, incomplete, poorly evidenced/researched or orphan entries.

Not sure we can progress much further without the views of Bastien or the other managing editors Oldiesmann artsinspired microtherion

Well that was as clear as mud pie!

Some of this disconnect may be due to my original CC concept vs. how management eventually implemented. My vision was a status for those editor-worthy but who didn't want to the responsibilities of an editor. Pick a list of things CCs can do without editor oversight to relieve editor burdens and move on.

What actually happened was the CC seems to be yet another step towards being an editor, with editor approvals needed for acceptability and training. Was another rank needed for this purpose?

I saw no reason to (e.g.) draft bios that had to be approved. Much more time efficient to just offer the sources. If the approval is a rubber stamp, eliminate the approval. If a real editor review similar to a submission, just offer the sources.

|Still looking for guidance here. Easy enough to ignore found missing bios for artists assigned to Bastien ..., but should this be my general rule? Example of one assigned to artsinspired ...:

Loch Lomond |

VV looks like the way to get them cleaned up is to mention them in the discussion board. This one got magically cleaned up yesterday.

Quote from DashBoardDJ856

VV looks like the way to get them cleaned up is to mention them in the discussion board. This one got magically cleaned up yesterday.

That is quite the coincidence. Why would art not offer some thoughts as well? Anyway, fat chance of me posting in the forums to offer missing bios/pics every time. I can handle a single, easily remembered exception for B, but as it stands I just do nothing for all I come across.

I'll add that part of the problem was I saw some editors (I think it was B & Seb) who would reject draft bios just for a typo or subjective preferences instead of approving and editing. When I expressed concerns over this, crickets....

I'm not afraid to give my opinion.

1) All users should write error reports to editors for missing bios.

2) CC's can change bios if they are comfortable with the available information they have on hand.

Or if they choose to do so, they can write up an error report.

3) Editors should change all bios and not write up an error report to other editors.

Geez, that wasn't 2 hard 2 do. It took 10 minutes and I didn't even get struck by lightning.