Slashdot sold to EvilTroll for $10 million, whose vision for the site is to replace every page on the entire website with a GoatSe picture.

Or some popup ads and possibly some Adware/Spyware and fakeAV popups/links.

Disagree != misunderstand.

Nice advertisement in your signature.

Why don't publishers put the ads in a section of the page that can allow the rest of the page to load and render before the ad loads and renders?

E.g. Embed the ad in a sized Iframe.

1) No, that's completely wrong. Think about that one a bit harder.
2) You'll find this is the situation with moderators pretty much everywhere in real life; you must be young
3) Also wrong, and obviously so; you know very well posting to a thread you moderated will undo the moderation, and frankly it matters very little since moderation can't completely remove any posts.
4) You'll find this is also true of the internet in general.
5) You'll find the distinction between these two types of posts is only clear if you're the one who posted it. This is a universal constant of society too; nothing to do with slashcode.
6) You didn't think this one out very carefully either, obviously.
7) See #6. What, do you think getting all your friends to help gang up and moderate some poor sucker's post to -1000 is gonna actually help this situation any? Careful... your hidden agenda is showing...
8) see #5
9) Seriously? all your complaints above and you actually still think someone is gonna use a "disagree" moderation when they can call it a troll or flamebait? you said yourself there's no accountability.... come on. if you want to actually address problems you have to actually think out your "solutions" to their logical conclusion. Even if you could enforce use of "disagree" moderation, there's absolutely no sane world where disagreeing with someone's post should be justification for being allowed to moderate it. In fact, quite the opposite; what your suggestion creates here is called a "conflict of interest." At best, this suggestion doesn't change anything at all and just adds server load and development costs. At worst, it actually causes/exacerbates a problem you claim to care about; that legitimate posts are unfairly moderated down.
10) I'm not even sure what you mean by this. The moderator points are assigned clearly by past behavior. Don't post anonymously so much and you'll get more moderator points to spend. Simple. This point also appears to be wrong, but Its possible I just don't understand what you mean, or you meant to type something else.

And then we have:

11) I guess I don't know about any delays, but my guess is its a server-load/hosting-cost issue. Not all ACs are going to be the honorable gentlemen you envision them to be; many of them are actually trying to crash or infect Slashdot's servers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In the real world, I can't imagine any high profile website that allows users to post content anonymously without any sort of throttle whatsoever. You must not maintain web software for a living.
12) Ok this one you're right about, and I actually agree with you. Someone clearly needs to brush up on their understanding of character sets and regular expressions, because the data handling of this text field is so amateur-hour 1996. Its pretty embarrassing to see it still behaving the same exact way in 2015. They should have put development man-hours into fixing this first, instead of that whole "Slashdot Beta" boondoggle.
13) God help us all if you actually get your way on this one. The rest of us would rather NOT see every single user's stupid rich-content banner-ad signature. I'm certain the signature character limit was specifically chosen to prohibit the ability for the signatures to carry a Google tracking tag. Your other opinions might just be misguided, but this one makes me suspect you're actually a bad person, who seeks to do harm on those around him.

And of course...

14) Ok, I agree here too. The editing sucks. At least they could fix obvious typos and grammatical errors, missing links, outright inaccuracies, etc. Its pretty clear most of them take zero pride in their work, or else their parents just didn't discipline them enough as children.
15) No, the firehose is there so all submissions are visible by the users. If you think its a waste of time just don't use it. Nobody ever implied you should in the first place. Your lack of self control isn't a justification for removing a feature that allows complete transparency of submitted (pre-approved) stories. This is actually one of the few really smart things they've added in recent years.
16) Ok, I agree with this one too, just not with the entire list of what you think is currently broken. Slashdot Beta was balls though, for sure.

I'd probably only fire like 70% of them. The rest could probably be trained to suck less, once the dead wood is dropped.

You are right. It's not an open source project. All it does is open its source. C'mon. Bridging API frameworks is where "it's at" today.

What do you mean "locked to a single platform". I admit that I haven't tried it, but they give away the source code to VS 2015. Which is pretty much why RedHat it trying to claim that code which used to be owned by a single company is a point of failure. It's another business swipe at MS. RedHat is running for the hills because pretty soon they'll lose all purpose.

All while working for RedHat. RPM relies on shell scripts and doesn't have a reliable rollback/commit mechanism.

But yeah, this obvious attempt at slamming business competition under the guise of technical know-how is oh, so 1995 (which was 20 years ago). But, in todays world, we have gotten to the point when it is not only easier, but more reliable to generate code than to write it by hand. And while they have some learning curve, visual code analysis tool are still better than text-only ones. Even the resurgence of C can be mostly attributed to the fact it's simpler syntax makes it easier to generate than the new C++ syntax.

Why would you make an anti-tracking feature for a browser only made to track you? Whatever you do you are still being tracked by default, that is the point of Chrome.

He sounds like another text-only monkey. He is of the generation that thinks that code still needs to be written by hand. Basically, he is doesn't know why is incompetent and he is proud of it.

I'm going to have to leave this now, but as a parting shot: The Washington post explicitly says that the FCC does indeed have the power to "preemt" state law (direct quote). (As I understand it without having to go via a court, though I assume that the state can sue the FCC if they want to appeal the decision).

Is this a mischaracterisation of the actual legal process?

Ah, sorry, you sent it to the wrong person. You must want the Nigerian prince sitting in the back row of the cafeteria over there.

I don't do ID theft or other crimes, but if you want to e-mail me the private keys for a Bitcoin wallet with a few hundred BTC in it.......

Pathogens don't "learn". They evolve, ok. They adapt, ok. But they aren't sentient. They are not thinking. And especially they aren't thinking "hey, if they vaccinate, they won't die anyway, at least not as fast, so let's get more deadly!" This isn't the fucking Pandemic flash game for crying out loud!

There is no interest of killing a host for a parasite. It's an side effect. Unintended, and actually harmful for the parasite in the long run. Just like poisoning the seas is harmful for us. We ain't some comic book villain who does it for ... well, for being evil. We do it 'cause it cuts costs. The oil spill is only the side effect, not the reason we do it.

So yes, they COULD get more deadly because we don't die as fast and a more deadly mutated strain would kill itself off with the host if there was no vaccination. But that is hardly an argument against vaccination. It only means that at worst we're with vaccination where we are now without. AT WORST. If, and only if, the pathogens mutate in such a way that they get more deadly. Which is neither in their interest nor anything they would (evolutionary) strive for.

What's the benefit for a pathogen to be more deadly? Killing the host is actually bad for it, since that ends spreading (with this host at least).

I can dissolve that conspiracy theory: They are more afraid of someone finding a way to bypass their input sanitizers than losing money from hacks. So no characters are allowed that could possibly, remotely, be considered "active" or "command" characters in any language they could probably think of.

Also, most, if not all, of the hacks happen due to people getting their passwords stolen by trojans and the like rather than someone actually guessing the passwords.

Provided that we now know how your passwords are created, finding your password is essentially not harder or easier than before. From a technical point of view of course. Actually, it probably is much easier now considering that, since you probably rely on your creation algorithm to introduce enough entropy, you probably choose simpler passwords.