Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot.org

FortKnox's Journal: The Second Slashdot Moderation Movement! 16

Journal by FortKnox
Yes, its gotten to me again.
Reading YRO and michael constantly blasting MS and their abuse, and spam and its abuse...

Want to talk about monopolies, and annoyances, and abuse?

Then lets talk.
Still, we don't see user moderation vs. editor moderation. Why not? Well, Taco's come up with lots of excuses like "editors hardly moderate." I'd like to see that for myself. The one he used on sourceforge, though, was "editors are users too." HARDLY! Maybe if we were like k5, then yeah. To use OO concepts, editors are an extension of users with more power. If you give users unlimited mod points, and the ability to accept/write stories, then yeah, we're the same. Want to argue more? If editors are users too, then they should wait, like us, to get mod points.

Over/Underrated STILL isn't in metamod. Over/Underrated needs fixed. Badly. My suggestion is only allow overrated for posts above score:2. And Over/Underrated CAN be metamodded. The m2 checker just needs to check on the comment and read it to determine if its a good moderation (if you wanna get real complex, just tell the m2 checker what the score was when it was over/underrated).
Don't like those options? Then take Over/Underrated OUT!

All in all, the moderation system needs reworked, and these two points are what I am DEMANDING.

Don't even get me started on the mass moderator-revoking...

If you agree with me, do three things.
First, click that you are "Willing to Moderate" (if you can), then when you get moderation points, take all 3 days (so that less moderators will be given the next two days), then mod up (using all 5 mod points) -1 scores with underrateds (don't worry, they can't catch you... underrated isn't m2'ed).

Next, participate in The (Hopefully) Great Slashdot Blackout.

Finally, put this in your sig: <A HREF="~FortKnox/journal/6662">We DEMAND a better mod system!!</A>
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Second Slashdot Moderation Movement!

Comments Filter:
  • I think all your points are valid.

    But even if implemented, I think reading /. comments would still be tedious.

    For example, the cloning story today. There's tons of posts. And tons have been moderated up to 4 or 5. And they're all very similar. Is there insight buried in the hundreds of comments there? Who knows? They all have the same title, and I'm not going to read them all (and I shouldn't have to, that's what moderation is for).

    The problem on a story like that is simply this - "moderators are sheep". Any one of the comments modded up is great on its own. All the moderators will clear M2 with no problem. But the resulting view of the comments is really boring. The same few points reiterated in 5 comments, all score 5.

    I don't know why the same thing doesn't happen on K5, but it doesn't. Perhaps people there aren't after glory as much (no karma, and high moderation isn't terribly glorious). Perhaps there's simply less readers/posters.

    • Use friends to bring interesting people's ratings to 4 or 5. I find this makes it a much better experience. Also make sure to rate your fans up at least a point, to see comments from people who like you for whatever reason.

      (And if you're in a bad mood, rate your freaks +6 and then mercilessly flame them.)

  • ...,practically.

    I proposed in my journal [slashdot.org] a means by which over and underrated mods can be m2'ed. If I knew Perl and SlashCode, I'd submit a patch, but it would probably be shitcanned by Jamie (I mean, if a trivial regexp takes weeks to be included, how long could it take for a feature-add to a major subsystem to be merged?).

    I'm planning to add M2 of overrated and underrated to my Slash-like site [crystalorb.net] when I add comments and moderation.

    The other thing I suggest is giving metamod teeth: take the square root of the net metamod (over some suitably large number of metamods, maybe 2000?) for a moderator and add it to the number of moderations they have. So if a moderator's last 2000 metamods are judged Fair, they get 50 (5+sqrt(2000)) available moderations.

    I'd also consider limiting mod-downs to one-half of mod-ups, for all users. So if I want to mod someone down, I have to mod two other posts up (since, after all, in the normal case, a post can be modded up twice as much as it can be modded down, and the moderators are supposed to concentrate on modding up, right?). This really makes modbombing difficult, even for the editors.

    Of course, if Slashdot allowed highly rated users (hell, limit it to highly rated subscribers) become [unpaid] editors, things would get a lot better around here. In addition, allow bad editors to be let go, using their metamod results as a basis. Since the moderator's name is never given, there's no way that an editor no one likes would be targeted by metamodders for firing.

    End of rant...

    I'm planning on implementing every one of those features on NotSlash, by the way....

  • That is one horribly abused moderation.

    This comment [slashdot.org] was tea-bagged twice after reaching a lofty score of 2. Though not the greatest comment in the world, it deserved better than zero.

    Or when someone mods one of your posts Overrated, and then mod-bombs you with Overrateds by checking your posting history.

    Remeber the Free Dead Penis Bird crapflood? That was a result of when two 11-day old comments received 6 Overrateds within a span of 40 minutes or so. One of those two took four of the mods. That reeked of editor Overrated mod abuse.

    Overrated == abuse. Pls fx thx.
    • Overrated has lots of potential for abuse, but is still a worthwhile tool within a slashdot-style moderation system. After all, it can only take three people liking a comment to get it listed as the best comment in a section, which isn't always right.

      Having seen both in detail, though, I have to say I much prefer the K5 system. By allowing each comment more moderations and then averageing them, you end up with much more precise ranking. Look at most stories now, and the first few root comments tend to be short, pithy and obvious. Quite often they're jokes. Why's this? Well, they're the oldest which have hit 5. They're pretty good comments normally but because they hit 5 and were written before the others, they're shown higher as time is always the final decider, oldest first. And, let's be honest, a decent, insightful post takes longer to write.

      Taco was moaning some time ago that he didn't like seeing all the funny moderations. Well, the reason we get so many highly rated jokes is that they can be written more quickly and his moderation system favours quickly written comments. It might have worked when there were only a handful of moderators, but with hundreds it's hopeless. Not that he'll ever move it...
  • I think the reason why you don't see much bad modding on K5 (to the extent that you see it on Slashdot) is that modding on slashdot is anonymous. I can look at any k5 user's rating history, and see if (s)he's trying to censor other views by downrating.

    I became a mini-celebrity on k5 a few days ago for my battle against greenrd. I'm now looking through his comment rating history to see if there are any that warrant a corrective rating (in general any comment which he downrates is worthy of an uprate from me).

  • When editors don't listen, they don't listen. I rarely visit here anymore because these editors got out of touch with their fan base in many ways. I'm off to marotti.com, where I know the staff actually gives a damn.
  • go start your own site.
  • by zapfie (560589)
    Slashdot is a privelidge, not an unalienable right.

Some people carve careers, others chisel them.

Working...