What do you do in this (stupid) work situation

[OverVolt]

She's an internal customer and probably feels put upon or sidestepped. Apologize for stepping on her toes and ask for her help in making the website as professional as you know her capable of. A little sunshine and flattery does wonders. Bring her some coffee/tea/chocolate. Don't waste energy on negatives waves, Moriarty.

Yea this is the best route. Nobody likes a complainer at work. All management will do is start micromanaging and it'll just get worse. It's not a big deal.

 

[dank69]

Well I spoke to her this morning and things are OK. I think she was just having a shitty day yesterday.

Oh good news, you can save the matches for another day.

 

[Imp]

You're on the wrong forum pal. ATOT doesn't make mistakes at work, and every precious gem we create is etched in granite to be admired and marveled over for generations to come. I'm afraid you don't meet spec. Sorry...

Yep. I love all the perfectionists here who never make a single mistake in life, especially one as big as a typo. And because proofreading is a completely error proof process done by humans who are completely infallible 100% of the time...

Even professional proofreaders screw up. That's why they have redundancy and specific methods, and shit still happens and errors get fixed across reprints/editions. In my experience with non-professional proofreaders (i.e. letting higher-ups look through things), they skim, catch the occasional big mistake, and pass it to the next person.

 

[alkemyst]

My question is why should someone else be proof-reading another's work automatically.

When I was a programming, typos and grammar were handed by the team and anything sent to the web publisher was considered ready for the web.

 

[Sheep]

Yep. I love all the perfectionists here who never make a single mistake in life, especially one as big as a typo. And because proofreading is a completely error proof process done by humans who are completely infallible 100% of the time...

Even professional proofreaders screw up. That's why they have redundancy and specific methods, and shit still happens and errors get fixed across reprints/editions. In my experience with non-professional proofreaders (i.e. letting higher-ups look through things), they skim, catch the occasional big mistake, and pass it to the next person.

I'd agree with you if it was just one person who messed up. But shit flows downhill. Imagine if the web publisher's time was wasted with constant re-work leading to delays of other important tasks because EIGHT people whose jobs involved vetting the materials couldn't be bothered to get their acts together. The web publisher's going to be on the hook for not getting things done in a timely manner even though none of it was a result of her actions. It's perfectly legit to ask them to get their acts together, particularly if this is a chronic occurance.

 

[Imp]

I'd agree with you if it was just one person who messed up. But shit flows downhill. Imagine if the web publisher's time was wasted with constant re-work leading to delays of other important tasks because EIGHT people whose jobs involved vetting the materials couldn't be bothered to get their acts together. The web publisher's going to be on the hook for not getting things done in a timely manner even though none of it was a result of her actions. It's perfectly legit to ask them to get their acts together, particularly if this is a chronic occurance.

Yep, eight people screwed up and deserve the blame -- I'm not saying they aren't blameless. But it's likely going to keep happening again and again. It's happening right now in thousands of organizations or groups across the country even with redundancies in place.

You can focus on blaming and shitting on the screw ups (what some are doing), or you can try to design a process to minimize errors but allows for corrections to be made if/when they're discovered (what the OP's "work situation" was about). Since the OP has stated that the web editor has since made the corrections, it appears that they're going with the latter approach.

In this case, let's put it into perspective... Publishers with professional proofreaders, decades of experience, and veteran editors let typos happen on 100,000 copy print runs. Doesn't sound like OP has the same level of organization dedicated to publications.