Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot's Disagree Mail
On Wed Sept 6, 2006 ********* wrote:
"I can't help but notice the huge amount of trolls posting comments the past few days. I know you guys work hard to keep them down but it's a losing battle. You should make people post comments in groups to get rid of the trolls. Everyone would have a "comment buddy" that has to agree that your comment is worth posting. You could make it part of the preview process. This way trolls wouldn't be able to post because nobody else would mark their comment as worth posting. Maybe if two trolls got together they would be able to defeat the "buddy" process but that seems unlikely to me as I don't think they work in groups do they? Maybe this isn't as good an idea as I think for working against large groups but it might work for lone trolls."
I love the idea of a comment buddy. It reminds me of "Posture Pals" from the famous MST3K short. The next mail comes from a lady who doesn't mind clicking on things, in fact she loves it. If she had her way, everyone would have carpal tunnel syndrome.
On Mon May 7, 2007 ******* wrote
"Instead of a confusing bunch of numbers and some adjectives that don't mean anything why not just have a list of everyone who has posted a comment that a user can go through. That way you could click on a name and then click on their comments until you decided if you liked what they had to say. You could then click on them again and click on a ACCEPT COMMENTS link. Then you could click on them again and let them know that you like what they write so they will probably like what you write. That way it would save some clicking. After a bit you will have clicked on enough people that you could see a dozen or so comments in a story because you can't read much more than that anywy. You'd just have to click on a dozen people for a dozen or so stories and you will have your own little community with only the people who were worth clicking on. Just a thought."
Finally we have someone who thinks speech should cost something. In this case, a nominal fee on an upsliding scale.
On Fri Jan 5, 2007 ******* wrote:
"I have a suggestion to help solve the flame problem you seem to have here. It's simple and will make you enough money that you can get rid of ads. You charge 1 cent for the first 2 comments in a day 3-10 comments cost 5 cents and anything over 10 comments cost 25 cents (nobody but flamers post more than 10 times in a day). People would probably complain at first but they'd get used to it just like I'm sure people complained about stamps but accept it now. I don't think people would be willing to flame if it cost a couple $. keep up the good work."
"I love the idea of a comment buddy. It reminds me of "Posture Pals" from the famous MST3K short. The next mail comes from a lady who doesn't mind clicking on things, in fact she loves it. If she had her way, everyone would have carpal tunnel syndrome."
"Ms. Martin! Tommy drew a bong!"
My work here is dung.
"Instead of a confusing bunch of numbers and some adjectives that don't mean anything why not just have a list of everyone who has posted a comment that a user can go through. That way you could click on a name and then click on their comments until you decided if you liked what they had to say. You could then click on them again and click on a ACCEPT COMMENTS link. Then you could click on them again and let them know that you like what they write so they will probably like what you write. That way it would save some clicking. After a bit you will have clicked on enough people that you could see a dozen or so comments in a story because you can't read much more than that anywy. You'd just have to click on a dozen people for a dozen or so stories and you will have your own little community with only the people who were worth clicking on. Just a thought."
Has she approached Amazon with a draft for a 9-click patent?
My work here is dung.
charging for comments??! that's one of the worst ideas i have heard in a while. i don't think this comment is worth a penny! and i bet a lot of people would agree with me!
"they didn't know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
Maybe implement all these ideas. It would get rid of all extra random posts...
Over- and underrated don't say anything about the post. Insightful means that the moderator finds it insightful, troll means they think it's a troll. Those are positive traits.
Over- and underrated aren't meaningful characteristics, so much as they are lameass cop outs. They often seem to get used by moderators on posts expressing controversial opinions. Instead of someone having the balls to call out something as being a troll or flamebait, they're just a way of sinking a rating without having to commit oneself.
The Firehose (and by extension, Index v2), came about from people saying that they wanted to vote down stories. But that's the only one I can think of, can you think of any others?
-----
As for paying to post, well that would rule me out. I don't even have a credit card (the two times I've tried to get one, the bank in each case refused, I think due to the lack of sufficient income on my part). Not to mention, I'm not about to hand over my details for a few cents a day. (And PayPal doesn't like me for some reason, something to do with my combination of NoScript, not accepting cookies and FireFox?)
-----
I don't even understand the second suggestion.
-----
And I just don't think the first suggestion could work. There are enough trolls who would vote each others posts up, even if they don't know each other. And of course, one person's flame is another's insightful post.
I wank in the shower.
Clearly he has not heard of Something Awful. Yes, we^H^H they do work in groups.
Here's an idea. Make the
idle comment box wider. One
can barely type more than
half a sentence in it the
way it is set up now.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I like the idea.
Just my 2c, literally.
Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
I think the correct term is accountabilibuddy.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
"I can't help but notice the huge amount of trolls posting comments the past few days. I know you guys work hard to keep them down but it's a losing battle. You should make people post comments in groups to get rid of the trolls. Everyone would have a "comment buddy" that has to agree that your comment is worth posting. You could make it part of the preview process. This way trolls wouldn't be able to post because nobody else would mark their comment as worth posting. Maybe if two trolls got together they would be able to defeat the "buddy" process but that seems unlikely to me as I don't think they work in groups do they? Maybe this isn't as good an idea as I think for working against large groups but it might work for lone trolls."
Or it will do nothing but squash unpopular opinions.
Will you just stop posting this shit already? It's not funny. It never has been funny. It never will be funny.
Slashdot is run by super-geeks: YOU HAVE NO APPRECIABLE SENSE OF HUMOR. You can't do "funny" because YOU'RE NOT GODDAMN FUNNY.
And for fucks sake, get a new goddamn theme on Idle. It's ugly and hard to read.
Does the first writer really mean "trolls" or something else? I thought a troll was someone who intentionally posted an unpopular comment to get a frenzy of reactions. A good troll actually requires intelligence and creativity. It's the humorless automatons who reply to trolls that really clog up message boards. But I don't think that writer meant trolls at all.
you will never get rid of trolls 100%, like a war on terror you technically cant win...The system here works great. Making people pay to post comments will only drive them to another site. Many people throw the word troll around when they find someone who disagree's with them. That is just as annoying as a real troll. Discussions are also meant to include negatives, like it or not. You mite find a flaw in your brilliant plan that you hadn't thought of. If a bunch of people sit around completely agreeing with each other, is it even a discussion?
Why does idle not have the sectional navigation panel on the left side but every other saction does. This forces you to press back on the browser rather than just Main?
Why is idle's scheme so different from the rest?
Why do the tags get cut off when logged in Anonymous and disappear entirely when logged in?
my posting:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=991147&cid=25329509
(most of it, at least...)
"You know what is painful? That a thread starting out at 0 (because i intentionally disable the karma bonus (without bragging that it's turned off)) is knocked to -0 or -0, Off-topic (either before or after others' comments are added), then through sloppy non-tracking and dodgy code of Slashdot, other comments can be appended, gain bonus points, and even quoted the original/slammed/ridiculed gp, and yet the gp does not get automatically "raised" commensurate to (but not necessarily higher than) useful comments of others.
In other words, someone comments, is punished, then quoted by another, who in effect validates the ridiculed/punished commenter, and then Slashdot's coded does not close the loophole exploited by those on a "kill/vendetta" mode of operation.
This hurts, and it CAN be dealt with, but for economic or political reasons, Slashdot "seems" contented with just leaving things this way (for now, but hopefully not forever...)."
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Getting a comment modded to +5 results in free pudding.
"Over and under rated also don't affect a person's karma."
Since when? Or do I just not see the effect of a modreasons change because I've had this account pegged at Excellent for years? (Slashdot has changed the modreasons from Slash's preset "slashcode/slash/plugins/Moderation/mysql_dump.sql"; for one thing, Funny differs.)
And the third suggestion almost seems like a clever way to DoS attack online banking. Can you imagine all those penny transactions? Good lord!
I will bend like a reed in the wind.
THANK you I enjoyed THAT entertaining STORY
samzenpus should be: A. Boiled alive B. Drawn and quartered C. Keel-hauled D. Dragged behind a pick-up truck E. All of the above
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0122e.html#gruff
Thats a pretty lame idea. That's socializing opinion. "It's ok to speak as long as some one agrees with you"
I like the pay per comments idea, but maybe make ithe first 3 comments in a day free. With this solution YOU decide if you comment is worth posting, not someone else.
As one who has been on both the receiving of mods and moderating sides: Trolls are often in the eye of the beholder. There are a lot of modders who mod down opinions they simply disagree with--especially political ones--as trolls, flamebait and overrated.
I think there needs to be someone modding the modders. Can the overseers not discover who's consistently moderating unfairly and just not give them moderating points? I know meta-modding sometimes helps correct unfair mods. But is anything done if a person who is unfairly modding people down? Can they find out who and not allow them to have modding points?
Trolls and flamebaiters are generally those who are posting totally off-topic and/or vile, bigoted rhetoric, not simply disagreeing. And they're usually anonymous. Posting the reason(s) you disagree with someone's opinion whether it's another slashdotter or the person, place or thing discussed is NOT trolling or flamebaiting. I know, I've had to mod or meta-mod people back up--even some I disagree with, because they made a legitimate point. And I've had some of my posts fluctuate similarly.
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
That last comment was my favorite part
Ok. Before stamps there was no mail delivery. Wait, that's wrong. It was paid by the recipient. At least here in the US, I think. I'm sure that people all around like stamps better. Who complained?
I suggest capping the comment abilities of posters with a UID over #56.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Amen on the comment box, bro.
One way to improve slashdot and reduce comment clutter would be to have a way for the reader to collapse entire threads which have drifted off topic, without changing the comment threshhold. Does anyone have a greasemonkey script that does this?
The best example I can think of where this would be necessary, are the articles about evolution, fossils and such related stuff. Early in the discussion the evolutionist, creationist, and intelligent design trolls post, stirring up a whole hornets nest of other trolls and genuinely earnest posters, all of which get modded to +5 insightful. Then you have pages of meaningless comments obscurring any real discussion.
If I could collapse entire threads when they veer off topic, I can then see the two or three comments which might have something meaningful to say.
In the meantime, I just skip those articles entirely because other articles go off topic, but nowhere nearly as badly.
Also, sorry for the offtopic/threadjack, Dave.
More music, fewer hits
Pay me a nickel every time I read a comment attached to disagree mail?
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
Personally, I think it sucks.
I find it hard to read and archaic in style. Therefore I rarely comment or read comments. I like the stories, though. Keep 'em coming! BTW, Gizmodo has started some kind of retarded comment system where only pre-approved accounts can comment. You have to submit a series of comments then they judge whether you are worthy of public comments. I quit reading Gizmodo when they started that. Engadget has all the same articles.
People will use the gold mod point on the first week and spend the rest of the semester posting "If I had my gold mod point..."
-- dnl
Seriously, for those of us who have him deny reality and post things to us, it would be nice to be able to disallow specific individuals from being able to reply to a thread more than once, since they never get the hint that 99.9 percent of all scientists think he's wrong, and he should just STFU.
Hmmm, how about call it the STFU thread block - make it an option available to Journal authors or Post authors when someone just won't take the hint and stop posting replies that ignore reality.
Or, to be even more Crystal, call it a PudgeBlock.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion - once.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It is important to tag trolls. I, for one, don't even bother to read posts tagged as such. The sooner they get tagged the better
-- dnl
Palin?!? Is that you?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Errr. We have these already. Its called metamoderation
-- dnl
So we need to get rid of the +5 cap, and then scale the score by total #comments to give a good relative score.
Hey, I think I'll send this idea to Slashdot feedback!
Slashdot has one of the best discussion systems there is.
I say again, huh?
I agree, in fact, I think we need a few more mod categories like Uninformative (for the posts you mention with factual errors) and Unfunny (for attempts at humor that fall flat). Just like Funny, Unfunny would not affect karma, but would be useful for filtering out bad jokes.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
This is dumb beyond belief, but: If I only had mod points ...
Yes, I think there's a whoosh going over your (and the second poster below's) head. Because I specifically mentioned meta-moderation as helping to correct unfair modding. What I don't know is if anything is done about someone who consistantly mods people down unfairly. I don't think there's something in place to keep score and stop giving mod points to those who abuse them.
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
I think the last emailers remarks are unfounded.
/.
I'd like to see the research data that proves only homosexuals post more than 10 times daily to
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
I have my minimum viewing value set to 3 usually when browsing comments, and I have friends set to +1 and enemies set to -1 so I'm very likely to see posts from people I like the regular posting of, and less likely to see it from people I dislike.
Of course, actually using the existing system solved this problem for me, without all the extra clicking :-)
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
If you have a goddamned thing on your front page that tells me "Don't visit IDLE, It's a waste of your time." THEN WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU PUTTING A WASTE OF TIME ON THE FRONT PAGE?
Seriously, I think my little brother has more sense than this. Thank you for fucking over other slashdot users who have worse bandwidth caps than Comcast.
Christ, I know pretty much NOTHING, but even I could figure out a solution to such a problem. Apparently, you cannot.
Slashdot - no longer news for nerds, it's just another fucking DIGG.COM.
Stick to your original material, your new shit sucks.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
People would probably complain at first but they'd get used to it just like I'm sure people complained about stamps but accept it now.
Remember when we all used to complain about stamps? I remember pulling up Slashdot on that dreadful morning and seeing the headline:
A sad day indeed.
This is a spam message.