Journal FortKnox's Journal: Why Do Editors Appends Comments To The Story?? 7
This journal entry is to discuss this point.
Time and time again, CmdrTaco LOVES to point out that editors are users, too. Well, now, why don't the "users" that are editors post their comments into the comment section to be moderated with the rest? Well, I can see that people like michael would be posting at -1 within a day (even banned, HA!). Seriously, though, if they are "users" enough that when you get moderated, it won't define who's a "user" or an "editor", then why do they get to append to an article. Since we are so democratic on slashdot, shouldn't the highest rated comment go there?
Time and time again, CmdrTaco LOVES to point out that editors are users, too. Well, now, why don't the "users" that are editors post their comments into the comment section to be moderated with the rest? Well, I can see that people like michael would be posting at -1 within a day (even banned, HA!). Seriously, though, if they are "users" enough that when you get moderated, it won't define who's a "user" or an "editor", then why do they get to append to an article. Since we are so democratic on slashdot, shouldn't the highest rated comment go there?
while we're at it.... (Score:1, Insightful)
...i think someone else brought up changing posts without notice this morning
...editor mods still appear the same as other normal mods
...michael sucks
...seth (the one that allegedly stalked michael) writes very decent and informative posts on slashdot, as well as extremely insightful articles on k5 regarding censorship
Looking at the profiles... (Score:1)
Slashdot editors are users. They also happen to be editors (a smaller subset of users) with more access to the system. I don't really see a problem with appending comments to the story -- it has many uses:
- Appending multiple but similar submissions
- Providing links to older/relevant discussions
- Providing random insights
- Bitching, whining and moaning
I dunno. As far as I see it, Slashdot isn't a democracy. It's Taco's sandbox. And his sand. It looks like a democracy because for the most part, that's what works. But when it comes down to it, what Taco says goes.*shrug*
More like Catbox (Score:1)
Two words: (Score:2)
Editors would simply insert their comments as the first post. This would upset the trolls and probably get modded down, since their comments are rarely interesting or even really on-topic. Then the nobody would ever read any of the witty things that they have to say and they wouldn't get their daily ego-stroke from running this site.
Anyhow, /. really doesn't need a troll revolt, so let's just keep things as they are.
There is good news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Occasionally, I find editor's comments useful because I sometimes need a little help understanding the articles (yes, I'm an idiot, no point in bothering to tell me THAT). Occasionally, just like you noticed in your "mutiny" journal, editors attach their grossly inappropriate opinions to the articles, then people turn around and post a comment explaining how stupid the editor was and that comment gets modded up. It happens every day, the most recent example being right here [slashdot.org]. I just thought it was part of how it works, wherein if you don't like what someone has to say, you post, and if others agree, your post does well. Did I miss something?
Why Do Editors Mod down Comments They Don't Like? (Score:2, Insightful)
Apparently editors will downmod their critics without any remorse or abandon.