Help Shape the Future of Slashdot 763
Long-time readers will know that we try not to clutter the front page of Slashdot with much stuff about the site itself; this is a rare exception, but we hope you'll like the reason: we want your opinions. You should see above a link to take a survey about Slashdot, and (just to be heavy handed) here's the direct link. The questions there are simple, but we're going to read the answers carefully. The reminder bar up there will remain active for some time, but this story will scroll down the page like all Slashdot stories. Comments are welcome below; surveys have their limitations, after all, but please don't comment without also giving the survey a visit — if it makes sense, feel free to cut-and-paste any answers from there as comments, too. The engineers who build this site (and the editors, too!) are counting on your honest opinions and hoping for some great ideas; ideas outnumber the hours we have to do things, so we hope you'll make a case for the ways that Slashdot should change (and the ways it shouldn't!).
Moderation system (Score:4, Insightful)
This really ruins the comment system as one is supposed to only have certain mindset and he is supposed to do all the same comments over and over again. Then there is the other mod abuse what happens when someone sees a comment he really doesn't like, so he goes on personal war against the poster and downmods all his comments from his comment profile, causing him bad karma and inability to post. Moderation system needs some serious work.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot has probably of the best comment systems on Earth. But it certainly is subject to orthodoxy. Unpopular opinions are modded down, turning some comment threads into echo chambers. I'd rather hear stuff I don't agree with than only one side.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
While your at it, you might as well have foes' mod points not counted in your view of Slashdot.
Re: (Score:3)
As do we all.
And above average to boot.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
This is such a common practice nowadays that 75% of the discussion are all replies to the Frist Post and the whole thing becomes a fragmented mess.
Re:Moderation system (Score:4, Insightful)
As it is, the entire discussion ends up being a reply to the first one or two posts, and those several starter posts tend to be the dumbest.
Re: (Score:3)
My suggestion would be to make a the "Off Topic" moderation disconnect a post from its parent and make it its own thread, preferably at the end of the list. Eventually the active discussion will shift farther down the page and it won't be necessary, while simultaneously not rewarding users who post before reading TFA.
That sounds great at first but people with a partisan axe to grind will disconnect an opposing viewpoint comment to its own thread and thus to obscurity. How would it get back?
But mainly this works against the write only nature of the slashdot code. Notice there is no 'edit' for your post once it goes in; this is part of the secret to their fairly good response times. Adding the ability to change the reply-to chain would mean the database would need to be updateable and thus slower.
Re: (Score:3)
You're right that people would try to abuse the feature, but if say it required 5 off-topic mods, plus individual users having the feature enabled, it wouldn't be so bad.
It wouldn't require changing the database to implement the feature either really. As the page is being rendered by the perl script, offtopic posts could be held in a buffer and spit out at the end.
But really, I doubt Slashdot would even blink when shuffling the occasional comment to the end of the line on a story. I know Slashdot is pretty
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
Give all logged in users the ability to mod.
Hell, NO! That's the main problem with Digg. Everybody can moderate, so moderation becomes commonplace. In Slashdot, you can't always moderate, and your possible number of moderations is limited. This makes every +1/-1 more valuable.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but we still have the problem that anyone and everyone can moderate as long as they manage to get enough karma. As has already been discussed, it's pretty formulaic if you want to get modded up. Find the right discussion, and plug in the right "thoughts" and you'll be +5 in no time. So with enough formulaic regurgitation posts under your belt, you start getting mod points, and then it's really a matter of luck whether or not you're worthy of them.
It is possible to have a conventional moderation system
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but we still have the problem that anyone and everyone can moderate as long as they manage to get enough karma.
My karma is maximized and has been for years now. I get mod points from time to time but not terribly often. I receive them maybe a few times a month. Also, I never receive the 15 points I hear others talk about. It's five each time. I don't consider this excessive.
As has already been discussed, it's pretty formulaic if you want to get modded up. Find the right discussion, and plug in the right "thoughts" and you'll be +5 in no time. So with enough formulaic regurgitation posts under your belt, you start getting mod points, and then it's really a matter of luck whether or not you're worthy of them.
If Slashdot is completely immune to determined individuals who wish to game the system, I believe it would be the first in history. When you consider the kind of empty person who would do all of this instead of manning up and telling the wo
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot has probably of the best comment systems on Earth. But it certainly is subject to orthodoxy. Unpopular opinions are modded down, turning some comment threads into echo chambers. I'd rather hear stuff I don't agree with than only one side.
I've found that one can thoughtfully articulate an unpopular opinion in a way that causes others to consider ideas and perspectives they would otherwise be unwilling to entertain. Though they do it for petty and ignorant reasons, that same rigid orthodoxy winds up serving the higher purpose of helping me sharpen a skill that is otherwise more difficult and costly to practice. If they insist on being this way, let them; I will continue to use it constructively despite their narrow-minded intentions.
If you're going to fix something about this site, you should first identify something that can be easily recognized as broken. What comes to my mind is the JS that drives the comment system. It's unresponsive as hell. Most of the time, I have to click "Preview" and "Submit" multiple times before anything happens. Even then, it often won't update to show me the finalized comment, forcing me to use my browser's Refresh button. Since this is neither consistent nor the intended functionality, I consider it a glaring and obvious bug(s). If I were the developer, I would focus on basic usability and getting fundamental functions to work smoothly before I'd move on to larger ideas.
Otherwise, it would be easier to view the staff as a group of professionals if they'd take a small portion of their revenues and hire a good copy editor. Even a part-time copy editor would help tremendously. I frequently see mistakes that even automated spell-checkers would have caught. You're telling me an article submitted to an audience of millions isn't important enough to spend a few hundred milliseconds of CPU time to run a spell-checker? That would cost nothing, even if they can't be bothered to proofread anything. The lack of even basic attempts to achieve quality sends the message that these are not professionals who really care about the quality of their work, that they're just mercenaries who are not doing something they enjoy and value.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
When they changed the meta-moderation system I stopped meta-moderating. I'd be surprised if I were the only one that stopped. The older system of an up or down vote was a lot easier to do, without actually spending huge amounts of time, it's just too hard to figure out what the moderation should have been.
They could also provide an easier way of reporting abuses of mod points.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd like to know how metamod is supposed to work these days. What's the thing that's actually being measured?
The pre-AJAX metamod system was relatively simple to understand: "Was the moderator's action of ("Insightful" or "Troll") a reasonable moderation to apply to a given post or not?" Having the "see in context" URL handy was invaluable - a snarky one-liner might be (-1, Trol
Re: (Score:3)
When they changed the meta-moderation system I stopped meta-moderating. I'd be surprised if I were the only one that stopped. The older system of an up or down vote was a lot easier to do, without actually spending huge amounts of time, it's just too hard to figure out what the moderation should have been.
You dont actually have to pick a reason, but it's better if you do. The way I treat meta moderation is "how would I mod this if I had mod points" rather then trying to guess the way other people modded it.
They could also provide an easier way of reporting abuses of mod points.
An easier way to report abuses, will lead to abuses of that.
Some people get modded down fairly.
My only complaint about moderation is fanboy mods. This is most prevalent with the "cultists" but I see it happen with the "Hippy's" too (BTW, I lump myself in with the Hippy (Linux) crowd). The group supp
Re:Moderation system (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree that the moderation system is very good.
I have several opinions which are not mainstream here; for example, that most open source software is of poor quality [slashdot.org].
When I articulate my views clearly and show illustrative examples, my comments get modded up. At the very least, it stimulates discussion and invites people to post counter arguments. Putting up examples puts the burden on them to counter the argument and also explain why the illustrative examples exist.
It makes for real discussion, rather than people just posting their position.
Look at other sites that just allow comments - it's mostly people saying "I feel this..." or "I think that...".
Having the moderation system forces people to be better commentators.
Re: (Score:3)
I frequently give positive moderation to unpopular opinions that even I don't agree with, if the logic behind them is sane and the human reasoning seems genuine. Especially if the comment also brings new facts to a discussion.
I cannot imagine that I am the only person with mod points to adopt this behavior.
Re: (Score:3)
Frankly, I don't think training would fix it; the goal of moderating is fairly obvious, especially by the time you get enough karma to get modpoints. We're just naturally biased to value more (especially with the "Insightful" mod) comments which agree with our preexisting beliefs.
Re: (Score:2)
"as does anything that says good things about Microsoft."
They usually don't, at least lately :)
On the other hand I agree, that anything counter-culture gets too easily upvoted. The opposing point of view might get upvoted as well, but they have to put much more thought into their comment to get the upvote.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see it that way.
Being able to express a contrary opinion while retaining popular support is a skill. Being a dick about it is what gets you modded down to stay.
Targeted moderation attacks do happen, but it's easy to see when they do, and you can request that your karma be repaired and the offender be dealt with. Mod points link back to the modder.
I suppose the one change would be that you never get mod privs if you're not contributing otherwise, and the number you get starts at 1 and goes up with karma and participation. And then you can go to the marketplace and buy armor and weapons and potions and spells...
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm assuming meta-moderation is why I don't get mod points anymore. I've modded up some minority opinion and I've been punished for it.
Not that this comment will ever be seen, as I'm also stuck permanently on a score of 1.
Usually when I have the urge to comment I remind myself it's just Slashdot and posting is a waste of time.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm assuming meta-moderation is why I don't get mod points anymore. I've modded up some minority opinion and I've been punished for it.
Not that this comment will ever be seen, as I'm also stuck permanently on a score of 1.
Usually when I have the urge to comment I remind myself it's just Slashdot and posting is a waste of time.
If it helps, I mod up unpopular or minority opinions all the time. There is no shortage of cases when an unpopular notion that no one really wants to hear happens to be the fuckin' truth. I'd rather people grow up and work to change any truth they dislike. I won't help them do otherwise, nor should I.
I don't view it as "just Slashdot". I view it as a way to almost instantly reach a large audience of mostly intelligent people, a technological marvel no one would have imagined just a hundred years ago. Consider for a moment how easy it is to take that for granted. If Slashdot goes away, I'll do this someplace else. They don't have a monopoly on communication. What they do have is a community I appreciate that actually knows a thing or two about reason, despite the highly visible users who don't.
Eh, even if you don't like a single thing I've said, at least for now your (quoted verbatim) comment is effectively at my +3 score.
Re: (Score:3)
The moderation system seriously needs thinking and redone. It's constantly abused on Slashdot, up to the point where it really has started to annoy people. All the stories are filled with slashdot groupthink comments and it's always clear what kind of comments will be modded up and which down. This especially comes up within certain subjects - anything anti-piracy will get modded to -1, as does anything that says good things about Microsoft. This really ruins the comment system as one is supposed to only have certain mindset and he is supposed to do all the same comments over and over again. Then there is the other mod abuse what happens when someone sees a comment he really doesn't like, so he goes on personal war against the poster and downmods all his comments from his comment profile, causing him bad karma and inability to post. Moderation system needs some serious work.
I agree with what you say. But none of this is a big secret. Your post would be useful if you suggested a fix.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's my suggested fix:
Move away from rating things +1 Insightful... to a simple "Agree or Disagree". Give a bonus for rating up or down posts that haven't been rated yet.
Now, and here's the neat bit, allow people to filter the posts according to the best rated posts they agree with, and the best rated posts they disagree with.
This way people will be presented with argument and counter argument, instead of just group-think.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Interesting)
2) Make it load faster. Sometimes pages take forever to load, then when they do load, they scroll slowly. I think this is caused by fancy javascripting or something. Just display the comments. We don't need/want any fancy web 2.0 features.
3) We need better trolls. The trolls right now are lame. What happened to GNAA? Maybe you should invite them back.
4) The comment quality is getting worse. Slashdot is now mostly mundane comments. Sure, some are funny, but most lack content.
5) Take a note from Ars Technica. They are getting better commenters, they have original content (why not have feature stories here). Ars's commenting system sucks, but yet they still manage higher quality comments.
6) Delete all accounts numbered 2,000,000+. Remove signup. Invite only.
Re:Moderation system (Score:4)
The biggest thing to take from this is the old comment system. I really don't know why everything feels so rubbery and unresponsive, I actually did like the graphical side of the site overhaul but the sluggishness kills me. I'd love the old site back for a month.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Funny)
snowraver1 (1052510) writes: 6) Delete all accounts numbered 2,000,000+. Remove signup. Invite only.
Agreed, except that we should start at 1,000,000.
Re: (Score:3)
Forget that. stope at 100,000.
Actually when I look at other sites compared to Slashdot it is a revelation.
Compared to CNN, Engadet, and most local new sites, Slashdot's commenters are on the whole much more civil, intelligent, and frankly good natured than most other sites.
I would not allow AC commenters but I know that a lot of people on slashdot do not agree with that so.
I would give people to ability to post as an AC but you still take a karma hit. Hey if it is not worth a karma hit to you say it then it
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed, except that we should start at 10,000.
No, wait#+++ATH0
NO CARRIER
Re:Moderation system (Score:4, Funny)
Spoken like a true loser of the Low UID Dickwars.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Informative)
Seconded, whoreheartedly. AJAX is the bane of current web browsing -- everyone seems to think it's a "better way of doing things", when in reality it's slower, annoying, and godawful to deal with.
Re: (Score:3)
Well whatever this is certainly doesn't work well on my Asus Transformer tablet on any of the three browsers I use. It's barely functional on my Android phone. It works fairly well in the stock Debian browser because I use Classic view. It was painful last time I tried it on the iPad. It works OK in most versions of IE I've tried, but I don't like to fire up a Windows box just to browse /. It seems somehow... wrong.
It reminds me of the old web interface for some HP bladesystem gear - you needed three
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have an actual argument to make about something, then make it, and see if it flies. Moderation is to some extent the measure of how well this specific community has taken your comment. And that doesn't always fall along political/sect lines, as you seem to claim. I've seen many comments in favor of copyright and in favor of Microsoft get modded to +5. It is just rarer, perhaps because the people who typically make those comments do not share the same values as the slashdot community, or because they're just assholes.
Re:Moderation system (Score:4, Informative)
What the hell? You just went and provided a long list of "evidence" (which, by the way, quite gives away your political standing quite easily), only to then claim something that is in direct conflict with half of what you just wrote. How can slashdot believe those "discredited" ideas and still be fear-mongering against the government? 2+2=54373?
This is exactly why people get modded down on slashdot, and it has nothing to do with groupthink. You claim that scientifically proven statements are false, pervert the English language to support your political positions (look up "theft," in either a legal or normal dictionary, and you will see it is a very specific definition), and then close with a nonsense claim... bias is not the problem in the vast majority of downmods, and their posters thinking that it is doesn't make it so.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Informative)
It's constantly abused on Slashdot, up to the point where it really has started to annoy people.
Do what I do and read at -1, ignoring all mods. That way it won't annoy you. Yeah you'll run into the occasional goatse/GNAA/epic troll post. So what?
If any changes are made to the moderation system at least let users like me be able to opt out of the new system, because ANY automated system can be abused by non-automated humans. I'd rather take my chances than miss out on the numerous good posts that never get modded up.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
> The moderation system seriously needs thinking and redone.
Any suggestions? I can't think of any other way to make the rating system more accurate than drawing from a collective of geeks. Besides, moderation "floats" so you don't have the same people all the time modding things to their liking. The task gets spread around a lot of different personalities.
> This especially comes up within certain subjects
If your favorite topics gets frequently blasted off the moderation scale maybe that's a sign tha
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
> he moderation system seriously needs thinking and redone. It's constantly abused on Slashdot,
Even WITH all the group think, it is _light_ years ahead of Reddit. You can't even hold a civil discussion over there. At least here people can disagree.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I think when a post which is factually wrong gets modded up to +5 informative, it if fair to moderate as overrated. Does a wrong post deserve +5 informative?
I also think it is probably fair to mod a vapid post which is on +5 insightful as overrated. Does a vapid post desreve +5 insightful?
In both cases, it is fair for the moderator to mod them as overrated as they are in the opinion of the mod, overrated. I personally think that modding overrated should only be done to posts over the default level.
Re:Moderation system (Score:5, Insightful)
To be fair, there are a lot of posts that are overrated even at Score:1.
Re:Moderation system (Score:4, Interesting)
On those cases, I've seen everyone mods "Overrated" a lot. There's someone with a signature on the lines of "'Overrated' is '-1 Disagree'", and I concur.
I agree that happens but it's not just for honest disagreements. There is no way to explicitly moderate something as being factually wrong. Overrated is the only way to moderate something down that isn't a troll or flamebait. I think we need an "innacurate" or "misleading" mod option. Of course like everything it would get abused some but it would be useful too.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually I have a somewhat tongue-in-cheek way to help the bias problem.
Add an actual moderation option "-1 disagree". Have this only lower the post for the moderator himself, and secretly subtract karma from the moderator. Eventually disagreers will no longer be able to moderate. Problem solved.
And to elaborate... bias isn't a problem with the moderation system, it is a problem with human nature. A way to filter that out would be helpful, but I am not sure how.
Re: (Score:3)
You post. Posting has more effect than moderation anyway. Most of us don't get all excited about the number, and the ones that do, well, they're all Apple fanbois anyway...
We also need emoticons. Really.
SHAPE the future? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a Rhombus fan myself, triangles are just too two-sided.
Re: (Score:3)
The front side and the back side. What were you thinking?
Re: (Score:3)
"You might consider adding avatars / gravatars next to people's comments."
Useless decoration. Have an option to disable.
WORK WITHOUT JAVASCRIPT (Score:5, Insightful)
Make it so I can see all the posts without logging in or Javascript. My usage of the site has gone down dramatically because it's a pain in the ass with the (relatively) new system. I have been reading the site since 1998 and this fucking sucks.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:WORK WITHOUT JAVASCRIPT (Score:5, Insightful)
If classic mode is ever disabled I will never visit again. I cannot stand the default mode.
Re:WORK WITHOUT JAVASCRIPT (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I feel the same way. The default mode isn't very good.
+1,000,000 (Score:3)
I have mod points but you're already at 5. They should remove the cap on just this one comment so it can go to a million.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This. It's really annoying that, when something really interesting comes up, it's a pain in the ass to see all the related comments.
Sometimes I scroll through the initial 50 comments and decide I want to read more, but the next 50 are dispersed through the ones I've already seen, forcing me to read back through them all.
Other times I know I want all the comments from the start, but I have to scroll to the bottom of the page, click the "get more" button, scroll again to the bottom of the page because it aut
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
+1 insightful, but can't really mod you up without javascript...
Re:WORK WITHOUT JAVASCRIPT (Score:5, Informative)
It isn't as good as the "Interactive" system before the last "improvement," but it does work without javascript. Not sure how you didn't see this, as looking at slashdot without JS offers this to you.
Improve Slashdot By Rewinding To What It Grew On (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop hitting the web server on my NAT box for ok.txt every time I post.
Don't assume that any cookies you set will ever be sent back.
Don't use referer fields at all, just send straight HTML.
Don't use all this horrible crashy javascript.
article selection (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:article selection (Score:5, Insightful)
This more than anything else.
I can live with the sometimes dodgy comment system, the abusable moderation, etc. Honestly, it's not perfect but it's far more palatable than 99% of the systems out there like Disqus or flat comment systems without any moderation.
However, if article selection keeps dropping, the site WILL die. The quality of the submissions is what makes or breaks a site like Slashdot, and even I feel like it's been declining of late (I'm not usually picky on things and hate people with nostalgia overload). Many articles are submitted by employees of the sites they're posted on and are of dubious value overall, often requiring commenters to give better links. If a paper is covered, good luck finding the actual link to said paper. Many times, summaries are incredibly biased and show that the editors plain and simply did not "edit", they simply took the thing from the firehose, ran a spellcheck (sometimes forgetting that step) and put it up on the main page. I find that unacceptable. If the editors are overloaded, which I would find surprising unless they happen to do a lot more work than is readily apparent, then find more editors. Perhaps implement some sort of election system for junior editors, where unpaid or paid members of the community get promoted to editor status. Anything to raise editing quality. I'd rather have a submission rewritten or denied than have horribly biased or even misleading summaries crop up on the main page.
Slashdot is one of the few sites where I can expect serious, insightful discussions in the comment threads. I wouldn't want this to die because the submissions stop fuelling said discussions.
Problems with Bio and Physics editing (Score:3)
While tech articles are frequently ok, I've noticed life-science and physics stories especially have this problem. Often they feature sensationalist pieces trying to fluff up absolute garbage. The editors and story-submitters seem to have just enough background in the field to recognize the buzzwords and take the bait; not enough to render good judgement or comment in the header insightfully (in other words, too incompetent to realize how incompetent they are).
Firehose /moderation doesn't help as much as
Finally, a meta-thread! (Score:5, Insightful)
Better quality editing.
Sounds mean but it has to be said. Some of the stories over the last year or two have had blatant errors in the summary (one was even in the title, about some incident at a nuclear plant), I remember at least a few troll stories that got through, it's shameful. It seems like the posters are often putting more effort into the posts than the editors are putting into the articles.
Re:Finally, a meta-thread! (Score:5, Informative)
I really enjoy the community and the moderation system on Slashdot. The combination of the 2 are working well together, in my opinion, and I told them that.
I also lambasted the editors for not editing, for headlines that are downright false, and various other editorial issues. One thing that stops me from suggesting slashdot to my friends is that I never know when some story is going to get posted with completely false information in the headline or summary, with a 100+ comment conversation that ensues about information that isn't even accurate.
When that happens, and it happens often, it makes the site look foolish and by extension it makes me look foolish for having suggested it. Slashdot needs to tighten up the editorial department, for me that is the single biggest area for improvement on the site. I told them as much.
Re:Finally, a meta-thread! (Score:5, Insightful)
I never know when some story is going to get posted with completely false information in the headline or summary
This.
Slashdot is billing itself as "news". I'm tired of reading headlines that are spun or outright lying to maximize nerd rage. You're not doing original reporting here, so the bare minimum is the editors need to RTFA and see if the summary and headline are accurate and from a vaguely credible source. Bonus points if you actually fact-check the articles.
I want at least on professional editor (Score:5, Interesting)
All I want is at least one professional editor. Somebody to do basic things like check for dupes, make sure stories aren't wholesale ripped off, basic fact checking, that kind of thing. This is done by almost every other professional news media site out there, can Slashdot please make this /one/ change?
Read your own goddamned bug tracker? (Score:5, Informative)
How about you read your own bug tracker and actually fix, or at least respond in some way, to the bugs in it?
What do you dislike? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bad stories. Useless stories. Stories that are identifiable after reading the first couple comments that they are in fact non-stories, trolling, or something like that. Stories should be demote-able, so less of Slashdot need waste their time with them.
I think I speak for us all... (Score:5, Funny)
Bring back Jon Katz!!!!
This needs to stop (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This needs to stop (Score:4, Interesting)
Tech problems make the site less fun.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Over the past few years, my user experience has gone into the gutter, with very few corresponding benefits. Boxes often overlap, and the whole site freezes on a regular basis. Most other sites are fine.
As a result, I show up less. Sure, I could read it on my home computer, but eh. What's the point if you can't sit on a conference call while reading?
Re:Tech problems make the site less fun.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, logging in is a disaster.
It often happens that I'm reading a thread without being logged in, and want to reply to a comment. Then, at that point, of course I have to log in, but slashdot of course jumps back to the front page, and I totally lose the point where I wanted to leave the comment.
It is so stupid, I sometimes just want to break things in my office.
Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
More poines.
Oh, and more selection on the moderation. -1 Insane and +1 Really Insane and -1 Fanbois and +1 Well Played, Sir
Re:Easy (Score:4, Insightful)
+1 Well Played, Sir
definitely well played sir.
Re:Easy (Score:4, Insightful)
+1 Brohoof
Re:Easy (Score:4, Insightful)
More mod options (Score:3)
Oh, and more selection on the moderation. -1 Insane and +1 Really Insane and -1 Fanbois and +1 Well Played, Sir
+1 Well Played, Sir.
I'd add: -1 Inaccurate, -1 Misleading, -1 Citation Needed, +1 Citation Provided, -1 Whoosh!
Re:Easy (Score:4, Insightful)
SEARCH!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The search function completely sucks. If I'm looking for a comment that I *KNOW* was posted in an story, but can't remember the story, good freaking luck finding it.
I usually wind up with better results by using google ("search text" +site:slashdot.org).
Re: (Score:3)
site:slashdot.org search function completely sucks [google.com]
Slow preview progress circle (Score:5, Informative)
A Few Things (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition to the moderation / meta-moderation issues noted (confirmation bias anyone?) Changes over the past year have made reading /. on a mobile device (e.g. iPhone) almost impossible. Page loads take forever and it must be trying to calculate pi to 1 billion places for each page load. Plus, clicking a collapsed story to show it will scroll to the top. That's stupid. The "More" links are lame, too. You can keep clicking "more" to get more stories (since it only displays like 5), but when you go into a story to read comments and then come out, all your extra stories are gone. A simple "next page" feature would be far more useful. AJAX is all fine, but /. abuses it to the point where it detracts from site functionality.
Oh, and more stories about ponies.
Re: (Score:3)
Edit your posts (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Hear! Hear! Just today I submitted a post titled "Did Alternative Medicine Contribute to Steve Jobs' Death?" I previewed the post, the text of the body looked fine, I hit submit and the title became "Did Alternative Medicine Contribute to Steve Jobs'". WTF??? Maybe the title change appeared in the preview, but I was too busy scrutinizing the body of the post. I cringed, considered resubmitting the post, but decided to skulk away. Nobody's gonna read that.
I will hand it to the editors though, they have refac
All comments (Score:5, Insightful)
I want an option to automatically load all the comments on an article. not 250 at a time, everything. Every time. Automatically.
biggest problem (Score:3)
There will be ten firehose entries for the same article. They will sit unposted for days, and then when it finally hits the frontpage it is from the same five people who always get articles posted, the worst link, the worst summary, and often through a spammy blog instead of the source.
I was happy when the firehose opened up. I thought it would help out a lot. Instead it is just like a cruel joke seeing what could have been posted instead of what did get posted.
The sad thing is you could move slashdot to a sub-reddit on reddit.com, possibly one of the worst sites on the internet, and it would be an improvement. For something masquerading as a technology site, the current setup is just embarrassing.
There's nothing particularly wrong with Slashdot (Score:3)
Slashdot works very well. I don't see any problems requiring a major change. Is this a solution (e.g., an editors' ambitions to leave their mark) looking for a problem?
a working survey would help (Score:3)
1 esp for those that have "classic"/D1 style selected DO NOT ADD TEST STUFF (D1 was selected for a reason)
2 have a -5 (oblivion) rating where you have to have N!^2 mod downs to reach it (you have to be down modded from 0 55 times to reach -5(oblivion)) then if you draw a posting with that rating 1 your ip is banned for 24 hours 2 after your ban you are limited to posting once a day (with an ip block check)
3 add a function to mod POSTERS/Editors (they get blocked for a week if they reach -1 moderation)
Temporal Displacement of Comments (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the things that I find disappointing is that probably the single largest factor in terms of whether a comment is promoted or demoted is the time after the post hits the main page. It is extremely common to see average posts (i.e. limited informational or insightful quantity/quality) rated very highly (probably too highly) simply because they are submitted shortly (within 1-2 hours, often much less) after the parent post hits the main page. Conversely, insanely high quality posts (i.e. those with tons of useful information or insight) that are submitted after the magic window either do not get voted up or are only voted up to a minor degree.
I understand why this occurs. A large influx of people are reading the comments shortly after the post and then there is an exponential decay afterwards. The result is that high quality and deserving posts do not get voted up since fewer and fewer people with mod points see them. It is completely understandable, however I think addressing this would have a significant positive impact. I know there have often been times that I would not post simply because I figured it was too late and practically no-one would read the comment so why bother. Unfortunately, I do not know how to solve this problem, just that it is real.
I do realize that the meta-moderation system does have some limited impact here, but I think it is too limited to be effective.
Excellent point! (Score:3)
If someone can really contribute to an issue, and takes the time to write a thoughtful post, complete with sources. By the time they are finished, the "magic window" has often passed, and their post never gets up-voted... I rarely make substantive comments any more, for exacty this reason: I know that the investment of time required to make a real contribution to the discussion means precisely that the comment will not be seen by most people.
How to fix this? That's hard...
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, I do not know how to solve this problem, just that it is real.
The moderation system needs an overhaul to fix this problem.
Today, you'll get 15 points to use over the next several days. So, you'll use them as you read normally. Most people go for the newer stuff, so the moderation pattern follows.
To fix your problem, Slashcode would need to award targeted moderation points to people reading the articles after the magic window. They might only be valid for that one article, for instance.
The
Mod Type Filter (Score:3)
If there a filter for mod types? Sometimes I just want to see the Funny.
Slasdot needs... (Score:3)
... a trusted users system. I know people on slashdot that are intelligent and have reasonable judgement we really need these people to float to the top and given more weight. Trying to test out new systems to have these people float to the top would be nice. Politics usually seems to be slashdots worse subject - you get all sorts of nonsense in posts that are mere repeats of mainstream media talking points that are often false and misleading.
Skins (Score:3)
I'd like a slashdot skin that looks like, say, eclipse, so I can read at work in way that isn't 100% obvious from the complete opposite side of the room (no privacy in this office).
=D