metanewsmods (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
metanewsmods) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
metanews2015-07-09 04:59 pm
metanewsmods) wrote in metanews2015-07-09 04:59 pm
Entry tags:
Call for Volunteers
Metanews is once more (and always) in need of volunteers. We're looking for two types of volunteers. First, people who would be willing to take on link finding and maintenance for one our set reading lists (LJ, DW, Tumblr, Feedly, Pinboard, and submitted links). Right now there are only two of us, and we simply can't cover everything. It's not sustainable. The only reason we're getting by right now is that one of us is unemployed, but it would be better if that one had time to do other things, too, in addition to Metanews, and didn't end up burning out.
Second, we're also looking for volunteers who would be willing to cover one or two specific fandoms of their choice. This would involve looking for meta in general, particularly in places we don't know about or can't adequately cover (especially Tumblr), and evaluating for quality any links other link finders discover for the fandom(s). We're especially interested in help with fandoms or types of fandoms that we haven't covered much or where the quality of the meta we've been finding isn't great because that generally means that we don't know where to look to find meta for that fandom.
We use Google docs for all of our working documents, so any volunteers will have to be willing to deal with that.
We've been told that we're not doing a particularly good job at posting on Tumblr, and we don't really have many readers there. Neither of us actually use Tumblr beyond following links there that we've found elsewhere and making the weekly Metanews post (which we do by rote). We would love to have someone to take over the Tumblr posting and do it in a way that's more friendly to Tumblr readers, whatever that may look like.
The fastest way to reach us is to comment on this post on LJ or DW or to PM metanewsmods in either place. We don't check Tumblr very often, so things sent to us there may languish for a while. We can also be reached as on Gmail as meta.news.fandom.We don't always check the Gmail every day, so please be patient if it takes us a little time to get back to you.
While we do check the email every day due to it being forwarded, and will attempt to get back to any replies within 24 hours of receiving them, we may be longer due to consulting with each other.
Second, we're also looking for volunteers who would be willing to cover one or two specific fandoms of their choice. This would involve looking for meta in general, particularly in places we don't know about or can't adequately cover (especially Tumblr), and evaluating for quality any links other link finders discover for the fandom(s). We're especially interested in help with fandoms or types of fandoms that we haven't covered much or where the quality of the meta we've been finding isn't great because that generally means that we don't know where to look to find meta for that fandom.
We use Google docs for all of our working documents, so any volunteers will have to be willing to deal with that.
We've been told that we're not doing a particularly good job at posting on Tumblr, and we don't really have many readers there. Neither of us actually use Tumblr beyond following links there that we've found elsewhere and making the weekly Metanews post (which we do by rote). We would love to have someone to take over the Tumblr posting and do it in a way that's more friendly to Tumblr readers, whatever that may look like.
The fastest way to reach us is to comment on this post on LJ or DW or to PM metanewsmods in either place. We don't check Tumblr very often, so things sent to us there may languish for a while. We can also be reached as on Gmail as meta.news.fandom.
While we do check the email every day due to it being forwarded, and will attempt to get back to any replies within 24 hours of receiving them, we may be longer due to consulting with each other.
no subject
no subject
We have a Tumblr with attached reading list, but it needs to be weeded a good bit. I've looked at it a little, but I haven't had time to try to figure out what we should get rid of or even if using a reading list is a good way to find stuff on Tumblr at all. The Feedly blog list pretty much eats up all of my time. I did, however, get the impression that the ratio of usable meta to other types of posts wasn't what we really needed.
The other moderator and I are pretty much ignorant of Tumblr and really have no idea how to find anything beyond following a few blogs and hoping that meta turns up. That's a fairly poor strategy when dealing with the Niagara Falls of new content.
I think there are two (maybe three) Tumblrs we follow that regularly produce meta-- One is ASOIAF related, and one is Buffy related (and the LJ Buffy newsletter pulls meta from that Tumblr anyway, and we've been getting the links from there, so I'm not sure we should keep following it). Both of those are aggregators, at least as far as I can gather, and maybe, finding other aggregators might be useful.
Basically, you'd be largely charting your own course. Tumblr is so big that trying to sift through all of it is likely to take far too much time to be realistic. My suggestion would be to pick a few fandoms or topics that interest you (however many you're comfortable with) and see what's available for them specifically. I don't know whether that would mean following specific blogs or searching for specific terms at regular intervals or what. You wouldn't be limited to what you chose to start. You could add or subtract or change your focus.
I did determine at one point, through experimentation, that it takes about an hour to go back through twenty four hours of posts on the current reading list. I don't see that as a reasonable investment of time for most (any?) people. I think it would lead rapidly and inevitably to burnout. I'd like to think that there's a better way, but I'm sufficiently ignorant of Tumblr that I really don't have much to suggest.
When we link on Tumblr now, we try to figure out who posted the item originally and link there. Figuring out who posted originally is also important because we try not to link anything that's more than a couple of months old, mostly because of the time involved in trying to make sure the particular item hasn't been linked in a previous newsletter. Of course, sometimes multiple people have added important stuff to the post, so you have to use your judgment about how much to strip away.
I'm hoping that whatever new volunteers we get can find a time commitment that works for them long term and that isn't overwhelming. I don't know what that would look like for you or how best to tailor link finding on Tumblr so that it fits what you're able and willing to do right now.
no subject
I have been leaving links I find in tumblr browsing sessions in the submission post but, it sounds like I'm really just making more work? Is there a way to do it that would be more helpful, without it being a set up where I would let everybody down if I didn't do it one week? That would be optimal for me as I'm not sure a weekly commitment is realistic.
Do you tag on tumblr? Maybe the account is hard to find.
no subject
The fact that we, the current link finders, understand so little about Tumblr is why I say that anyone who's willing to link find there will have carte blanche to change how we do things there. It would be silly to recruit someone who knows Tumblr and then hobble them with the way we've been doing things (which we know doesn't work well). My main request will be that they write up some instructions as to how to do it in case we once again find ourselves with no one who knows Tumblr well.
I think that leaving links for us is very useful. We are behind on following up on submitted links, but those links tend to be really good stuff that we wouldn't find any other way.
That said, if you want to be an occasional link finder and write up the links you find, we'd welcome you. Giving you access to our weekly Google doc wouldn't be a big deal, or, if you'd rather, you could write up your links and mail them to us. The format is pretty simple. I can provide you with the template. The hardest parts tend to be the pull quote or summary of the article and the tags.
Links that are already written up can just be pasted into the correct place in the posting document and so don't require very much work at all.
no subject
When I tag I prioritise the things I think people are most likely to be following/searching for on tumblr? So probably "meta" and then fandom names, or "fandom name meta" is a used tagging convention also. The first five will be the easiest to find but you can use up to twenty. Of course tagging may not be the problem at all, but it's an idea.
no subject
Also, this comm is just awesome. :)
no subject
I can PM you with our templates for writing up links.
For a pull quote, we try to find a sentence or three in an article that will give the reader an indication of what the article is about or of the writer's attitude toward the topic. It's often challenging because people don't tend to state their theses very clearly and because a number of writers introduce their articles with lengthy digressions.
When we can't find a good pull quote, we try to write a sentence or two that tells readers what to expect if they follow the link. I most often do that for things like Tor's chapter by chapter rereads, for discussions of specific episodes and such that ramble and cover a lot of different points, and for linkspams focused on a single topic. I also use it for posts where the majority of the meta is discussion in the comments. So an example would be (this is a typical Tor summary): "Summary, discussion and analysis of the chapter in question." Another option might be something like: "Discussion of the episode, mostly in the comments." For a linkspam, I might say something like: "Collection of links relating to the works of Joss Whedon."
no subject
Oh, and about the tags, shall I add them separately after the meta link?
Also, once I'm sure I'm on top of things I could leave what links I find directly on your Google doc if that would mean less work for you guys. :)
no subject
We put the subject/fandom tags between the div style= and the /div html tags.
There's no maximum number of tags, and it's fine to use just one. I'll often just tag for fandom, if I'm in a hurry, even if a topic tag might fit because the fandom is the thing most people care about more.
no subject
no subject
But I do have time, and a working knowledge of Tumblr. I don't know if I could do it all by myself but I'd be available to help for awhile.
no subject
We would be thrilled to have any help you can give us. As I said above, anyone willing to work on Tumblr would be free to set policies and establish routines because right now we really don't have any. If you just picked a single fandom or a few specific blogs to follow, that would be more than we currently have.
We can give you access to the Google doc where we gather up our links for posting, or I can send you our link templates and a few notes about how we format links, and you can use that to write up links that you then send to us by email or PM or some other method.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2015-07-11 06:27 am (UTC)(link)"The fastest way to reach us is to comment on this post on LJ or DW or to PM metanewsmods in either place. We don't check Tumblr very often, so things sent to us there may languish for a while."
In this case, wouldn't it be best to completely get rid of the contact-via-Tumblr? It must be off-putting to your supporters if they find their messages go ignored for "a while". Which one is the contact address that guarantees me my message will actually be read within, say, three days?
By the way... have you ever discussed whether you actually need a presence on three social media platforms? Perhaps you should figure out which platform is the most suitable for you and your readers' needs*, make it your home base, and only use other platforms to link to the new posts there. Don't spread yourself thin when you are only two people.
*) I don't actually know which one that would be, but probably neither DW/LJ nor Tumblr. A regular blog with a good search function?
no subject
We'll taket he rest of your suggestion under advisement.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2015-07-11 07:14 am (UTC)(link)no subject
I apologize if the tone came off as abrupt or rude. The under advisement was simply the phrase that seemed most right at the time.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2015-07-11 09:51 am (UTC)(link)Not no, but I doubt we would consider changing where we post - it would involve a great deal of work we're not up for right now.
So it does mean no. You can just say so, my suggestion was unsolicited after all. I am sorry that I cannot help by volunteering, but I wish you luck.
no subject
Well, no for right now isn't necessarily no forever. There may be a time that the work would be feasible, or that something else could happen to make it easier, so I didn't want to say never, which no felt like. Thank you for wishing us luck. We wish the same to you.