I've had the leatherman wave ( closeup ) for about 6 mos. now and I love it. I see the Spyderco having absolutley no advantage over it (except that it looks kinda neat) especially with the approx. $40 more SRP.
btw, have you seen the new leatherman crunch ( closeup )? locking pliers...oh yeah...
>We all know good and well that 80% of people stick with the default >options, so marking a message in the negatives effectivily deletes it >since most people will never change their default threshold.
I assume that the majority of people who visit/. are not stupid. They will see, as you have seen, that leaving the default at zero will hide all posts with a negative score from their view. If that's not what they want, they'll change it.
>If you want to use scores, that's fine but DON'T ALLOW NEGATIVES and leave >the threashold at 0. That way, the default is to see ALL COMMENTS and if >someone wants your 408 moderators making decisions on what they read >for them, they are free to do so.
The system as it stands now has no absoulte lowest threashold, making it virtually impossible to guarantee that all comments will be seen. However, if the threashold were set to somewhere around -10,000, as Rob suggested, it's pretty unlikely that any would not be shown.
I agree that there is a potential problem with "scoring wars," but I'm sure something will be implemented to curtail that sort of thing. Overall, I don't see why you're so upset about this. If you don't want your posts moderated, takes Rob's advice, use a -10000 threashold. Personally, I think its a great system. I set my threashold to 3, read every post, and they all had content worth reading. A very welcomed change to the/.ing experience.
Slashdot Mirror
see for yourself...
http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/tattoo2.html
Well if you have linux/unix or anything that supports perl...can someone port this to win95/dos...?
you can get perl for win32 at activestate
I've had the leatherman wave ( closeup ) for about 6 mos. now and I love it. I see the Spyderco having absolutley no advantage over it (except that it looks kinda neat) especially with the approx. $40 more SRP.
btw, have you seen the new leatherman crunch ( closeup )? locking pliers...oh yeah...
>We all know good and well that 80% of people stick with the default
/. are not stupid. They will see, as you have seen, that leaving the default at zero will hide all posts with a negative score from their view. If that's not what they want, they'll change it.
/.ing experience.
>options, so marking a message in the negatives effectivily deletes it
>since most people will never change their default threshold.
I assume that the majority of people who visit
>If you want to use scores, that's fine but DON'T ALLOW NEGATIVES and leave
>the threashold at 0. That way, the default is to see ALL COMMENTS and if
>someone wants your 408 moderators making decisions on what they read
>for them, they are free to do so.
The system as it stands now has no absoulte lowest threashold, making it virtually impossible to guarantee that all comments will be seen. However, if the threashold were set to somewhere around -10,000, as Rob suggested, it's pretty unlikely that any would not be shown.
I agree that there is a potential problem with "scoring wars," but I'm sure something will be implemented to curtail that sort of thing. Overall, I don't see why you're so upset about this. If you don't want your posts moderated, takes Rob's advice, use a -10000 threashold. Personally, I think its a great system. I set my threashold to 3, read every post, and they all had content worth reading. A very welcomed change to the