Journal sam_handelman's Journal: l'esprit de voltaire 4
WTF am I supposed to do with 15 mod points? I have enough trouble spending 5, chrissakes.
Anyway, I regard down-modding this as mod-abuse:
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1079987&cid=26322341
He's expressing a (clearly unpopular) opinion with which I disagree. I'd certainly up-mod the person arguing with him. But is this flamebait because most people disagree with it? He seems sincere to me.
Later on he could legitimately be called a troll since he starts insulting people.
No, it's Flamebait because the moon isn't cheese (Score:1)
If we upmodded instead of downmodded loony tunes postings, then slashdot would be filled with global warming deniers, even though 99.9999 percent of all scientists in the field have concurred that human activity is a major component of global warming.
And that ... would be bad.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How about not modding such posts in either direction? Just because I don't think a post should be down-moderated, does not mean I think it should be up-moderated. If that post were up-moderated (which it might have been, after I posted this in my journal,) then that is a situation were the over-rated
Are we restricting ourselves to the factual circumstances around global warming? Objective factual inaccuracy (which abounds among global warming "skeptics") is flamebait. But that is not 100% true, a g
Re: (Score:1)
When modding or metamodding, I try to also think of the intention of the poster.
Flamebait involves some intention to create controversy and trouble.
As opposed to Interesting or Informative, which might be possible for a global-warming denier, even if their end conclusion is false.
So concerned, eh? (Score:2)
You mean you can't find 15 bad mods in 10 posts?
Anyway, my sig summarizes my opinion of /. these days, but it isn't worth worrying about.