Engadget hides things

Adam G · Post by **Adam G** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:22 am

Since my last topic was locked

, I figured I would start a new one that the community could add input to.

To simply show you what I mean by Engadget is "hiding" things from you, let's take a look back at time and reminisce.
I found an article on Engadget that hadn't yet been "posted". That is to say, it was on their server, but not yet released to be read by the public.
It was found at http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/20/phos ... way-part-2.
They have since then moved that article, but don't worry, I found it (Unintentionally)!
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/20/phos ... rt-2-yxjf/

Why did they move it just because I found it? Is it really that big of a deal and if so, why not just edit access to the page instead of moving it? Also, go their and post to get a free watch!

Maybe include the tag "Ben's ARMY" at the end of you comment, but that may cause some problems between Ben and the Engadget staff...

Also, what exactly does "yxjf" mean, or is it just some random characters someone came up with?

~Adam~

timmeh87 · Post by **timmeh87** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:40 pm

moved:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/20/phos ... rt-2-dkg3/

hint: use google.

they probably move it either randomly or when they detect traffic spikes or something. so they dont get totally flooded by idiots from a forum who ruin it for everyone

Adam G · Post by **Adam G** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:36 pm

timmeh87 wrote:moved:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/20/phos ... rt-2-dkg3/

hint: use google.

they probably move it either randomly or when they detect traffic spikes or something. so they dont get totally flooded by idiots from a forum who ruin it for everyone

You couldn't use Google if Google didn't know it was there.

Once they put it on the front page, then yes, Google it.

tom61 · Post by **tom61** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:37 pm

It's called approval. Someone posts something, then to make it appear on the main page, it has to be approved. Mostly used on sites where users submit news items (so that spam doesn't go through), but I guess it would be a useful mechanism to have an editor look it over and then approve it on Engadget.

Or it could be an MI5 plot.

Adam G · Post by **Adam G** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:41 pm

tom61 wrote:It's called approval. Someone posts something, then to make it appear on the main page, it has to be approved. Mostly used on sites where users submit news items (so that spam doesn't go through), but I guess it would be a useful mechanism to have an editor look it over and then approve it on Engadget.

Or it could be an MI5 plot.

Okay, but why did it say it was written at 12:42 if I made a comment at 11:42? Just curious.

lifeisbetterwithketchup · Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:28 pm

Adam G wrote: Okay, but why did it say it was written at 12:42 if I made a comment at 11:42? Just curious.

I wrote this at 9:24. To you, it appears that it was written at 7:24 (assuming I've got my time zones straight).

Adam G · Post by **Adam G** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:49 pm

lifeisbetterwithketchup wrote:
Adam G wrote: Okay, but why did it say it was written at 12:42 if I made a comment at 11:42? Just curious.
I wrote this at 9:24. To you, it appears that it was written at 7:24 (assuming I've got my time zones straight).

I was using time quotes directly from Engadget.com, thus, their server time. If the article said "12:42", and the comment I made said "11:42", well...I think you understand?

HazmatB · Post by **HazmatB** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:12 pm

Here is my question:

Why is this news? So they store unpublished articles on their server... It isn't really a big surprise... Especially that article, as it was a contest.

Sorry I just don't get why anyone would be surprised by this...