Why doesn't anyone realize that forcing a 0 threshold default while setting negative scores is just as bad as integrating IE into Win98 while saying "well they can install Netscape".
Don't mislead. You can't get rid of IE in 98 very easily (there is a vendor or two offering something that will do this, but its beta from what I've seen so far). You can very easily get rid of a default threshold. Your IRC example is pretty damned misleading too. You see, in IRC, whoever is running the channel can control if I can talk or not, if I'm allowed to be there or not, if I can hear others or not, etc etc.. Under the slashdot moderation system, I can read what I want and write what I want. This isn't about censorship, its about choice, and people like you are trying to restrict MY choice and other slashdotters... hmm... isn't that a form of censorship?
Doesn't matter much to me what a post is set at. I can see them all. I've seen other "systems" in which they try to maintain anonymity & freedom for people to say what they want, and it goes down the tubes anyways. Guess what, they either tend to lose the anonymity side, they start censoring things, or they turn into such a useless forum everyone stops using it (except people spamming in their url's).
When I first started reading/. I was quite pleased with the way things are handled. And yes, I have my threshold set down so far I can pretty much see anything that's being said. However, people who don't want to see flamebait, statements made on behalf of idiots, OT comments, etc., can for the most part, whisk it away.
Certainly, moderators are going to give things improper ratings at times. Its all a part of being human. But then again, let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.
I'm not saying be blissful and ignorant of mistakes. However, if you think you will accomplish anything by giving snide comments, well, its not going to work, welcome to life. If you perhaps, suggested a solution, it might.
Moderation on/. is very simple, it gives you choice. I can choose to see comments made by people that several moderators have rated. I can choose to see it to varying degrees, or even read only the best comments. I can always pull out all the stops and read whatever comments I want.
Pulling this type of moderation on/. would be akin to forcing someone to watch only one channel on their TV. I want variety, I want to be able to see what I want, and I want my neighbors to have that choice too.
PS: If I get moderated down, great, I was continuing an off-topic thread anyways. But at least I have the *freedom* to write that, and people can choose whether they want to read something not relevant to the topic or not.
Well, working things out, I make about $25/hr working. Since having a family comes into play, I'd consider my free time slightly more valueable than my work time. So, in the time it would take to find an MP3 or two, we're already at the cost of a CD.
Like I said, I'd pay for legitimate MP3's no problem.
I'd have to beg to differ. Time to pull out of that shortsighted state of mind, because the medium isn't the problem here.
There are many people who utilize mp3's in a legal fashion. Just because some people use it for less than legal purposes doesn't make it wrong, evil or term people "freeloading-idiots." Email has been used for wrongful purposes, do you see the pulp and paper mills in an uproar? Do you see them taking sendmail to court? Nope.
And as for the wrongdoing that *is* done with mp3's nowadays. Personally speaking, looking for mp3's is one of the bigger wastes of time ever. You end up spending over an hour looking for one frigging song, and what you do get is usually of a poor quality. Not worth the navigating (and closing of all the browser windows these sites usually popup). I would much prefer flipping a few bucks to get a song *I* want. And I would prefer it if the artist got the big chuck of that cash.
That's what those record companies are afraid of. I don't think they care NEARLY as much about pirated mp3 songs as they care about losing their middleman status.
You have to keep this in mind, that Microsoft is a big company. And when it comes to antitrust laws, it deals directly with companies/corporations/etc., not individuals. If it were otherwise, I can just see all kinds of screwy things happenning in regards to say, antitrust and voting (sue the other candidate just because he had a better platform?).
Linux on the other hand, is not a company. There wasn't a specific vendor kicking up dirt, it was one individual. And it has to do with freedom of speech. He's allowed to say to people that Toshiba was giving him a hard time, and not recommend anyone buy from him.
And what of the people on/. and others who followed through and complained to Toshiba? They were all potential customers. Its called consumer demand, not "Linux antitrust".
As for Linux having a monopoly on hype. Erm. I don't think so. I'd respond to that in more depth, but just the thought of you thinking any *one* thing could monopolize "hype" just makes me laugh:-).
Last but not least, just because people "flexed muscle" doesn't mean its bad. Its called consumers telling a company what they want. Companies after all, should want to know what consumers want, as yes, it will directly affect their profits.
I gave them my two cents too. I'm pretty sure alot of people did. If a fourth of the readership of/. sent them mail, then they should still have a backlog of mail to read;-)
Slashdot Mirror
What a crybaby.
/. I was quite pleased with the way things are handled. And yes, I have my threshold set down so far I can pretty much see anything that's being said. However, people who don't want to see flamebait, statements made on behalf of idiots, OT comments, etc., can for the most part, whisk it away.
/. is very simple, it gives you choice. I can choose to see comments made by people that several moderators have rated. I can choose to see it to varying degrees, or even read only the best comments. I can always pull out all the stops and read whatever comments I want.
/. would be akin to forcing someone to watch only one channel on their TV. I want variety, I want to be able to see what I want, and I want my neighbors to have that choice too.
Doesn't matter much to me what a post is set at. I can see them all. I've seen other "systems" in which they try to maintain anonymity & freedom for people to say what they want, and it goes down the tubes anyways. Guess what, they either tend to lose the anonymity side, they start censoring things, or they turn into such a useless forum everyone stops using it (except people spamming in their url's).
When I first started reading
Certainly, moderators are going to give things improper ratings at times. Its all a part of being human. But then again, let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.
I'm not saying be blissful and ignorant of mistakes. However, if you think you will accomplish anything by giving snide comments, well, its not going to work, welcome to life. If you perhaps, suggested a solution, it might.
Moderation on
Pulling this type of moderation on
PS: If I get moderated down, great, I was continuing an off-topic thread anyways. But at least I have the *freedom* to write that, and people can choose whether they want to read something not relevant to the topic or not.
How about instead, your browser/OS/IP address gets tacked onto every message? That should prevent a few people from flapping their jaws.
/. gets flooded with the tilde??.microsoft.com users who come here to do nothing but misinform :-).
It would also be pretty useful, for when
Well, working things out, I make about $25/hr working. Since having a family comes into play, I'd consider my free time slightly more valueable than my work time. So, in the time it would take to find an MP3 or two, we're already at the cost of a CD.
Like I said, I'd pay for legitimate MP3's no problem.
I'd have to beg to differ. Time to pull out of that shortsighted state of mind, because the medium isn't the problem here.
There are many people who utilize mp3's in a legal fashion. Just because some people use it for less than legal purposes doesn't make it wrong, evil or term people "freeloading-idiots." Email has been used for wrongful purposes, do you see the pulp and paper mills in an uproar? Do you see them taking sendmail to court? Nope.
And as for the wrongdoing that *is* done with mp3's nowadays. Personally speaking, looking for mp3's is one of the bigger wastes of time ever. You end up spending over an hour looking for one frigging song, and what you do get is usually of a poor quality. Not worth the navigating (and closing of all the browser windows these sites usually popup). I would much prefer flipping a few bucks to get a song *I* want. And I would prefer it if the artist got the big chuck of that cash.
That's what those record companies are afraid of. I don't think they care NEARLY as much about pirated mp3 songs as they care about losing their middleman status.
You have to keep this in mind, that Microsoft is a big company. And when it comes to antitrust laws, it deals directly with companies/corporations/etc., not individuals. If it were otherwise, I can just see all kinds of screwy things happenning in regards to say, antitrust and voting (sue the other candidate just because he had a better platform?).
/. and others who followed through and complained to Toshiba? They were all potential customers. Its called consumer demand, not "Linux antitrust".
:-).
Linux on the other hand, is not a company. There wasn't a specific vendor kicking up dirt, it was one individual. And it has to do with freedom of speech. He's allowed to say to people that Toshiba was giving him a hard time, and not recommend anyone buy from him.
And what of the people on
As for Linux having a monopoly on hype. Erm. I don't think so. I'd respond to that in more depth, but just the thought of you thinking any *one* thing could monopolize "hype" just makes me laugh
Last but not least, just because people "flexed muscle" doesn't mean its bad. Its called consumers telling a company what they want. Companies after all, should want to know what consumers want, as yes, it will directly affect their profits.
I gave them my two cents too. I'm pretty sure alot of people did. If a fourth of the readership of /. sent them mail, then they should still have a backlog of mail to read ;-)