Once again I’m confused about an OP submission of mine that was not published / closed and I’m seeking some clarification as to why that occurred.
Yesterday I submitted this OP here:
It has a note on it that says: “Closed as Inflammatory ~ Primus Pilus“.
Then I notice that today the exact same article is used in an OP submission from a different community member and it gets published! That is here:
As I have stated in previous Den posts, I can understand that different mods may render different verdicts.
However this situation has me kinda confused and I’d like to seek clarification as to the reasoning behind it to avoid further confusion on my part.
With that said, there are two things about this situation have me confused.
The first is that I can see that the mod who “R&I”ed the version of the OP submission that was approved today also had their hands on the version of the OP that I submitted yesterday, as I can see there were three revisions saved under their username in WordPress. This fact, combined with the delay in seeing it closed leads me to speculate that when they saw my OP yesterday that they had some trepidation on its content and then sought consultation with other mods for a final judgement. That would seem to be a cautious and justifiable way to conduct themselves. But if my speculation is correct it leads to the question how the same mod can then R&I another version of an OP that utilizes the same source article?
Now the text from the OP article that I excerpted is from deeper into the OP article than the version that the other community member submitted that was approved and published. If my speculation as outlined above is not correct, maybe that’s the reason why my OP was 86ed and the other one was not? If that is so, that would lead me to wonder why the whole content of the OP article is not considered when rendering judgement on whether a source article meets the BNR standards? If that is not the case I would be curious how the one gets rejected and the other one approved? Can OP articles be used that contain content that violate the authoring guidelines or are inflammatory as long those juicy bits are not excerpted into the OP submissions that appear on BNR?
The second thing that has me confused is that there are a few other OPs that touch on the exact same content. Why were they not deemed “inflammatory”? Is it one of the reasons I speculate on above? Or given that the exact same article can be viewed so differently, is the application of the authoring guidelines and general standards simply widely and blatantly inconsistent and to be expected?
I would appreciate some clarification surrounding this issue, as it is getting confusing as to what the authoring guidelines and standards actually are around here!
Thank you!