When I used to metamod - I would look at how the comment was modded and state if I thought the moderation was fair or not.
If I understand the new system and instructions, I'm now grading the comment itself and how that affects the moderation depends on what it was. So for example, the first comment I just saw there had been modded troll. If I hit the plus I say the comment is useful and metamod the moderation of troll as unfair? If a comment was modded insightful and I hit negative I'm saying that the comment isn't insightful and again placing an unfair on the mod? So plus would be the equivalent of fair for a positive moderation and unfair for a negative moderation while minus would be fair for a down mod and minus would be unfair for an upmod?
At first glance it strikes me as a bit confusing - but maybe I'm just not that's a failing on my part.
Basically, you're saying "Good Comment" and "Bad Comment"... like, did you get something from this comment or not.
The reason for this is that basically we can double up on moderations... if you say this is a "Good" comment by clicking "+", you are implicitly agreeing with "Insightful" and "Informative" and disagreeing with "Troll" or "Flamebait". Basically, it just lets us be more efficient with our limited M2 votes in the system.
if you say this is a "Good" comment by clicking "+", you are implicitly agreeing with "Insightful" and "Informative" and disagreeing with "Troll" or "Flamebait".
So if somebody rated a comment troll, but I think it's funny, I should rate a +? What if the comment could go both trollish/funny? What exactly are the repercussions for the original modders for getting disagreed with a lot? Will they get a message each time they were agreed/disagreed with, or could they just get silently banned from modding like in the current system?
Does this affect underrated and overrated? The old metamod system never included those, so those mods were abused a lot.
Well, it's up to you. What you are basically saying is "Is this a positive contribution to your Slashdot experience, or not". We'll interpret that under the hood to determine the fairness/unfairness/funnyness/unfunnyness of comments.
I think we can logically extend this to over/under as well. ALthough that's not in there yet, it certainly could be.
The 'Read More' button links to the comment in context. Maybe we should change that word.
Does this affect underrated and overrated? The old metamod system never included those, so those mods were abused a lot.
I second that question. I continue to be mystified why some moderations should arbitrarily be exempt from M2. What are the benefits and do the benefits outweigh the problems caused by their abuse?
According to all the latest reports, there was no truth in any of the
earlier reports.
just to check (Score:1)
I'm confused a bit.
When I used to metamod - I would look at how the comment was modded and state if I thought the moderation was fair or not.
If I understand the new system and instructions, I'm now grading the comment itself and how that affects the moderation depends on what it was. So for example, the first comment I just saw there had been modded troll. If I hit the plus I say the comment is useful and metamod the moderation of troll as unfair? If a comment was modded insightful and I hit negative I'm saying that the comment isn't insightful and again placing an unfair on the mod? So plus would be the equivalent of fair for a positive moderation and unfair for a negative moderation while minus would be fair for a down mod and minus would be unfair for an upmod?
At first glance it strikes me as a bit confusing - but maybe I'm just not that's a failing on my part.
Re: (Score:2)
Not that I do much M2 anymore anyway...
Re: (Score:3)
The reason for this is that basically we can double up on moderations... if you say this is a "Good" comment by clicking "+", you are implicitly agreeing with "Insightful" and "Informative" and disagreeing with "Troll" or "Flamebait". Basically, it just lets us be more efficient with our limited M2 votes in the system.
Re: (Score:1)
if you say this is a "Good" comment by clicking "+", you are implicitly agreeing with "Insightful" and "Informative" and disagreeing with "Troll" or "Flamebait".
So if somebody rated a comment troll, but I think it's funny, I should rate a +? What if the comment could go both trollish/funny? What exactly are the repercussions for the original modders for getting disagreed with a lot? Will they get a message each time they were agreed/disagreed with, or could they just get silently banned from modding like in the current system?
Does this affect underrated and overrated? The old metamod system never included those, so those mods were abused a lot.
And what about contex
Re: (Score:3)
I think we can logically extend this to over/under as well. ALthough that's not in there yet, it certainly could be.
The 'Read More' button links to the comment in context. Maybe we should change that word.
Re: (Score:2)
Does this affect underrated and overrated? The old metamod system never included those, so those mods were abused a lot.
I second that question. I continue to be mystified why some moderations should arbitrarily be exempt from M2. What are the benefits and do the benefits outweigh the problems caused by their abuse?