Slashdot's Disagree Mail 202
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."
Ditch under/overrated as mods (Score:1, Insightful)
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.
Re:costly words (Score:3, Insightful)
The buddy system would bring a tyranny of the majority to slashdot.
Some suggestions that made it? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Ditch under/overrated as mods (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ditch under/overrated as mods (Score:4, Insightful)
Over and under rated also don't affect a person's karma.
A person might think that a post is interesting, just not the current +5 interesting (and thus the overrated). Or, alternatively, they might think it is errm, interesting, but aren't willing to mod it interesting. Maybe underrated isn't needed.
Perhaps it could be made that overrated can not be used to push a post below 2 (or 1, depending on who you ask), which would mean that it can't push a post to oblivion, but a mod can still express the opinion that it isn't such a great post (though not a troll or flame).
Re:Some suggestions that made it? (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't even understand the second suggestion.
I think what she wants is some system where you can mark people that you consider to be good commenters, that is to say they'd be your "friend". Then you can have some settings to change what types of posts you see, maybe call it something like showing posts by their "score". Then we could setup a system where you always adjust the scores of your friends' posts. Oh, wait...
Re:Non-Obvious & Novel? (Score:2, Insightful)
What i find funny about that suggestion... is if
you dont browse all the thread only your
favorites posters how can you add your favorites
posters in the first place ?