Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot Notes
Several notes attached below regarding the system in general,
but also regarding minor changes to moderation.
If you have ever had moderator access, or ever expect to
get it, please read the link below to read a few comments
on minor changes to the system, plus answers to faqs that
keep flooding my inbox. Never fear, I'll be rewriting the
moderator guidelines just as soon as I have a few hours of
peace and quiet.
- System has been unstable lately. Its a cranky 2.2.x kernel that likes to crash every few days (a known bug relating to the ether controller). 2.2.8 was having troubles with my SCSI adapter, so I gotta try 2.2.9. The problem is that with the machine 3 time zones away, so if I make a mistake, it is a pain to get it back up. Fortunately the coloc is installing a remote power toggle for us, so hopefully we can at least get it back up. We've been having troubles at home too with our local ISP dying (and this morning the power was out for like 2 hours). This makes it a real pain-in-the-butt for Hemos or I to post stories. Sorry about all this folks, but we're sorting each of those problems out as fast as we can.
- Moderator access is temporary. You get 5 points, and when you use them up, you're done until such time as you get more. Eligible moderators essentially take turns. On one hand, this restricts a good moderator from really doing a complete job, but it also restricts abusers from going hog wild.
- I replaced the + and - moderator control buttons with a drop down list containing reasons for moderation. These include Flamebait, Informative, Offtopic etc. The end result of these items is still the same, I'm simply trying to make moderators explain themselves just a tiny bit more- hopefully it will also make the system more self explanatory to new moderators.
- I have several things left on my "Shoulda been done weeks ago" list, most important of which is rewriting the moderator guidelines. They are hopelessly out of date. A few odds and ends after that and I hope to have a new Slash tarball out for those of you who keep asking and asking and forcing me to waste time replying instead of working on it (grin).
- Its good to be home. I had a great vacation (it was great to get away from all you guys for a bit *grin*), and LinuxExpo wasn't to bad either (as far as conferences go anyway). But thank god I'm home- I hopefully can be responsive to email again, and get cracking on the ever expanding TODO list. It feels good to be back.
- Redundant was supposed to be a -1 score but I messed up. It's fixed now.
- I thought about a humor indicator, but I'm wondering if it might be open to more abuse since humor is much more subjective than things like "Informative" or "Offtopic" (each of which are also subjective, but less so)
- Highly rated replies to low rated comments do get lost. I intend reparent them, I just haven't written that code yet.
- The moderator guidelines are comically out of date. Please read them when you get access, but don't worry about the letter as much as the spirit- they are months old, and the system has changed significantly since the days of 22 moderators hand picked by me... and parts of the guidelines haven't been rewritten to reflect that!
you guys work way more hard and way more dedicated than i ever could ... if anyone gives you flack for having to take some time away from slashdot to do stuff like eat, sleep, and generally live life, forget about it ... you guys are great and if you can keep up 1/2 the job that you do every day i will continue to be impressed ... no i'm not kissing up ... i'm just telling it like it is ... if people want to nit pick and pout about 2 hours of down time, then let them ... if it wasn't for that, they would have to find something else to pick on ... you guys are the best
starr
--
if knowledge is power, the internet is god - me again
I like the idea of slashdot running the latest stuff. Its great seeing the latest kernels and tools support the slashdot effect, survive, and expose any bugs quickly. Unlike the software from a certain evil company who charges for beta testers, Linux and tools has the source and can actually be fixed. Hopefully, this recent rash of downtime spats will be temporary and in the future only see bugs limited only to the added new features.
Its fun to watch a slashdotting newsite being hacked as much exciting technology is being tested. That is what life on the bleeding edge is all about.
With the latest trend in auctioning virtual property and services, the "moderator for a day... or two" idea is going to keep "RARE: Slashdot Moderation Points!" off of eBay for a while. Thank goodness for at least THAT much!
It works well for me when I sort by score, threaded, with a low spill. With that setup, my whatever-I-want-it-to-be threshold (I tend to be between 0 and 2 depending on time of day, etc.) will make the threaded view 'nested' to include the higher scored replies.
I see a lot of moderated replies with this setup, and sometimes the parent thread isn't to my threshold, which means I only see the informative replies without seeing the (perhaps) uninformative original post.
I do wish there was a way to 'up the thread to the parent' so that a thread with many worthy replies would get brought up higher than other posts.
Imagine two threads...
The first has this scoring:
parent: 3, child 1
The second had this scoring:
parent: 2, child 3, child 5, child 3
I'd want the second thread to be higher than the first when sorting by score.
I read slashdot along with several other news sites, and I sorely miss it when it is down.
A little while back Rob kindly provided us with a slashbox entitled 'slashdot stats' or something similar to that which gives hits/hr for previous 24 hours, loadavg and uptime. Keep up the great work Taco and Hemos.
As of last friday, I noticed that posts starting at higher than one was still happening. Not sure if that being turned off is part of the changes that just happened, but Friday it definately did post comments at higher than 1.
I think it makes sense in some circumstances to do that -- especially in lengthy discussions, where people who typically consistantly make good comments might jump in late in the discussion, and end up far enough down the list where a moderator won't run across it.
Someone who consistantly ends up with their posts moderated up to 2, 3 or higher probably should start at 2. I'd be more interested in reading those comments right away.
Personally, I don't like this new categorization of moderator points though... what happens when one person promotes it for being insightful, and another for something else? Or do these just represent the old -1 to 5 scale? If so, I don't think its intuitive that "Informative" is more significant than "Insightful" -- since in most discussions, I'm more interested in insightful comments than simply informative ones.
If they DO still represent numbers, then I think the numbers should show up with them. If they don't, I think some clarification of what happens when more than one moderator moderates a comment with differing reasons.
It doesn't make sense that the label given to a post is chosen by the last moderator. Especially when a "5" is downrated, or a non-anonymous post with a 0 score is promoted back to 1. What would provide much more value, if possible, is the last five ratings on a post. What one person sees as insightful another could see as informative. And what someone sees as a troll, another sees as flamebait.
If we're going to attach reasons for the moderation, I'd like to know more than what the last person who touched the message thought of it.
It always bothers me when I see a comment with a score of 5 within a tree of comments rooted by a comment with a score of -1. I think if any comment receives a score of 2 or higher (maybe 3), then all of its parents should be automatically bumped up to at least 0 (to regain default visibility). Nothing that generates a score 5 comment truly deserves a score of -1 does it?
Either that or replace below-the-threshold comments with blanked out stubs.
You could use additional words as well, such as "very good", "sublime" for good words and "Bad Joke" and "inappropriate" for bad words.
If you really wanted to enrich the slashdot experience you could have the general reader rate the moderators decision, such as "agree" or "disagree". Thus the moderators could collect their own score. Because of the large volume of readers it would tend to be accurate. This also would provide for a more involved readership.
Because they have their own score, better moderators would float to the surface. You could award the moderator with more vote points. Or maybe if moderators agree on the same rating a comment should be given or descriptive moderator words, that would give more vote weight (i.g. two moderators agree, giving a score of three. Also, If the readership vote swings alot one way or another, they could undo a moderator vote.
Just some ideas.
It's not clear how I would affect the post in question. Maybe a +1, -1 after the word?
like:
Redundant -1
Funny + 1
Offtopic -1
Amazing +2
etc
Help achieve Liberty in your lifetime - join the Free State Project - http://www.freestateproject.org
Is moderator status based solely on how much you read /. now? I would think it would be better to also consider how a user's posts have been moderated and how much they've posted. Also, it might be better to find some way to 'score' moderators based on their actions than rotating through them.
/. than people who post their opinion regularly. Probably there's a silent majority and an outspoken minority. It would be quite unfair if only posters would be able to rate postings.
/.) should be eligible for moderator access. It's not just the posters but all of the people who should be able to make up their minds on the quality of postings *and* voice that opinion by moderating - IMHO.
/. readers!
AFAIK, there're more lurkers just reading
I think all of the audience (i.e. people who regularly visit and read
Some people just post to say something, anything, possibly getting moderator access for just an unrated (1) comment. Others who only post if a topic is especially interesting to them will rarely be moderators although they might be more educated than others who do get moderator status.
If it's kept track of date of registration, number and duration of visits, not just score and number of posts, some of the regular lurkers could be given moderator access as well. Maybe picking half of the moderators from the lurker group? At least *some* representation of this quiet but important group of
-- Eavy (: Linux Is Not UniX
It would also be very nice to have a category for moderation adjustment. Sometimes, a moderator might feel it appropriate to moderate a 5 down to a 4 or a 2 up to a 3. An article that gets 5 status may look less and less like a 5 as time goes on. The reason for moderation downward shouldn't be "flamebait" or "offtopic," but rather something like "moderation tweak."
I'm a moderator, currently logged out to answer this. To become a moderator, you simply have to have the preference set in your account that you are willing to do so. After that, you do nothing special except read and post as normal.
Then, when you least expect it, you read a thread and notice that there is a slashbox to the right saying "You have moderator access." You get five points. At this time, you need to read, or reread the guidelines.
You use the five points then you're a mere mortal again. Then you become a moderator again sooner or later, sort of at random.
Before, each post had three little radio buttons at the bottom of it, with the default being the center 'don't change' position. To one side of this was a + sign, on the other a - sign.
As you read post, you could + or - certain posts, then when you get to the bottom oyu press a 'moderate' button and the changes were made.
Now, each post has a drop down list rather than a radio button, with the default as 'normal'. There are three 'negative' choices, and three 'positive' choices. The effect is the same, in that you are bumping the post up or down one, but now there is a 'reason' attached.
Does that make sense now?
All in all, I think this is a great idea. But, here are some of the problems I've got with it as a moderator:
Anyway, great idea, good execution, just needs to be ironed out a bit.
-- Amy Kresse
So, given that everyone knows now how moderator points are limited, it seems to me that a malicious baddie could post lots and lots of useless flamebait-type postings. This would soak up a lot of the moderation points by being moderated down, and potentially sabotage the promotion of worthwhile postings.
It doesn't seem very likely if the moderators do a good job, but seeing the number of downgraded postings in this thread made me think. Of course, this moderation system is an order of magnitude better than anything else out there- it's really nice to be able to cruise at +2 or +3 when I'm really busy and don't have time to read everything.
How about emphasizing the bit that says "focus on increasing, not
decreasing"..
I'm sick of moderators "punishing" posts/posters that they just don't
like - I've seen this already in the Wcarchive story, someone had
thier post moderated down because it's "offtopic" - when the poster
specifically mentioned FreeBSD... (gee, seems like it's on topic to
me..) at worst, this most should have been left alone..
I suggest that "temp" moderators only be given the power to decrease
scores once, and increase four times... it would certainly help to
emphasize the afforementioned rule...
And I wouldn't be surprised if this post gets moderated down soon...
We need an option for amusing posts. I've seen some that deserved +'s just for making me laugh, surely we don't have to ALWAYS be a smarty-pants to get positive points.
(Am I going to get moderator status taken away for this post? Are all the smarty-pantses going to revoke my privledges?)
-- First post (by a female living in a state that begins with M and does not end in a vowel with a birthday that falls
Ah, let me post under this -1 so I won't waste too much of your time...
I found score description an interesting idea; however, I would be worried that it might incite flames when a post is tagged as "flaimbait." However, if I was a dumbass and posted something pointless and silly, hopefully I would get the hint. Getting flagged with "bandwidth waster" would be a good awakening clue.
Out of countless thousands of readers with pushbutton posting ability, there might be a few tortured souls who had the wrong cup of coffee and this could be the thing that could make an irritating person hold a grudge and set him off in a rampage of first posts or whatever. In the end, I'm thankful many people take the time to moderate. Sometimes there are dozens of one-liner random thought replies to just about everything that loose the humor value.
I figured "redundant" would lower a score, not increase it. Found out after I used it that it does indeed give them a +1.
I took redundant to mean "me toos" or "too stupid/lazy/whatever to read the other comments so i didn't realize my point had been made 500 times by other people". Am I wrong?
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
In a nutshell, once you have had the account long enough, and if your usage falls within certain boundaries (read enough, but don't pound with scrips :), some days you log in and find 5 moderator points. It will give you a little doo-dad at the end of each posting, allowing you to moderate it, either upwards or downwards. Once your five are used, the different display leaves, and you're a regular user until sometime you connect again and find new points.
:)
They expire on their own again in a few days if not used. It won't happen if the net moderation of your your own posings is negative. And if you get moderated down too often, your posts start below 1, as 0 (like an AC), or even -1. It used to be possible to start above 1, but I think that this got dropped a few weeks ago; there was just too much starting at 2 and 3. (it worked on cumalitive moderation of your posts, rather than average moderation. A couple of brilliant insights, and every post about your dog & hamster was suddenly plus a couple
There was talk about "micro-defaults" to replace the defaults, so that (for example) frequent positive moderation might start you at 1.1, being listed before the average poster, but after the moderated posts.
Also, you can't moderate and post in the same thread.
A "counterpoint" category would be nice as wll as the existing list--when something provocative is posted, and is popular, drawing heavy + moderation on itself & its siblings, an oterwise innocuous counterpoint, which wouldn't normally get moderated, can get promoted to stand on the same level. I suppose this is "insightful," but it ought to have its own category.
I agree.
...?
I'm a moody person, prone to out-burst of insanity, and always thinking of shapes changing color and forms changing hue as relates to my environment, emotions, thought, and situation.
Sometimes I just want to read the fun and funny stuff, other ziet maybe the (on subject/related) weird/odd perspective/perception (maybe cultural/philosoph/religion bent), in the past I looked for the SCIENCE/MATH/FACT FILLED to read, now I think the Artistic maybe of interest, well in the future wasted and lost
Maybe, I hope, well be able sort and provide points on different catagories. A bunch of Humor on some days could really help my attitude at times.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Horribly Green Moderator
Why should one waste time by explaining why he/she moderated a comment? I think it's pretty obvious: if a moderator likes a comment, he/she will moderate it up, really crappy comments go down. I just don't see any need for further explaining. Adding too many "bells and whistles" will ultimately make things too complicated
I especially dislike the offtopic-option. There is a great risk that some very good comments get moderated down just because they are just a tad offtopic.
By the current method, it sounds like keeping moderator status secret is unnecessary for the purpose it was meant to serve (which I assume is to keep people from bugging you to increase their points). If anyone might be a moderator on a given "day" (where day is some arbitrary, short period of time), why bother keeping your current status a secret?
> I guess this puts to rest all the arguments of
/.'s lifetime.
/. is because Rob hasn't upgraded from 2.2.8 yet
> those people who were saying that it's
> slashdot's setup, not the Linux kernel, that was > causing the problem. Apparently it was a bug in
> the kernel itself. A known bug, but a bug
> nonetheless, and a serious one that caused the
> site to lose uptime at that.
If you're talking about the latest batch of downtimes, yes.
However, I should point out that most of the problems in the past (and Rob has announced the causes in a similar fashion to this in the past) have been due to mySQL crapping out, or more occasionally bugs in the particular patchlevel of mod_perl that Rob was running. Keep in mind, kernel 2.2.8 hasn't even existed for most of
The bug was stomped pretty quickly in 2.2.9 as I understand, too; the only reason it's not fixed for
It is dissapointing to have a stable kernel that's this flaky (although it is just the specific driver). I'm sure we'll have our share of 2.0.34s in the future, too.
I still think that _on the balance_ (and I think history bears out my point here), Linux does very well in terms of low bug rates and fast bug fixes.
DNA just wants to be free...
I disagree with the spirit of this post.
Basically, a kernel leaves linus's hands well (for some definition there of) tested and debugged. However, linus does not have the capability of beating up the kernel at the level at which the users do, nor does he have the QA necessary to make sure a new kernel is fit for all purposes.
I think there is an unspoken convention that if you can't afford any downtime, you wait a little while before jumping on the cutting edge. This is why many people still run a 2.0 kernel.
That being said, the fact that Slashdot runs a 2.2 kernel is doing more for getting the really nasty bugs out of the 2.2 series than any three hundred normal people, because of the extremes slashdot must go through (specifically, being under heavy load, high end hardware, etc)