I no longer have the ability to moderate or meta-moderate. My preferences don't even have the "Am willing to moderate" check box any more.
I expected it to happen, eventually. As a still-maturing reader of Slashdot, I become more and more likely to be at odds with general geek opinion. I suppose some moderation or comment of mine must have irritated one of the editors, and my moderator access was revoked.
It makes sense, and I agree it's the appropriate thing to do, but it's still sad. I enjoy reading Slashdot, the stories and comments, the polls. I visit Slashdot more often than Google News, my other online news source. I'm going to miss being able to highlight gems of wisdom or information, and I'm going to miss the careful weighing of points of view that went into my meta-moderating.
I say it makes sense, not because I'm cynical about Slashdot's administration and behavior, but because a homogenous environment like the Slashdot community isn't likely to survive being disrupted by dissenting views. It risks flamewars like the kind you can find all over Usenet, and it becomes harder for people to find information provided by people they agree with. (The zoo is a step towards making that easier.)
I don't see a point in griping about the system. If you do it in a comment, you'll be flooded by "insightful" and "troll" moderations. If you do it in your journal, who's going to read it? I'm willing to bet that most Slashdot users have something negative to say about the system, but so what?
To put it simply, CmdrTaco can do whatever the hell he pleases. He started the project(I think. I'm not too knowledgeable in