What's amazing to me isn't that/. has carried on this long, but rather that the comment quality on here hasn't gone the way of most social new sites. It seems that in general as a social news site ages, matures, and grows, the comment quality follows an inverse pattern. Or more simply, as the number of users approaches infinity, the comment quality approaches 4chan. Digg used to be a decent site for discussion; now you'd be laughed at for even suggesting that the comments might be notable. Reddit is quickl
The moderation system here at slashdot is terrible.
But then again most online moderation systems are. Quite simply, it is somewhat depressing that at this point we still don't have a good trusted "commenter identity" system that rewards good posters in a better manner. There are a number of proposed solutions out there but no one seems interested in implementing anything but the most basic systems. We have far too much idle computing power to be implementing this simple systems that don't scale in terms of reward or users.
The problem of rewarding good posters too much is that it tends to make the community degenerate into a clique. Look at Wikipedia and its editors, for example.
The best thing about Slashdot's moderation system, IMHO, is that it rewards good *posts* rather than posters because even Anonymous Cowards can provide interesting insight, and even the most intelligent fellow is liable to the ocassional episode of stupidity.
and even the most intelligent fellow is liable to the ocassional episode of stupidity
That was only the *one* time, I told you. Jeez, cut me some slack will ya. Well, since you've been most gracious in not mentioning my name, I won't be the spelling Nazi right now, and we'll call it even. In fact, to top it off, on Monday I will even pretend you didn't even make this post.
A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.
Age and quality. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Age and quality. (Score:2)
The moderation system here at slashdot is terrible.
But then again most online moderation systems are. Quite simply, it is somewhat depressing that at this point we still don't have a good trusted "commenter identity" system that rewards good posters in a better manner. There are a number of proposed solutions out there but no one seems interested in implementing anything but the most basic systems. We have far too much idle computing power to be implementing this simple systems that don't scale in terms of reward or users.
Re:Age and quality. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Age and quality. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem of rewarding good posters too much is that it tends to make the community degenerate into a clique. Look at Wikipedia and its editors, for example.
The best thing about Slashdot's moderation system, IMHO, is that it rewards good *posts* rather than posters because even Anonymous Cowards can provide interesting insight, and even the most intelligent fellow is liable to the ocassional episode of stupidity.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
and even the most intelligent fellow is liable to the ocassional episode of stupidity
That was only the *one* time, I told you. Jeez, cut me some slack will ya. Well, since you've been most gracious in not mentioning my name, I won't be the spelling Nazi right now, and we'll call it even. In fact, to top it off, on Monday I will even pretend you didn't even make this post.