Journal poofmeisterp's Journal: Comment system improvement-- 7
I propose to
1. Article posted.
2. Comments can be made on article.
2a. Comments are moderated.
2a(i). Moderations are meta-moderated.
3. A 'Random Discussion' can be had on the article.
3a. NO moderation is made on random discussions, there is only a junk filter *
3b. Junk filter has an enable/disable toggle.
3c. Specifications of what 'junk' is can be chosen by the user **
3d. Junk filtration system can be actively expanded upon by the
With the comment system you have to face the benefits and penalties of constructive commenting. The way the current system works is efficient with less comment material to be acted upon, in my opinion.
The addition to the system allows people who feel the need to rant to have said ability. It gives them the choice to argue over something that isn't 100% correct in everyone's minds. It encourages creativity and feedback, good and bad, on their creativity. It allows more opinions that aren't 100% on-topic, but are related to the topic at hand to a decent degree.
I believe that this is a useful improvement in both the commenting system, as well as the moderation system. It's a better balance. Ideas?
_______________________________________________________________________________
* (spam, random garbage text, etc).
** any discussion entry containing a URL or any discussion entry containing an '@' symbol, for example. Also, usernames can be entered as junk by readers. There is also an anonymous filter (i.e. all anonymous comments are marked as junk).
*** to automatically include new things determined to 'always' be junk, or new 'what junk is' selections that are selectable by the user.
Dunno... (Score:2)
Seems the unmoderated threads would devolve into one big trollfest, unless it was limited to people with a higher karma level.
I'd like to see journals not be modded; there are seldom enough comments in any one journal for hiding comments to matter, plus you can limit freaks and foes (although I think you may need a subscription for that feature).
As to moderation, it's never bothered me. My karma stays at excellent even when some halfwit modbombs me.
Re: (Score:2)
Understood... Here's an example that just occurred, and part (if not most) of the reason for my concern:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2481816&cid=37749060 [slashdot.org]
It's a humorous statement. It was intended to be that. It even gets modded as "Funny". Some guy responds that thinks he's smarter than me. I don't understand how in the hell a joke can be mistaken for "OMG I know more about this than you."
Next, I get modded down as "Overrated." "Funny" doesn't affect karma (that's in the FAQ), but Overrated
Re: (Score:2)
Next, I get modded down as "Overrated." "Funny" doesn't affect karma (that's in the FAQ), but Overrated? Not in the FAQ that it doesn't bump ya down.
Well, that's the danger of making a funny comment -- some people have no sense of humor and might mod you "troll" or "flamebait" for a commant that might have me laughing out loud. Whoever modded you "overrated" probably thought it just wasn't that funny.
Either way, what used to be me being a part of the discussion has become what seems to be a "mod him down ev
Re: (Score:2)
What's your definition of a modbomb? Could you give me a scenario that describes it?
The rest of what you wrote is descriptive. I understand. The 'no bonus' check box is something that isn't even available on the new UI in real-time. I have to click on the gear icon next to "post anonymously" to enable it, but as soon as it's checked and the "Save" button is clicked, it redirects back to the main page. If you typed a comment and chose the 'no bonus' option, you just lost everything.
Re: (Score:2)
A Modbomb is just what you described: someone using all his mod points to mod a person down. When you get the notification about comment moderation, and there are ten downmods there, you can be pretty sure you've been a bombing victim. It's an egregious abuse, too bad you can't tell if someone has been modbomed when you're metamoderating unless it's an interesting comment that was modded "troll", or an insightful and respectful comment modded "flamebait".
Re: (Score:2)
Gotcha. Kinda like the perfectly on-topic and useful one that I just modded up from some idiot's down-mod of "Offtopic".
BTW I got 10 mod points yesterday right after I responded to your first comment. Apparently the fast renewable moddage has been reduced to 10 sparse ones now.. Or something. I don't know. I don't get the mod point system. The time I asked about it in the past (help@), when I suddenly dropped from 15 to 5 with NO negative modded comments, I got a response that was a basic "I dunno. L
Re: (Score:2)
One more for you. Gold.
This is apparently 'Informative': http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2483874&cid=37762114 [slashdot.org]
This doesn't deserve a mod of any kind: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2483874&cid=37764126 [slashdot.org]
THIS deserves to be modded down: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2484446&cid=37766988 [slashdot.org]
Perhaps I should propose to ./ that the mod for "Funny" should be removed. All humorous statements should be banned. Also, supportive information that proves someone else wrong should only be modded