Perhaps we should be given moderator points for not only the posts, but the articles as well. A typical day in the moderation of a Slashdot article would probably go a little something like this:
Overrated: Sensationalist Trash
Overrated: Devoid of Research
Overrated: Doesn't Matter
Overrated: *YAWN*
This does not go to say that some won't be fooled. After all, there is always at least one and usually at least two people responsible for the articles (and the oh so stimulating and well thought out comments attached). Which leaves us with a moderation like this:
Underrated: If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, You Must Love Slashdot
> Sure he 'lost money' in the sense that he lost a sale IF YOU WERE GOING TO BUY ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE, but otherwise...
So you are saying that just because you "wouldn't have bought one in the first place" that it's just peachy for you to posess the item in question? That argument is nothing short of ludicrous.
You say that he did not lose money if you are driving around in one of his cars (or a copy of one of his cars; doesn't make any difference) which you wouldn't have purchased. The fact of the matter is that he most definitely/did/ lose money because you would have had to actually save your money and f***ing *BUY* one otherwise. It doesn't matter how you got the car, if it is/exactly/ one of his cars (as is pertinent to the software piracy scene) then that absolutely must be considered a lost sale. Period.
Slashdot Mirror
Overrated: Sensationalist Trash
Overrated: Devoid of Research
Overrated: Doesn't Matter
Overrated: *YAWN*
This does not go to say that some won't be fooled. After all, there is always at least one and usually at least two people responsible for the articles (and the oh so stimulating and well thought out comments attached). Which leaves us with a moderation like this:
Underrated: If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, You Must Love Slashdot
> Sure he 'lost money' in the sense that he lost a sale IF YOU WERE GOING TO BUY ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE, but otherwise...
/did/ lose money because you would have had to actually save your money and f***ing *BUY* one otherwise. It doesn't matter how you got the car, if it is /exactly/ one of his cars (as is pertinent to the software piracy scene) then that absolutely must be considered a lost sale. Period.
So you are saying that just because you "wouldn't have bought one in the first place" that it's just peachy for you to posess the item in question? That argument is nothing short of ludicrous.
You say that he did not lose money if you are driving around in one of his cars (or a copy of one of his cars; doesn't make any difference) which you wouldn't have purchased. The fact of the matter is that he most definitely