On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Riley Childs <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> designate someone to be the "copy editor",
>

Well, I kind of got the impression from the original question that this was
kind of out of the question.

However, I think it might be useful to look at development practices for a
solution: for example, we don't merge anything to master that hasn't been
code reviewed (well, that's not 100% true, but anything of significance),
it seems like something similar could exist for your web content.  Nothing
goes live without being peer reviewed and it's up to the author to get a
reviewer if they want to release the content, which at least then makes
multiple parties responsible for what goes up.  People can still abuse the
system, but that's a human management issue, at that point, not a
technological one.

-Ross.

From: Nathan Rogers<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: ‎4/‎17/‎2014 10:16 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] distributed responsibility for web content
>
> It sounds like what you need to do is a bit of guerrilla education for
> people on good methods of writing for the web versus things that are not
> appropriate for a professional setting. I have dealt with (and still am) a
> similar situation. The best approach I find is often to do a better version
> without stomping on their changes, talk to them, and explain why it is a
> better approach. Eventually if you are lucky they will have that ‘Aha’
> moment.
>
> On Apr 17, 2014, at 9:13 PM, Miles Fidelman <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > Simon LeFranc wrote:
> >> There is no one person in the organization with the time or authority
> to act as editorial overseer. What are some techniques for ensuring that
> the site maintains a clean, professional appearance?
> >>
> >
> > Give up and let chaos reign supreme?
> >
> > Miles Fidelman
> >
> > --
> > In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> > In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>