Email
Password
Remember meForgot password?
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Connect your Digital Journal account with Facebook or Twitter to use this feature.
Connect
Log In Sign Up
In the Media

I've become discouraged and just a bit disappointed

article:122531:20::0
By Viga Boland
Feb 20, 2007 in
Share
over the past 48 hours watching some of the best articles being buried before they even have a chance to be seen
or read and I'm wondering if there is some way to prevent this from happening.
I know it's impossible to control how many folks come on line at the same time and start posting for all it's worth, and one could say it's the luck of the draw. That's true. But my point is that some excellent articles might get seen, read and commented on by a handful of people and could indeed be of interest to others but they never get to see them because they disappear from the home page almost as fast as they are posted.
Take a great article like this one posted an hour ago:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/122298/Should_we_blame_the_Media_or_Masses_
This one is worth discussing and I'd love to hear what others have to say on the questions posed but I probably won't get to read them because it's already lost under celebrity gossip (is Clay gay? 21 things we don't know about sex) or the topic that's really getting a bit old after 3 days of it ie. Britney goes into rehab; Britney shaves her hair off; Britney's back in rehab....blah blah blah!
Sure gossip is always juicy but my point is worthwhile posts are lost while we gossip! When I joined DJ in late November, it was about late breaking news. It replaced Google news and Yahoo news for me because I found the latest breaking articles here first. That was great. But now it's moved well away from there...and I'm not saying I mind the direction it's taken (I read the gossip and latest crime too) but somehow I think it's time to find a better way to give other important articles more prominence, especially when "IMPORTANT" on DJ is determined by votes rather than "importance". What the votes really indicate is popularity. So maybe IMPORTANT should be changed to MOST POPULAR because quite frankly, while it may be more "popular", I don't think Britney's revolving door antics are any more important than "why do most women prefer planned caesarian"? which has garnered a whole 2 votes and been viewed a mere 29 times. (See http://digitaljournal.com/article/121890/Why_do_most_of_pregnant_women_prefer_planned_caesarean_
if you missed that one too!)
So do I have a solution: not sure and I don't know how hard it would be to implement, but what about having the "LATEST" postings in each of the categories? That way, those of us who want to read celebrity gossip but aren't interested in environment or tech issues can go there first. Those of us who are more interested in family and society can read those articles without scrolling through article after article looking for one that interests us. And the technical or business minded don't have to wade through articles on sex and crime trying to find something on what interests them.
I don't know if such a thing is possible but I'd just like to see good articles that some folks here have obviously taken a long time to write and to which they've given a lot of thought have as much viewing and response as possible. I'd like to see them as important even if they're not the most "popular". Perhaps my suggestion could make that a reality.
Does anyone agree? What do you all think? Or does anyone see other ways this could be done so all posts have equal "importance" as opposed to "popularity" regardless of category?
article:122531:20::0
More about DJ, Posts, Threads, Gossip, Members
 
Latest News
Top News
Engage

Corporate

Help & Support

News Links

copyright © 2014 digitaljournal.com   |   powered by dell servers