Slashdot Mirror
SGI Sets Sights On Turnaround
grub wrote to us about an article about SGI, and its ongoing battles to turn its corporate fortunes around. The company's been doing interesting stuff for a long time - here's to hoping they stay around.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
..second isn't quite as good.
You're a meta-moderation terrorist. Not to mention a complete fucking cocksmoking fuckwad. I mean, where the FUCK do you get off meta-moderating negative ratings as unfair? Are you saying things like Klerck's page-lengthening posts should be left at a default posting level of 1 (which it would be, if nobody moderated down).
/. story submission. After the first 24 hours, you're probably looking at a ballpark figure of 200-400 replies. Often in this range, you'll get anywhere between 0 and 10 posts that get moderated up to a score 4 or 5. By this time, the default reading level collapses posts of 3 points or less, and filters AC's who have start with a score of 0.
And the risk of feeding a hungry troll, let me justify why I don't give credit to moderators who waste their points on people like you.
First of all, take your average
Now, given that when you are chosen to do a moderation on this system, you get five points. If you pick 5 good posts, you can raise all 5 of them above the cacophony of the discussion. However, if you take your 5 points, and find 5 trolls out of hundreds, you accomplish absolutely nothing but indirectly censor 5 people who deserve to have their comments read.
I've seen dozens of really awesome, insightful posts that only made it to 3, and thus get collapsed (making reading more of a hassle), but in the same forum, there are some trolls with a whole lot of negative moderations. (They ONLY have to be modded down ONCE people, and they don't lose more karma after they've hit -1.) So, as you can see, moderating ANYONE down is inherently unfair because it only hurts the people who post intelligent comments.
Think about it.
Why bother.