🔒 Locked

Editorial Question: Spread em out? Dump em out?

Started by Gaiiden Sep 26, 2007 at 8:33 PM 6 replies 3.4k views

Original Post

Sep 26, 2007 at 8:33 PM

Hey community - this one is for you. If you haven't already noticed, whether by visiting my journal or hearing it elsewhere (wherever the heck that may be) we have a publishing schedule. This schedule has been a boon to our editorial processes, letting us track articles and reviews that are going to be featured and expose that to you all. It's been a great reference for me and John to keep track of things and post features on time (give or take a day, time zones and all that). Now, you may notice by looking at this schedule that we currently have articles slotted way into November. A bit of a stretch? That's what I'm here to find out. Those of you who have been around a while know that there was a time not too long ago where features were non-existent. Articles (and especially reviews) were hardly ever posted, the front page hardly ever changed for weeks on end, when suddenly some new feature would appear and lots of people would miss it cause they never bothered to look there anymore anyways. Obviously that's all been fixed now that I'm in charge. But now we face a slightly different problem. Now that we're back to posting features on a regular basis, there are two different ways we can go about it: Option #1 - Spread em out Stick to the current plan and always have a generous 1-2 month (max) lead time embedded into the schedule. PRO: There's little to no risk of the schedule "drying up" and us having no new content to feature for you all several times each week CON: You have to wait weeks some times for an article you're waiting to read to finally be published Option #2 - Dump em out Forget the lead time and post articles up within days of their submission and editorial approval. PRO: Articles pop up faster, perhaps several a week and/or more than one a day CON: There may be long (and incalculable) stretches of stagnancy between feature updates and features may cycle off the main page too quickly

So that's where we stand right now. I'm very interested to hear all your thoughts on this matter, as you are the people we're trying to serve best here! While I prefer Option #1 personally, I'm not against doing it either way, so convince me otherwise and it shall be so. BTW if any of you have articles to submit, please do send them to me!!

Alpha_ProgDes

Sep 26, 2007 at 8:44 PM

Well why not put articles that come in parts on a shorter lead time and have the other standalone as you have it now. That way we can have our 3 part series on "Simple Raytracing in C# for n00bs" (each part) posted every 1 to 2 weeks and have a new series schedule for the month after. As well as having a steady stream of spaced-out standalone articles.

Trapper Zoid

Sep 26, 2007 at 8:48 PM

I'm fairly happy with either option or somewhere inbetween.

My main concern with keeping a long lead time, other than the con you mentioned, is that the writers of the article might be a bit disappointed if it takes months for their contribution to be shown. You need the writers to be happy so they want to contribute more articles to add to your schedule.

As an aside, if I find the time and an appropriate topic I'd be happy to write an article or two; it's something I've been meaning to do for a while.

jbadams

Sep 27, 2007 at 12:20 AM

I prefer the first option, but think that the lead-time should be kept down around a month rather than allowed to drag out to two.

Gaiiden

Sep 27, 2007 at 5:38 AM

Quote:
Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
Well why not put articles that come in parts on a shorter lead time and have the other standalone as you have it now.

Funny, someone else mentioned this also on my GG blog post pointing towards this thread. We only have one series running at the moment (the Linux Game Dev one) and that's spaced out monthly due to publishing restrictions, nothing I can do about that. However if we do get another series, it will be delivered in full (that's a requirement - no more unfinished series!!!) like the Linux one and I'll def be posting stuff like that once per week.

GameEngineer_gi

Sep 27, 2007 at 9:30 AM

Quote:
Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
Well why not put articles that come in parts on a shorter lead time and have the other standalone as you have it now. That way we can have our 3 part series on "Simple Raytracing in C# for n00bs" (each part) posted every 1 to 2 weeks and have a new series schedule for the month after. As well as having a steady stream of spaced-out standalone articles.

I like Alphas idea where you keep the "mini-series" articles coming on a short, regular basis. So when the series starts, keep the articles coming in constantly and relatively short time spans in between. Of course that depends on whether or not the author has all series articles ready that quick.

New articles can be spaced farther apart.

I like having new articles being posted. Some of the current ones are good, but outdated a bit.

Steve

Gaiiden

Sep 28, 2007 at 5:22 AM

Interesting focus on series you guys have. They're not a very common occurance after all. Again, rest assured that (barring any publishing constraints) series would be posted in a closely-spaced regular manner.

eedok

Oct 14, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Why not balance the 2? when you have <= a months worth of articles, keep them spread out, but when there's more add bonuses.

I like the article structure being spread out, but I don't like how it alternates between weeks, I'd probably like it a bit more if it was like most web comics in having a consistent MWF updates.

EDIT: maybe you can have theme days too, like review mondays

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.