Talk:Slashdot/Archive 1

message: "Because of its technically savvy and innovation oriented audience"
A large portion of the slashdot population is often just as scientifically illiterate as the public they hold themselves above. The only difference is the snobbery and a larger amount of time sitting at a computer.   
Jarwulf 07:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As of my experience, I have generaly found Slashdot comments very interesting and have learned a lot of from this site I am reading since the begining 1995 or 1996 I think--Khalid hassani 13:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: There oughta be more detailed discussion of the various problems that have arisen with slashdot. It is nearly universally agreed...except for the editors, that these extend far beyond the rampant biased moderation of comments. For example, Dupes seem to have become very problematic since I joined. Very interesting submissions will regularly be rejected and shunted aside so the same irrelevent article can appear yet a third time on the front page in the same day. The editors don't bother to check the submissions for proper spelling, grammar, readability, or even broken links. The myspace takeover submission is a good example of this laziness. Then of course there's the fact that they let Jon Katz post...but thats a different story. Jarwulf 21:02, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. And I'd like to see a section or at least mention of the recent rampant growth of slashvertisements and other 'ego' posts. For example the noble piece prize was supposed to be a link to a nobel peace prize parody (listed under 'funny, laugh), but turned out to be a shameless plug for the submitter's software. The editor (asleep?) didnt pick it up, and the article wasn't even deleted or modified (even though many had noticed it was yet another slashvertisment) Adidas 14:44, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  A good example of slashvertisment is the great number of Google related posts as of lately (at least once a day), while this could be explained but the audience of the site, I can't help but think there is some slashvertisment going under the radar.--Khalid hassani 13:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slashdot problems 

message: Slashdot is also a good example of liberal bias--I'm liberal myself, but some of the editorials make me wince: they seem occasionally to ignore evidence contrary to accepted dogma (as opposed to, say, not understanding it or not knowing about it--or, better, yet, methodically discrediting it).  They're also a good source of invective against Microsoft, should you ever need one.  :-)  I do like the site, though, don't get me wrong.
One could say the same (or the exact opposite) about many news sources.  In any case, the great thing about Slashdot isn't the article or the editorial, it's the comments.  And those are a free for all-- in any anti-MS article, over half of the highly-moderated comments will be a defense of MS (even if, in that particular case, MS's behavior might be difficult to defend.)
----
:Achieving the front page on Slashdot.org is to technology what the front page of the Wall Street Journal is to business and finance. Except that the Wall Street Journal usually does some sort of fact checking and retracts egregious errors it makes.
While this is quite funny and not all that inaccurate, it could use a rewrite to be in a neutral point of view.  --BlckKnght
----This article is cool, id never heard of geekizoid or the 'anti slashdot' movement. Thanks for adding 'naked and petrified' back in. 
As for the bias, its not so much 'liberal' as 'geek',
which is some kind of two headed bastard baby monster
when a libertarian had sex with phyllis schlafly and
was raised in the suburbs.
:I would say that the editors (at least some of them) are definitely pro-environment, pro- civil liberties, and anti- corporate bad behavior; and rabidly anti-Bush (which may merely arise from the other values).  If that makes them 'liberal', I'm curious what the contrast is with.  (Are we to suppose that moderates can't hold those views?)  At any rate, 'liberal' has become something of a knee-jerk criticism of such a large range of values that it has almost become meaningless.
:The posters, OTOH, cover a very broad political spectrum.  There is prominent advocacy of Libertarianism (of the current variety), though seemingly not as much lately.  There were huge arguments over the 2000 election, with both opinions well represented, along with a lot of other people claiming that the result didn't actually matter due to party convergence.  I think the Bush supporters became rather hushed for a long time after the war started, but they seem to be becoming more vocal again now.  It's hard to say which political leanings are best represented, since you tend to notice the most vocal.  There are also very vocal advocates of Windows, Mac, and BSD, along with the Linuxers.  And there are incessant posts getting modded up for claiming that anyone who disagrees with the "groupthink" gets modded down.  The site would certainly make good fodder for a student of political rhetoric. — B.Bryant 12:27, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberal Bias 

message: Slashdot at this point really is a joke.
The editors don't bother to review article submissions properly (for spelling and grammar), they don't adequately check for duplicates, the posters whore for Karma (a meaningless number they don't even get to see anymore), the army of trolls disrupt every single thread, and the posters often don't even bother to read the articles they comment on since you have to get your comment in before 70+ other people do, otherwise no one will likely ever see it.
Kuro5hin is better. The only thing that keeps /. as popular as it is, is inertia.
:1. sign your wiki discussion entries. 2. Browse at 0 to filter out the trolls. 3. better yet, browse at 5, set insightful, informative, and interesting to +6, enjoy all the insight. 4. I see. Digg is Incredibly insightful </sarcasm> 5. it's gotten much better now. --Rdoger6424 03:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Editors 

message: User:Fredrik: for some examples of the term 'penguinheads' in use with relation to Slashdot, see http://www.google.com/search?q=slashdot+penguinheads . There's a fairly diverse range of citations there.
Acb 15:36, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I count 58 search results. Of those, many do not even refer to Slashdotters as penguinheads, but use the word "penguinheads" for Linux fans in general and also have a mention of Slashdot somewhere on the page. So sure, the term exists, but it is by no means sufficiently widely used to warrant inclusion. Contrast with "Slashdotters" which gets 30,000 hits. Fredrik | talk 15:48, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I noted the same thing when I looked up "penguinheads" the other day upon noticing that penguinheads as a synonym for slashdotters had been deleted.  Since I had never heard the term and it didn't seem to be referring to slashdotters themselves but rather linux fans, I was fine with the deletion.  I think, at best, someone failed to understand the distinction between linux fans and slashdotters - an understandable confusion considering typical comments on slashdot - and thank the editor for noticing the inaccuracy and correcting it.  --ABQCat 06:58, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penguinheads 

message: what is "slashdotted" ?
:To be slashdotted is to suffer from the Slashdot effect. DJ Clayworth 05:18, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  what is "slashdotted" ? 

message: *Concur.  Nothing on the Slashdot site that indicates it's a blog, and the consensus here indicates that Slashdot users generally agree that it's not a blog.  "News" is in the site byline "News for nerds...".  It's widely regarded as a news site or news portal that happens to provide for comments on news items.  While it has things in common with blogs, it's not a blog. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Contrib 05:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Slashdot is a ''news site''

message: *Agree Slashdot is technology news discussion forum. --Kryptknight 03:52, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
*Agree Kryptknight, you could not have put it better. Except maybe by putting in some jabs at the lazy editors. Donutz 22:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Slashdot is neither

message: It seems that the section of the article headlined "Criticism" maintains a biased POV throughout.  Instead of stating specific criticisms that some people hold as opinions, it states them as fact and/or as held by the entire population of Slashdot readers.  And the bit at the end about drug use seems to be entirely out of left field.  Does that even belong in this article?
--Reverend Loki 23:34, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Trolling subsection looks to me to actually cover most of the same stuff the Criticism subsection does, but in a better fashion - with more citations, etc.  Maybe the criticism section ought to just be removed? TerraFrost 19:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I more or less rewrote the section.  I think it is better with short statements. A few points are repeated from the "Trolling" section.  However, I would keep the criticism section because it handles valid criticisms apart from the work of trolls.  In other words, there is a difference between someone trolling a criticism and someone just making a point. --Vector4F 05:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: "Criticism" subsection and POV