I think the editors or owners of Slashdot are either 1) Trying to increase viewership by appealing to a lowest denominator (Star go boom! Big word scary! Chemicals are mean! Vroom vroom car!) or 2) Trying to deliberately weaken the readership for purposes I can only speculate that. That second theory is bolstered by the clumsy rolling out of 'features' during the past few weeks - breaking things that once worked, adding new features that don't, and in general doing their best to make the site almost more tr
I have no inside information, but it's apparent to me that Slsahdot is trying to be the new 'Facebook' or 'MySpace' for geeks. Or something. I'm expecting any day now the ability to add tacky photos, weird fonts and poor layouts to your journal pages.
Furthermore, I think that much of the original geek crowd is gone or mostly in lurk mode. So they are doing their best to attract a younger audience.
Furthermore, I think that much of the original geek crowd is gone or mostly in lurk mode. So they are doing their best to attract a younger audience.
I don't think they're gone, and lurk mode depends on your definition of it. If I'm sitting around with a bunch of geeks talking about non-technical stuff, I don't think that makes it lurk mode so much as everyday conversation. When we have technical discussions on here, the level of discussion isn't the same as a professional journal but it's very impressive
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday June 12, 2009 @12:38AM (#28304425)
However that doesn't mean that there aren't things that/. should fix. Your post is a case in point, a helpful realist perspective on the situation, but because you posted AC it stands at score 0, while the comment 'Having "journal pages" was bad enough.' unbelievably stands at score 2. The cause? Very simple, AC's start moderated at 0 instead of 1, which means even most moderators will not see them, so often they don't get moderated up even if they're good, or only after most readers have moved to the next story. Unfortunately, there is no a priori reason to assume comments from logged in users are necessarily better. I've been here quite some years and members also troll, flame, post incorrect stuff, inane crap, and so on./.'s moderation system is one big argument from authority. Which is a logical fallacy, so I guess it shouldn't surprise us that it yields disagreeable results. After all, if a post is good, it should be able to stand on itself, and it shouldn't have to depend on the reputation of the poster. Never mind the associated webforum reputation drama, which is less pronounced on/. than elsewhere, but still something I would rather do without entirely. And then there are comments which are more wisely made AC to begin with. Anyway, to tie this rant up, to see the most interesting posts in a thread, you'd probably (statistically speaking) have to either browse unmoderated and be confronted with all the noise, or you'd have to click all the "n replies omitted" links and possibly still be confronted with the noise./. has no moderation. It is really that bad. And there's a really simple solution. Why doesn't/. implement it? Is it really to encourage people to register? Well, given that most interesting comments are still, years since I first started to read/., made AC, I think we can safely say that it isn't working.
You can always just turn it off for yourself. That's what I do.
Anyway, what did you not like about my post? It was intended to draw the types of comments the parent posted. I wasn't so much interested in griping as finding out what other people really think.
Many of us who moderate have a rule not to moderate any AC, no matter how insightful. As per the moderation suggestions, I browse at -1 to undo any inappropriate downmodding. But I won't touch an AC because I believe my upmods are reserved for those registered and logged in.
It has been so long since I fiddled with my settings, I cannot say if my view is the default or not. But I don't recall only browsing at 1 or greater.
I would like rid of the AC post all together. It makes a great way to flame without getting a Karma hit. That and I think people should stand behind what they say. On Slashdot your not going to go to jail for what you post so protection from the man really isn't a good reason. Of course a lot of people will not agree with me and that is fine. They have their views and I have mine.
Wow, Great Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it THAT slow of a news day, or could no one else possibly outdo this clown of a submitter?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the editors or owners of Slashdot are either 1) Trying to increase viewership by appealing to a lowest denominator (Star go boom! Big word scary! Chemicals are mean! Vroom vroom car!) or 2) Trying to deliberately weaken the readership for purposes I can only speculate that. That second theory is bolstered by the clumsy rolling out of 'features' during the past few weeks - breaking things that once worked, adding new features that don't, and in general doing their best to make the site almost more tr
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have no inside information, but it's apparent to me that Slsahdot is trying to be the new 'Facebook' or 'MySpace' for geeks. Or something. I'm expecting any day now the ability to add tacky photos, weird fonts and poor layouts to your journal pages.
Furthermore, I think that much of the original geek crowd is gone or mostly in lurk mode. So they are doing their best to attract a younger audience.
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think they're gone, and lurk mode depends on your definition of it. If I'm sitting around with a bunch of geeks talking about non-technical stuff, I don't think that makes it lurk mode so much as everyday conversation. When we have technical discussions on here, the level of discussion isn't the same as a professional journal but it's very impressive
We should get rid of the AC -1 modifier (Score:2, Interesting)
However that doesn't mean that there aren't things that /. should fix. Your post is a case in point, a helpful realist perspective on the situation, but because you posted AC it stands at score 0, while the comment 'Having "journal pages" was bad enough.' unbelievably stands at score 2. The cause? Very simple, AC's start moderated at 0 instead of 1, which means even most moderators will not see them, so often they don't get moderated up even if they're good, or only after most readers have moved to the next story. /.'s moderation system is one big argument from authority. Which is a logical fallacy, so I guess it shouldn't surprise us that it yields disagreeable results. After all, if a post is good, it should be able to stand on itself, and it shouldn't have to depend on the reputation of the poster. Never mind the associated webforum reputation drama, which is less pronounced on /. than elsewhere, but still something I would rather do without entirely. And then there are comments which are more wisely made AC to begin with. /. has no moderation. It is really that bad. And there's a really simple solution. Why doesn't /. implement it? Is it really to encourage people to register? Well, given that most interesting comments are still, years since I first started to read /., made AC, I think we can safely say that it isn't working.
Unfortunately, there is no a priori reason to assume comments from logged in users are necessarily better. I've been here quite some years and members also troll, flame, post incorrect stuff, inane crap, and so on.
Anyway, to tie this rant up, to see the most interesting posts in a thread, you'd probably (statistically speaking) have to either browse unmoderated and be confronted with all the noise, or you'd have to click all the "n replies omitted" links and possibly still be confronted with the noise.
Re: We should get rid of the AC -1 modifier (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You can always just turn it off for yourself. That's what I do.
Anyway, what did you not like about my post? It was intended to draw the types of comments the parent posted. I wasn't so much interested in griping as finding out what other people really think.
Re: (Score:1)
Nevermind on the last part. I didn't see the post you were talking about until later.
Re: (Score:1)
Many of us who moderate have a rule not to moderate any AC, no matter how insightful. As per the moderation suggestions, I browse at -1 to undo any inappropriate downmodding. But I won't touch an AC because I believe my upmods are reserved for those registered and logged in.
It has been so long since I fiddled with my settings, I cannot say if my view is the default or not. But I don't recall only browsing at 1 or greater.
Re: (Score:2)
I would like rid of the AC post all together. It makes a great way to flame without getting a Karma hit. That and I think people should stand behind what they say. On Slashdot your not going to go to jail for what you post so protection from the man really isn't a good reason.
Of course a lot of people will not agree with me and that is fine. They have their views and I have mine.
Re:We should get rid of the AC -1 modifier (Score:5, Insightful)
If you get rid of AC you'll get rid of lots of noise, true.
you'll also get rid of people who post inside info...
-nB
Re: (Score:2)
Yea sure like it is hard to make an account to leak. Besides do you really listen to "Inside info from an AC on Slashdot?"
Talk about iffy at best.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You should check back once in a while, that 0 is now a 5.
Seems like it works to me. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Very simple, AC's start moderated at 0 instead of 1, which means even most moderators will not see them
Wrong solution for what has been a suggestion from the first day moderation was added - moderators should read at -1.
There are not too many posts from Anonymous Cowardons that I want to mod up when I have mod points, but sometimes I do.