I'd go farther than that and say that if it's not possible to read and participate in discussion effectively in a text-only browser like Lynx, then the site is too encumbered with unnecessary crap. Ok, I wouldn't actually read it in Lynx; I'd use my browser du jour like I would for any other random site. But the point is, it's the discussion content that is important, and any window dressing is only acceptable to the extent that it doesn't get in the way of consuming and creating the discussion content.
I haven't put a lot of thought into this yet, but my first impulse is to say that a new Slashdot site that was basically like Usenet of old with some form of moderation and the ability to embed URLs would be quite nice. There are probably fatal sucking chest wounds in that idea, but I'm just throwing it out there for discussion.
Does "Slashdot 2.0" even need to be a fixed web site? Could something distributed like Usenet be implemented to work well on today's Internet? Perhaps digitally signing messages would be the new delineator between non-anoymous posters vs. Anonymous Cowards, with each participant being able to choose whether they wish to view anonymous posts or not, killfile non-anoymous posters who annoy them with spam or other unwelcome postings, etc.? Again, these may be stupid ideas. I liked Usenet greatly back in the prehistoric times when I used it, though I may have forgotten a lot of shortcomings that annoyed me at the time, and it may not scale at all well to today's much larger and much more diverse online community.