ryanr's Journal: Interesting moderation cycle

So, I happened to get the first comment in a front-page story today: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/26/1757221&tid=172&tid=3

I wasn't particularly concerned about getting a Frist P0st or anything, but I have a strong opinion on the subject matter, and wanted it heard. Having an early comment is key to getting anyone to look at it, and discuss your point. And being that it's in my area of interest, I'm being my usual sarcastic curmudgeonly self.

So, it was moderated all day, and I think the story is done. Here's the moderation play-by-play:

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (2).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (3).

Stupid...has been moderated Flamebait (-1).
It is currently scored Interesting (2).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (3).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (4).

Stupid...has been moderated Overrated (-1).
It is currently scored Interesting (3).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (4).

Stupid...has been moderated Troll (-1).
It is currently scored Interesting (3).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (4).

Stupid...has been moderated Interesting (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (5).

Stupid...has been moderated Overrated (-1).
It is currently scored Interesting (4).

Stupid...has been moderated Overrated (-1).
It is currently scored Interesting (3).

Stupid...Insightful (+1).
It is currently scored Interesting (4).

In case you didn't pick up on it "Stupid" is the title of my post, referring to the subject in the article. The comment moderation message has been abbreviated somewhat for space.

I just thought it was interesting to see. I'm curious if the downmods are just haters, Mac zealots, or what. The Flamebait one is about the only one I could remotely agree with.

Meta?

[johndiii]

Almost makes me want to turn moderation on again so that I can do some M2. Nah. Not worth it. :-)

Re:Meta?

[ryanr]

I don't think I get to see the output of M^2 directly... I suppose I might see some of the negatives "cancelled".

Re:Meta?

[johndiii]

I think that you're right about not seeing the results. Only the crackheads get to see. :-) I could see the Flamebait, but only just barely, and I would be convinced that the person was over-sensitive. The cowards who were using Overrated, though, were just modding you down because they disagreed. Jerks.

Re:Meta?

[ryanr]

Yeah, overrated just needs to go. It's just an explicit way to say "I want to mod you down with no good reason."

Re:Meta?

[phiz187]

Well what happens when, and I'm not saying this is the case, a post is factually incorrect?

Offtopic is a stretch, flamebait is wrong, overrated fits just right.

yes/no ?

-PHiZ

Re:Meta?

[ryanr]

Not by definition of the word "overrated". You're saying that they meant overrated to mean "other"? That might be reasonable. I always read the list of specific reasons as being the only allowed reasons for modding something down.