Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Standards Too High?

By pediddle in Meta
Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 05:20:23 AM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)
Kuro5hin.org

Last night there were almost 10 stories at one stage or another in the queue. Some were interesting to me, some were not. I posted comments to some interesting ones. This morning, it appears that all but one of them have been voted down or otherwise deleted.

The post threshold is 95, and the hide threshold is -20. In a community where users keep the standard so high -- which is a good thing -- the balance seems a little off.


Remember that I'm not whining because some post of mine got deleted -- I've actually never posted before. These are merely my observations.

The system is essentially supermajority-ruled. There must be at least 95 more people that like a story than don't. If 300 people have voted on a story before a story is posted, then obviously the vast majority of people liked it. But if 300 people have voted before it gets dumped, then there is probably only about a 120/100 ratio of dislike/like. With that ratio, could the story really be so bad?

Stories about popular opinions obviously have a better chance of getting voted in (although ideally they shouldn't). Authors with minority opinions or with ideas for stories that aren't necessarily interesting to everyone therefore have a disadvantage. Stories that are extremely well-written or long also have an advantage, but we cannot expect all authors to have superb writing skills.

To me, the voting queue should merely be a place to make editorial comments and to weed out spam and trolls. With such a high threshold, it is instead a place to discriminate against imperfect, but not necessarily bad, stories.

A Solution?

It's bad form to bitch and moan without providing any suggestions. So here are three:



  • Simply lower the posting threshold to say, 20/-20. This will get good stories out of the queue fast, as well as mediocre stories that would otherwise sit for 36 hours before their fate is automatically determined. But it might get stories out too fast, before there is enough initial discussion. The fact that stories always have some comments by the time they are posted is good, since it stimulates the less active readers (who don't vote).

  • Change the system a little: use a simple majority (not counting voters who abstain), but only after a certain threshold of either votes or time. For example, post automatically after 150 votes, or after 12 hours. Instead of a simple majority, alternatively use the new auto-post system to factor in comments and ratings.

  • (My favorite idea:) Use a different threshold for each section, automatically determined based on the number of recent submissions and acceptions in that section. Our goal should be to keep Kuro5hin diverse and flowing. The system could set a goal of at least 2 stories a week for each section, with a certain number to the front page. If that goal is not met, lower the threshold accordingly. It would be nice, again, to factor in comments and ratings to the decision. And of course the threshold shouldn't ever be displayed, or else authors could start making off-topic posts to sections with lower standards. Finally, there should always be a minimum threshold to keep extremely slow sections free of spam.



Obviously we need to avoid decreasing the signal to noise ratio too much.  But what is an acceptable level?  I'm posting this query in the interest of spicing things up a little -- getting a little more variety and more stories into the section pages. The front page should remain sacred ground.

Is my story here good enough to meet the standards of you, the voting populace? Even if not, hopefully it will at least generate some discussion, even if the discussion is then lost forever. If any of you think the system needs to be changed, post your ideas below. If you don't agree, let your voice be heard as well. That's what it's all about.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Should rusty change the voting system?
o Yes, and have different thresholds for each section, automatically adjusted to keep the stories flowing. 19%
o Yes, make it 20/-20. 2%
o Yes, make it simple majority after a certain amount of votes or time. 11%
o No, keep it the same. 54%
o Yes, make it even more unbalanced. 12%

Votes: 238
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o Also by pediddle


Display: Sort:
Standards Too High? | 241 comments (218 topical, 23 editorial, 0 hidden)
The system is fine (5.00 / 6) (#1)
by Dest on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 03:58:09 PM EST

IMO, the system is fine as it is. If people want their message out they're free to post it in their diaries. As for the community's standards, they ensure a high calibre of story is posted to the section and front pages.

----
Dest

"Bah. You have no taste, you won't be getting better than tofurkey bukkake." -- Ni
See, here's the thing: (5.00 / 5) (#2)
by Canthros on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:03:53 PM EST

The bar is set where it is for a reason. When I first showed up, I think it was something closer to -35/55 or something. It's been quite a while. It got changed to decrease the number of crap submissions. Why is it that you want to increase the amount of crap that gets posted?

--
It's now obvious you are either A) Gay or B) Female, or possibly both.
RyoCokey
Short Answer: (none / 0) (#184)
by pediddle on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 02:19:06 AM EST

I don't want to increase the amount of crap, I want to decrease the number of descent stories (not crap, but not necessarily front-page material) that get rejected.

[ Parent ]
Not that easy. (4.00 / 2) (#199)
by Canthros on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 04:20:20 PM EST

If you lower the bar, you lower the bar. More crap gets in, the overall level of quality is lowered, and the number of good to excellent submissions shrinks, because it's so much easier to pass through a mediocre one. There are plenty of other ways to handle the problem, if you really think it is one. One option is to resection the story and comments to the author's diary, assuming that they have diary permissions.

I think that's a much better option, since that's basically what authors do with some rejected stories as-is.

--
It's now obvious you are either A) Gay or B) Female, or possibly both.
RyoCokey
[ Parent ]

The purpose (4.76 / 25) (#4)
by rusty on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:10:22 PM EST

This misbalance ruins the real purpose of k5: to let people speak their minds to the masses about technology and culture.

That's what you think the real purpose is. I think the real purpose is to select the best articles possible and produce an interesting and thought-provoking online news and opinion magazine. Well, among other purposes, but the point is that what you think (or want) the purpose to be ain't necessarily what it is.

My other response is that we've been going for more than three years now, posting new stories every day, and they keep getting better. I've been hearing the "we'll push away all the writers and starve for lack of stories!" argument since the first story was voted down. I've also heard the "as the userbase grows, we'll be crushed to death under the mountain of articles!" argument for about as long.

Both are speculation, and neither has turned out to be the case. Instead we've kept about the same average number of stories per day, and while the number of submissions slowly increases, we're posting fewer of them, so overall the quality tends to improve. This, IMO, is the best of all possible outcomes, and it would be nuts to mess with it.

____
Not the real rusty

Just curious (4.33 / 3) (#6)
by onyxruby on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:15:44 PM EST

Just our of curiosity, what is the average rate of rejected to accepted articles?

The moon is covered with the results of astronomical odds.
[ Parent ]

Consulting the database... (5.00 / 3) (#10)
by rusty on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:32:02 PM EST

Interesting question. I haven't looked at that in a long time. I poked back a few months, and the numbers are pretty steady. We post around 130 articles a month, out of 300-400 submissions. The ratio of posted to dumped seems to be steadily between 35% and 45%. So, slightly less than half of all submissions are posted.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
That's just raw numbers. (3.00 / 1) (#76)
by BadDoggie on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:43:57 PM EST

With a more specific SQL query, you get closer to a 75% acceptance rate:

SELECT count(*) FROM TableSubmissions WHERE UID <> 20658 AND TableSubmissions.story <> "Resubmitted";

It goes up another five to ten points if you add the condition "TableSubmissions.AuthorPaidAttentionToEditQueueCriticisms = TRUE".

woof.

"The line between genius and stupidity is very fine indeed, but you're so far away from the line that it doesn't matter." -- Parent ]

my only complaint.. (3.50 / 6) (#100)
by infinitera on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 10:18:38 PM EST

Lies with the hide threshold. I think it should take a bit longer for stories to get hidden - I don't mind the current ratio of posted/dumped stories, I'd just like stories to stick around for more voters than some random 20 some odd folks. It would also somewhat negate the time-zone/ideology problem (that is, if you want a [particularly] liberal story posted, put in the the queue when the europeans are voting, otherwise it dies before they even see it).

[ Parent ]
But . . . (4.50 / 2) (#154)
by acceleriter on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:54:52 PM EST

. . . the only time 20 folks can dump a story is when 20 thumbs-down votes come in without a single thumbs-up. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

[ Parent ]
*COUGH* (4.50 / 2) (#185)
by Ranieri on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 03:21:40 AM EST

*COUGH*dupe accounts*COUGH*
--
Taste cold steel, feeble cannon restraint rope!
[ Parent ]
The purpose. (4.66 / 3) (#9)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:30:44 PM EST

As usual, the purpose of the site is what the users want it to be, and a lot of people use K5 as a discussion site. I'd have to agree that I've found a lot of stories in the queue to be quite interesting, at least for the 36 hours that I'm allowed to read them and comment on them.  Even within that time, I've seen some generate over 300 comments and great discussion.

But I think that there are too many people on kuro5hin now with such a variety of interests that very few stories can get the sort of majority required to get posted.  And since people aren't voting on quality anymore but rather on their opinions, many very interesting and well-written stories with a great deal of discussion value are being dumped for shorter, less-well-written, less controversial pieces that are easier for everyone to understand and vote up without thinking about it.

The fact that less stories are getting through doesn't imply that the quality of the stories that get posted is increasing, or that they are better than the stories that get dumped.  As I've already mentioned, the current system can stifle interesting and thought-provoking opinions because not everyone agrees with them--that is often the nature of such opinions.  Instead, you have a system that posts opinions that the majority likes, agrees with, or doesn't have to think very hard about.  That fact that a story stays in the queue implies that people have a difference of opinion about it, and therefore it might very well be interesting, thought-provoking, and controversial.

As technical solutions go, I'd appreciate it if I could see other people's stories that got killed by "Auto-post", since these often tend to be more interesting than the stories that do get posted. But ultimately I think that either the thresholds, the moderation system, or the moderation guidelines need to be adjusted; I'd rather discuss interesting, quality stories than the stories that everybody agrees with.  Sometimes the truth hurts; those are precisely the times it needs to be posted.

And if all else fails, could you recommend some discussion sites that do wish to discuss interesting and thought-provoking ideas and opinions?  I'm looking.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Hmmm .... (4.33 / 3) (#16)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:05:53 PM EST

I'd have to agree that I've found a lot of stories in the queue to be quite interesting, at least for the 36 hours that I'm allowed to read them and comment on them. Even within that time, I've seen some generate over 300 comments and great discussion.

Unless it actually reaches the -20 threshold, a story with "great discussion" will generally get posted. Can you given an example of a story that went down that was any good ? I can't really think of one.

And since people aren't voting on quality anymore but rather on their opinions, many very interesting and well-written stories with a great deal of discussion value are being dumped for shorter, less-well-written, less controversial pieces that are easier for everyone to understand and vote up without thinking about it.

Somehow or other, this seem to have become a common belief, but I really don't see it. If anything, the voting a story seems to depend most of all on the views expressed in the highest-rated editorial comments. Consider, for instance, that the general political bias of this site is centre-left (liberal, to Americans), and pro-technology: one of the latest stories to be voted down castigated conservatives for the opposition to "partial-birth abortion" (D&X). It was voted down because it didn't explain its position sufficiently well, and several highly-rated editorial comments said as much. In general, standards of writing still seem to influence moderation much more than the opinions expressed, which is as it should be IMHO.

There certainly are stories killed by auto-post that seem to have died mainly out of indifference. Personally, I think this is just fine. They tend to be bad fiction pieces, and the musings of amateur technologists, philosophers, peacemakers and economists. I've read enough of that (in the newspapers if nowhere else) to want to vomit. I really don't need any more. If you find them interesting, fair enough, but that doesn't mean they should get posted.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

Gladly. (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:25:33 PM EST

Here are some recent stories that got dumped after 36 hours:
Estanislao Martínez's story about religion,
redwolfb14's story about Affirmative Action, my story about Ends and Means, and yellowbeard's recent story about the US Educational system.

Take a look at the comments in these stories and tell me what you think; they all have a fair amount of discussion, and em's story doubly so.  I found them all interesting, posted in them, and as usual find it distressing that I can no longer consult the text of the story, especially seeing as how I've found all of these stories to be generally more interesting than the few stories that have gotten posted lately, which I have not commented on.  This doesn't necessarily mean that they should get posted; however, I think that with this sort of interest, they definitely shouldn't get hidden, especially for those who prefer a discussion to a HOWTO.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Well, ... (4.66 / 3) (#38)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:04:26 PM EST

Estanlislao Martinez is a former adequoid. There is a certainly natural bias against their stories, given the shit they've pulled in the past, and the fact they now all seem to be back here again. In that particular case, I think it's justified. YHBT, I think.

The affirmative action story, I must admit I never saw. AA is an overdone subject however. An article on it needs to contain something both interesting and either original or newsworthy to get posted. That's a high hurdle.

Your story on means and ends: The central moral question is one of those unanswerable questions that has been thrashed out to such an extent that raising it as such is basically pointless. Mentioning Iraq is probably a bad idea.

Yellowbeard's story: I'm surprise that wasn't posted, so I'll give you this one.

As a general observation, I'd say you're emphasising stories that are trying to be original. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I'm not much enamoured of originality these days. It takes considerable knowledge and careful thought to make an original contribution to most fields. In terms of practical K5 politics: If you try to be original, there is almost certainly someone out there who will pick serious holes in it and generally persuade the mob to vote against it. I'm not sure this is any bad thing.  

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

OT Question (2.50 / 4) (#41)
by medham on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:12:05 PM EST

Is there any user who better personifies the term 'kurobot' than you? Your arrogance is astonishing, ignorance impressive, and utter lack of aesthetic sense or imagination indicative. Furthermore, you have just the right element of prissy self-righteousness.

Some might well choose a more obviously stupid user, and I could appreciate the generality argument. But unless counterexamples are given, I'll stick by my choice.

The real 'medham' has userid 6831.
[ Parent ]

I'll consider that a complement (nt) (3.00 / 2) (#48)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:24:37 PM EST



Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]
I will now prove the point (3.00 / 2) (#49)
by medham on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:27:48 PM EST

When I point it out, you're going to claim you did it on purpose. Q.E.D.

The real 'medham' has userid 6831.
[ Parent ]

No. I've just been drinking (nt) (3.00 / 2) (#50)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:29:42 PM EST



Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]
enjoy the recycled opinions, then (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:22:56 PM EST

I know who em is, I know he can write rather well, and I value his opinion in such precise matters.  I don't see why such ludicrous bias should exist at all--can't we judge people by their actions?  That was even the point of his story, and apparently K5 missed it entirely.

The AA story probably got dumped because there was another AA story around; actually, I don't think that even made it 36 hours, upon further inspection. But again, not a good reason to vote down an interesting story, especially a different take on a popular issue.

My story on ends and means was intended to make K5 think about if they even use moral principles at all when they evaluate things, because I think they don't.  Their confusion about the entire issue justified my suspicions.

I think Yellowbeard might have irritated the queue in his submission style, and his emphasis on sex probably biased some people against him, but then, he did mention his credentials, biases, and reasoning up front, and I think he did a good job of explaining things.

So you're telling me that the current story submission procedure encourages unoriginal thought?  Well, that goes along with promoting ideas that are easy to agree with as well, and maintaining the status quo.  It sucks for a discussion site, though.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Stuff (5.00 / 1) (#51)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:40:00 PM EST

My story on ends and means was intended to make K5 think about if they even use moral principles at all when they evaluate things, because I think they don't.

I'm sure they don't, but this is no surprise, surely ?

So you're telling me that the current story submission procedure encourages unoriginal thought?

Not really, but it does encourage care, which does discourage "original thoughts" that are ill-thought-out or just plain wrong.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

that would explain it. (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:58:58 PM EST

In that case, a "Morality HOWTO For K5" might be a good idea, since both morality and interesting discussion doesn't seem to have much place here (along with humor and now fiction).

I'd say it discourages original thoughts that are just plain wrong after about 20 seconds of inspection by the average obsessive queue reloader.  Which is a value judgement that seems to mean very little, even after 36 hours.

Maybe next time I'll just start things off with an amusing link or anecdote, or offer to rate up comments for the first 50 +1 votes, since both attention spans and morality are in short supply...
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

but... (4.00 / 1) (#189)
by dalinian on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 06:16:50 AM EST

Is Stirnerian egoism a 'morality'?

[ Parent ]
if the authors of the dumped stories you mentioned (4.00 / 2) (#52)
by s alpha on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:41:00 PM EST

  1. took the time to tighten up their piece before submitting,
  2. took the time to heed editorial advice before the vote, or
  3. submitted their piece as a diary entry,
then they still would have generated a fair amount of discussion, and we could still consult the text — seems to me to be working as god and rusty intended... people just need to be more realistic about the quality/appropriateness of their content and where it belongs.

[ Parent ]
who says they didn't? (4.00 / 1) (#57)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:48:32 PM EST

Take my story, for example; you can find an earlier version in my diary, and I did rewrite parts of it, specifically the Iraq section, before submitting it.

I had someone read it over, I put it in the Edit Queue, where it stayed for 2 hours (the maximum time alotted), during which time I got basically no useful editorial feedback.

Then, once it got to the queue, a lot of people seemed greatly confused about many things--mainly basic issues of ethics, something that no one had mentioned before.  I and other K5 readers replied to these concerns, and there's a lot of interesting and relevant discussion to be found, therefor.

Perhaps em's article would be an even better example; it was incredibly well-written, which was also the only Editorial flaw people could seem to find in it.  It got over 300 comments, and generated a lot of interesting discussion.  Also dumped after 36 hours.

Maybe it is working as god and Rusty intended.  That doesn't mean it couldn't be working better.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Yellowbeard, I know... (3.00 / 1) (#119)
by Menard on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:55:49 AM EST

Requested editorial comment, received it, edited, re-posted - and was castigated for spamming.

Still, I think that's beside the point. I think the question here is - what should be done about a mediocre piece with really really excellent discussion?

[ Parent ]

The problem with answering this question (none / 0) (#204)
by eightball on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 05:55:48 PM EST

Can you given an example of a story that went down that was any good ?

Because of the way rejected stories are handled, we can't point to a link where you can read the rejected story. We are therefore limited to our memories. Also, we are unlikely to remember these things for long unless we are personally affected by the subject (i.e. you are the author or are very personally involved in the subject). Therefore, anyone not being able to pull an example does not necessarily mean there are none.

I have seen a number of good stories go down, but I can only remember one. The reason I remember it was because probably the only reason it went down was because another story was posted that started an inter-story flamewar. I am speaking of the male circumcision story from earlier last year (late February, early March).

[ Parent ]

a little something called the diary section... (4.50 / 2) (#45)
by s alpha on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:22:16 PM EST

is where we “let people speak their minds to the masses about technology and culture.”

the submissions queue, on the other hand, is where we provide feedback and tips for improvement upon people’s attempts at journalism (and now, apparently, fiction — go figure).

when that feedback is ignored, stories die a well-deserved death — this whole ‘problem’ boils down to people submitting diary-grade material to the queue, ignoring good advice on how to bring it up to par, and then bitching when it’s rejected.

[ Parent ]
Time threshold in queue? (5.00 / 1) (#234)
by laotic on Sun Feb 09, 2003 at 03:51:53 PM EST

I thought I'd ask rusty about this someday (before posting my story) - of course it is unfair if people from, say, Philly, get to vote a story they don't like into oblivion while those on the West coast might push it to FP - but they are not awake at the time the story is mashed to prevent it!

The solution is simple, I guess - retain the stories in the queue (at least for voting) a standard minimum, something like 24 hours, so that everybody around the world gets a chance at voting.

 

 


Sig? Sigh.
[ Parent ]
I agree, partially. (4.20 / 5) (#5)
by Menard on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:12:15 PM EST

Of your first two points, I definately agree with the first point. Although there is a theoretical limit of 36 hours, this is rarely reached. For stories that quickly fall to -20, there is no chance for the majority of users to see and vote on them. Something that might have succeeded with lots of daytime users dies with th 3 a.m. crowd. This isn't certain, of course - maybe 3 a.m. users are entirely representative of the user base as a whole. However, I think it might be good for those other users to at least get a chance to see the story.

I'm not sure that I buy the second point, though. While one certainly does not want to hurt people's feelings, I don't think things should just be voted up as an exercise in self esteem. If something is bad, it should die. I'd just like more people to be able to make that decision.

Of your three practical points, I don't like the first suggestion - It would keep the early-death problem, but also add it's opposite. This way, the majority of the community wouldn't decide what goes OR what stays, in most cases.

I like the second suggestion more. This would allow stories to survive long enough to be seen by all, in fact giving each story an equal length of exposure.

The third suggestion appealed to me at first, but a flaw occurred to me : what about the sections that ARE very active - Culture and Technology are both examples of such high-volume sections. If the limit were set at two, wouldn't the voting threshhold for these sections rise greatly, creating a kind of hyper-exclusivity in the major sections?

Finally, taking comments into account seems like a good idea, but I think it's unworkable. Someone could easily trick the system by creating a series of dummy accounts, and spamming the story with posts. Even if you only count high-rated posts, it wouldn't be that hard to create further fakes, and rate your spam post higher. I suppose it could be worked around somehow, but doesn't seem worth the effort to me.

Timing (none / 0) (#20)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:22:44 PM EST

If you've got a decent article, it's best to posted it between 0800 and 0130 GMT on a weekday, for reasons that really ought to be pretty obvious. If you want to get crap posted, submit it at the weekend, when only the high school kids will be reading.

I'd have thought this was straightforward enough that it doesn't need any kind of technological fix, but I suppose the voting system thresholds could be varied depending on the number of page-views.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

I'm not following... (none / 0) (#23)
by Menard on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:29:09 PM EST

The time span here. I'm reading this as between 8 a.m., and 1:30 a.m the next day. Pretty long time span there... What obvious fact am I blindly overlooking here?

[ Parent ]
Time zones (none / 0) (#25)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:41:17 PM EST

9am British Summer Time, until 5.30pm Pacific Time.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]
You insult me! (none / 0) (#136)
by ti dave on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:58:50 AM EST

I'll pipe in here, as the 3 a.m. PST Cabal representative who's well past the High School years.

I do most of my k5 reading from midnight to 4 a.m. PST, daily.
Very few stories are submitted in that time span, and only a few more Diaries.

As a matter of fact, the appearance of a tombuck or TheophileEscargot Diary marks my bed-time.

I don't know of any Hawaiian kuro5hin readers, so the next batch of early morning readers would be the Antipodeans.

Heavily populated time zones do greatly influence the fate of a submitted story and I think that this should be considered when posting.

Watch for Ice!
[ Parent ]

Discouraging authors (4.93 / 15) (#7)
by cyclopatra on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:17:12 PM EST

When a story gets voted down, it can discouraging to an author who committed an hour or two of his time to waste...

To me, this is identical to the argument for peer-group promotion. "We have to pass children to the next grade, even if they don't meet the standards for passing, because it will damage their psyches to be held back."

One of the reasons I like k5 so much is that in order to get to the FP, a story has to prove itself to a large number of people. I can usually be confident that anything that's made it out of the queue will be decent, and anything that's made it to FP will be good. I don't see why we should increase the signal-to-noise ratio on the site and begin posting mediocre stories just because the authors of those stories might be upset when they get voted down. I've had stories voted down. It sucks. But I've also had stories posted, and I have to admit that the stories that were posted were better written and showed more thought than the ones that weren't. I don't see any reason why we should lower our collective standards for posting a story just because someone might be disappointed that we didn't like it.

Cyclopatra
All your .sigs are belong to us.
remove mypants to email

But are those standards rational? (5.00 / 1) (#61)
by Eric Green on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:59:47 PM EST

It seems to me that the only standard for whether a story gets posted or not is whether most people agree with it. Not the quality of the writing, not the quality of the arguments within the story.

That's why I don't write stories anymore for Kuro5hin. As a liberal libertarian (!) my political beliefs do not agree with the majority of Kuro5hin's members. After getting a story smacked down because it challenged the cherished religious beliefs accepted on faith by the average Kuro5hin member, I decided it wasn't worthwhile to make the effort anymore. See my diary to see stories that *could* have been made into Kuro5hin submissions, if I'd felt it was worth the trouble.
--
You are feeling sleepy... you are feeling verrry sleepy...
[ Parent ]

It's true (4.00 / 3) (#89)
by cyclopatra on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:29:37 PM EST

...that a lot of stories get voted down because people disagree with them, but I don't see any way to change the story queue to fix this, without letting a lot of crap through at the same time.

Also, given that people are going to vote against things they disagree with regardless of how many times you tell them not to (personally, I try not to vote based on whether I agree, but I know I do it, and I give a *lot* of 0s because I can't bring myself to vote *for* something I strongly disagree with), there's not much point in complaining about it - it'll just get your stories voted down :P

Cyclopatra
All your .sigs are belong to us.
remove mypants to email
[ Parent ]

It's good to see someone admit this. (5.00 / 3) (#105)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 10:46:03 PM EST

In the past, this wasn't really a problem because the voting guidelines explicitly stated that the vote was about the quality of the story and not about your opinion of it.  That is to say, we were voting on the quality of the story, and not about our opinion of it.

Later, Rusty changed his mind on this one, and said that it's ok for people to vote -1 on what they don't like or don't agree with, (perhaps because many people were doing it anyhow?) which brings us up to the present--when many well-written stories are dumped in favor of less well-written and less interesting stories with wider appeal.

Although there are technical solutions that could help this problem out, it's primarily a problem with changing community standards in a growing and changing community.  I also think that K5 is getting too large for the same system to keep working the way it has in the past, and just burying your head in the sand isn't an answer either.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

My feelings are similar. (5.00 / 1) (#117)
by Menard on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:37:52 AM EST

It would be nice if people would vote what's well written rather than what they agree with. I, for example, am not much of a libertarian. I might well have thought what you wrote was stupid. But I think it would be interesting (if it was, indeed, as good as you say) for the diversity of opinion, and the discussion it engenders. Kill stuff that's crappy, not stuff you disagree with. If you disagree with something you should POST AN ARGUMENT, thus enlightening everyone. Still, as people have said, there's no technical fix for this, nor is there a way to convince people to stop it. So I guess I'm just ranting uselessly here, really.

[ Parent ]
Limits of argument (4.50 / 2) (#130)
by rusty on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:01:29 AM EST

Personally, if someone writes something that I think is dumb, I vote against it. There's a point at which you've seen the "libertarian vs. everyone else" argument so many times you could repeat it in your sleep. IME most of the people who complain that they don't get listened to because they have an unpopular view actually just don't get listened to because their view has been argued so many times already everyone's sick of it. This goes for a wide range of standard arguments, not just libertarians, though they do tend to be particularly obtuse about repeating the same crap over and over, and whining when they get told to shut up already.

I find that unpopular beliefs are welcomed when they're original, or presented in a new and interesting way. They're not partricularly welcomed when they're the same old unpopular beliefs everyone else has.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

there's also a degree (none / 0) (#224)
by aphrael on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 08:20:12 PM EST

there's also a degree to which unpopular viewpoints which you've held at a previous point in your life, but no longer do, become particularly odious.

[ Parent ]
Ha (3.00 / 2) (#226)
by rusty on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 09:17:08 PM EST

Yeah. And I know exactly what you're talking about too. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
politics (none / 0) (#183)
by ucblockhead on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 01:00:38 AM EST

It depends on whether or not the story is a political one. If the story is not about politics, people vote more rationally.
-----------------------
This is k5. We're all tools - duxup
[ Parent ]
I'm happy with the response (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by pediddle on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:30:02 PM EST

There've been some good comments posted so far, most disagreeing with me.  Good!  Most of the time, people are happy with the system as it is.

I suppose I could have found a better place to gather input on this subject, so I hope I have not abused the queue.

Perhaps last night was just a particularly bad night for posts.  But I'm still curious, what is the average ratio of posts/rejects?

No, (4.00 / 3) (#29)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:52:26 PM EST

only most of the queue nazis are happy with the system, or unhappy with your solutions, depending on how you choose to look at it.  I still think there's a problem here, but it might have more to do with which stories get posted, which get dumped, and why. This goes back to both the system and the userbase, which have both changed a lot over time (the users more than the system).
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]
Think "high signal" (4.87 / 8) (#11)
by kphrak on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:33:20 PM EST

I don't know about you, but I like being shielded from mediocrity by a high threshold. If the article is good, it's almost certain that at least 95 people will vote for it. Even if it's a minority voice, I've noticed K5ers will usually vote an article up if it's written well, so your premise that this discriminates against the minority is mostly invalid.

As another poster noted below, we are not a public school, forced to pass low-grade students to keep statistics from looking bad or ruining anyone's self-esteem. I'd much rather have one good article a week than twenty pieces of utter shit, or even five mediocre articles. I get enough of mediocrity in college; there's no need to for me to get it on K5. Also, we are in no danger of becoming a static site from turning down too much material; I see articles getting accepted every day.

My suggestion to you is that instead of trying to lower the bar so your articles can get through, you should try raising the quality and writing of your articles. If you're unsure of what we want to see, keep it in the Edit queue for a while.


Describe yourself in your sig!
American computer programmer, living in Portland, OR.


Don't agree (4.92 / 14) (#13)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:45:47 PM EST

As someone who doesn't submit stories, I feel embarassed commenting on this, especially given what I'm going to say, but if it is of any comfort, I do spend at least as much time on some of my comments as some people appear to spend on their stories.

Which leads me to what I'm going to say: As things stand, it is not particularly hard to get a story posted. Aside from fiction, which is still settling down, as long as you write in a moderately decent journalistic style, which you can find documented clearly in Strunk and Whyte's "Elements of Style", or "The Economist Style Guide", link anything that needs support, and aren't trying to advertise something, your story will be voted up. Yes, there's a slight liberal/centre-left bias. Yes, sometimes people are excessively bolshy about, for instance, Op-Ed Politics pieces, but as long as you've got something to say and say it clearly, I don't see writing for K5 as particularly difficult thing to do.

If you look at sites that are easier to post to, with no moderation system at all, or with a lazy cabal of editors who don't bother to edit (not thinking of anyone in particular here :), you see the writing quality is much lower than K5. If anything, the site we have most in common with is everything2, which also has a complex user-driven moderation system. Although K5 articles do not have the permanance of E2 entries, and hopefully we're not quite as anal, there is still a general sense of community standards that means something has to be better than a few random thoughts from someone with aspirations to reengineer the Internet, or someone's latest and entirely conventional thoughts about Iraq, to get posted. In some ways, these standards are slightly higher than those applied to conventional print media. Go figure.

As to fiction: I abstaned in the poll, because I believe that fiction writing, like humorous writing, is hard and that most people are less good at it than they think they are. Journalism is, comparitively, quite easy. I've abstained on most of the stories too, generally because I didn't have time to make a proper assessment of how good they were, and wasn't very interested. Unfortunately, it has generally only taken a few sentences to get to the first jarring cliche, but that in itself doesn't necessarily damn an article.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate

I don't think... (5.00 / 1) (#109)
by Menard on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 11:27:30 PM EST

That that's how E2 works. I haven't posted anything to the database in a year and a half, granted, but when I did it just went up permamnently. I think you can add anything you want at any time. I think that's the beauty of the site, really, not to imply that I'm reccomending that for this place.

[ Parent ]
Everything2 (5.00 / 2) (#121)
by TheOnlyCoolTim on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:19:13 AM EST

Everything2 is quite different from Kuro5hin... Kuro5hin is a magazine with the content moderated by the users, E2 is an entirely new style of publication with content moderated by a cabal.

Everything2 benefitted from low quality standards as a source of "everything," but they constantly tried to "raise the bar" which, in my opinion, did not fit with the style of the site - a site that was supposed to "everything" became increasingly constricted with the ideas of "raising the bar," "No getting to know you," "no subjectivity," and "noding for the ages." There is also rather arbitrary editing by what is basically, for better or for worse, an "old boys' club." There was also the level/exp system, which in retrospect after quitting that site was entirely ridiculous.

K5, as a magazine-type publication, benefits from high standards in stories and low standards (only spam is hidden, nothing deleted) in comments.

Tim
"We are trapped in the belly of this horrible machine, and the machine is bleeding to death."
[ Parent ]

No (4.43 / 16) (#14)
by ucblockhead on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:48:35 PM EST

Standards are not too high. They are too low.
-----------------------
This is k5. We're all tools - duxup
Both. (5.00 / 1) (#110)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 11:48:14 PM EST

Some good stories get dumped, and some bad stories get through.

Standards need work.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Submission System not flexible enough (4.75 / 4) (#15)
by gyan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 04:56:18 PM EST

 I emailed rusty about this. I'm sure it was deleted after a cursory reading.

 The problem with the Hide threshold is that it's an absolute number. It doesn't take into account how many have voted. It would be fairer to remove a story with "+400/-421" than one with "+15/-36".

 Like mentioned elsewhere, a story posted at odd times for its intended core voting audience won't make it simply because among the first 45 voters, you might have 33 naysayers at that time of day. Obviously, the more that vote, the more you come closer to the entire site's consensus. But since the whole userbase will never vote, we shouldn't ever 'Hide' a story. Instead...

 Allow voters to filter stories by current score and/or section.
And the only way to remove the story is the 36-hour limit.


********************************

Back in the old days ... (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:12:08 PM EST

... the thresholds used to vary according to how many registered K5 users there were, with the intention of ensuring that a representative fraction of the community had voted. This was eventually changed to +80/-20, and then to +95/-20 as it is now, because it was taking much too long for stories to go anywhere. People get sick of reading the queue if it spreads over three pages.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]
True. And it in (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by gyan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:18:51 PM EST


 reply to this

 eople get sick of reading the queue if it spreads over three pages.

 I suggested

 Allow voters to filter stories by current score and/or section.
And the only way to remove the story is the 36-hour limit.

 So, you're then perfectly welcome to set your personal threshold at -20 / All Sections as it's currently set for all users.

********************************

[ Parent ]

Well, ... (4.00 / 2) (#24)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:39:28 PM EST

1. Stories should generally be posted between 0800 and 0130 GMT in order to get a decent profile of votes. While this may be a bit harsh for antipodeans, it isn't exactly an insurmountable obstacle.

2. Stories that hit the -20 threshold very quickly are usually completely worthless. Are you sure you're not inventing a problem where there isn't one here ? I mean, generally there are stories that go up very rapidly, stories that sink like a stone, and stories that hand around for ages bobbing up and down. Its only the last category where there is any real controversy, and that is where autopost kicks in.

3. Your solution doesn't really solve your problem, even if your problem really exists. Having stories hang around in the queue for 1,5 days won't ensure that stories will be seen by everyone who might have wanted to vote on them, and it is much too long if all you want is a roughly representative sample. The current system seems to guarantee the latter, as long as you post stories at sensible times.

4. Individual thresholds tend to make sites less commmunity-like and more atomistic. This seems to have happened to /. since the advent of moderation, and especially since the advent of the friend/foe system. This is a Bad Thing. If K5 didn't feel like a commmunity, I bet there'd be a rapid drop-off in the number of submissions and comments.


Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

Nah... (4.00 / 2) (#34)
by gyan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:58:58 PM EST

1. Stories should generally be posted between 0800 and 0130 GMT in order to get a decent profile of votes. While this may be a bit harsh for antipodeans, it isn't exactly an insurmountable obstacle.

 Someone might get 'inspired' at a different time. Wouldn't want to wait till the slot 'opens'. In general, a Bad Idea.

2. Stories that hit the -20 threshold very quickly are usually completely worthless. Are you sure you're not inventing a problem where there isn't one here ?

 No. Not when the site population is 30000 and the difference required is 20. If it's worthless, it will continue to remain hidden to those users whose display threshold remains at -20. In any case, the voting subculture of the regular voters feels deviant from that of the entire userbase. The more people vote, the less that becomes an issue.

Having stories hang around in the queue for 1,5 days won't ensure that stories will be seen by everyone who might have wanted to vote on them, and it is much too long if all you want is a roughly representative sample. The current system seems to guarantee the latter, as long as you post stories at sensible times.

 Yes, but it gives more users a chance to see it than the current one. Like I said, the sensible time is a bad idea. I wouldn't want to be constrained by a rigid timeslot.

Individual thresholds tend to make sites less commmunity-like and more atomistic.

Well, we are ultimately "atoms". The system I propose lets the user do what they want rather than let someone decide for them.

 In any case, let there be a poll and then a test-phase upon a majority 'yes'. If that ever happens, there'll be your answer. There's no harm in trying.

********************************

[ Parent ]

Nyet (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:23:55 PM EST

Someone might get 'inspired' at a different time. Wouldn't want to wait till the slot 'opens'. In general, a Bad Idea.

Write story. Save story. Wait. Post story. It's not hard.

No. Not when the site population is 30000 and the difference required is 20.

That's silly. There aren't 30,000 regular users. There are at most a few thousand people who actively participate. Judging by autoposted stories, less that 1,000 of those people read any given queue story in any given 36 hours. No doubt there are a great many more lurkers, but they, presumably, abdicate voluntarily. If you're claiminng the "subculture" of regular voters is not the same as everyone else, why is this ? There's nothing stopping others from voting. Stories that are not straightforwardly dreadful rarely plummet straight to -20. You've got, on average, a fair few hours to vote on a story.

Well, we are ultimately "atoms". The system I propose lets the user do what they want rather than let someone decide for them.

This is where we really differ. We are ultimately all atoms, at least in some sense (which I personally believe is illusory, but that's a tangent and I have run out of paranthetic elements), but it is not necessary for this to manifest in every aspect of our lives. In joining certain communities we choose to subscribe to their standards. The fact K5's standards are expressed throught a piece of technology called Scoop and are basically democratic does not change this. When we choose to join a particular community, we accept that its functioning is determined by some social system and is not a matter of our personal, individual choice.

It seems rather contradictory to want to define your own view of K5, but at the same time to want to base it off community votes. Why not just post everything and read what you like ? That's the ultimate logic of your position. If you want some kind of general feeling of community, the things I mentioned previously, about the lenght of the queue and general community standards, are relevant.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

But (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by gyan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:42:44 PM EST

In joining certain communities we choose to subscribe to their standards.

 Who decides these standards and are they rigid ? Can't I as a member of the democratic community propose a change in the standards ?

 "That's the ultimate logic of your position."

 It is. But practically, that's not possible or effective.

Hence, we are selective. I think we can have a more flexible system of voting/queue that will be just as fair if not more.

If you're claiminng the "subculture" of regular voters is not the same as everyone else, why is this ?

 Because they see all the stories. Not just the one that make it (and due to them). I believe this does make them more "careful" in choosing the stories than what the mass userbase at k5 would be. In other words, they might reject stories that touch on the same topic as other stories in the queue simply if they're tired of it. Now, these stories might deserve it but completely dumping it because the first 40 regular voters pounced on the -1 option doesn't strike me as fair.

********************************

[ Parent ]

you read my mind (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by CanSpice on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:46:08 PM EST

Allow voters to filter stories by current score and/or section.
Just last week I was going to suggest this over on the Scoop development site but couldn't be bothered. I'm glad I'm not alone in my thinking.

[ Parent ]
ah, one of my favorite topics (3.75 / 4) (#67)
by dr k on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:06:59 PM EST

it is really a matter of statistics. Given a large enough sample, you can make an accurate prediction of the quality of a given story -- and this sample is smaller than most people are comfortable with, probably less that 100 votes.

There are other problems clouding the issue as well: multiple +1 votes, and the "neutral" 0 vote that is essentially a waste of data.

Then there's the social problem: people like to think they are more important than they really are, and they want to express their opinion on everything that passes through the queue. These are the people [ucblockhead] who moan about some overwhelming lack of quality in stories.

The Edit Queue is a possible solution to this, but the anally fixated k5 majority like to keep a tidy house, and stray stories in the queue are an anathema.


Destroy all trusted users!
[ Parent ]

pshaw (4.00 / 4) (#116)
by yankeehack on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:18:20 AM EST

if ucblockhead is causing so much dissonance, then make two troll accounts and vote the opposite of what he does.

Jeez.

No one who was bad in bed has ever been good in life (i.e. liberals, I've never had sex with a liberal woman who knew how to use her body.) Keeteel :-P I'm *right*!
[ Parent ]

People moaning (4.66 / 3) (#182)
by ucblockhead on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 12:58:40 AM EST

You mean, people that think k5 can do better?

I don't think I'm important here.

I do think k5 is too good to put whatever warmed over, half-assed 45 second stream of conciousness "commentary" some lazy ass who won't proofread on the front page.

Probably a quarter of the articles I vote "-1" on could be turned into a "+1" if the author just spent an hour on proofreading, research, etc.
-----------------------
This is k5. We're all tools - duxup
[ Parent ]

The real solution .. (4.00 / 3) (#17)
by Eloquence on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:10:44 PM EST

.. is to auto-post dumped stories as user diaries. Add some modest comment-style moderation to the diary section primarily to weed out spam and find the best diaries of the day. Also, use a wiki for the editing process.
--
Copyright law is bad: infoAnarchy Pleasure is good: Origins of Violence
spread the word!
Goes too far. (4.00 / 1) (#31)
by Kwil on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:55:20 PM EST

While I like the idea of dumping stories into the author's diary, I don't agree with any moderation of diaries.  It's called the ghetto for a reason.

That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze


[ Parent ]
Mixed feelings. (4.00 / 1) (#43)
by NFW on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:14:45 PM EST

Diverting a dumped story to the author's diary sounds like a great idea. Moderating diaries doesn't. The unmoderated nature of the diary section complements the moderated side of K5 very nicely, so I'm not too keen on that idea.

It might be constructive to have a 'hotlist' of currently-popular diaries, in addition to the existing unmoderated diary section... ranked by the sum of comment ratings, or something like that. I dunno though... people clamoring for attention would probably change the diary section dramatically, and probably not for the better.


--
Got birds?


[ Parent ]

"Complements it very nicely"? (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by Eloquence on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:07:13 PM EST

Hmm, just a random excerpt from today's diaries:

dead baby joke friday (Diaries)

By anonymous pancake
Fri Jan 31st, 2003 at 05:45:13 PM EST

What's the difference between a baby and a dart-board? Dart-boards dont bleed.

When a baby is being born, why do they boil water? So that if its born dead they can make soup.

What's 18 inches long and can make a woman scream? Stillbirth.

And so on, ha ha. I fail to see how tolerating crap makes this site any more interesting; the only thing it creates is a subculture of morons who continue to infect the more healthy parts of the site with their obnoxious and mindless drivel. The troll culture on K5 is, largely, a result of the unmoderated diary section; if you check the hidden comments, you will notice that they mostly come from diary posters. The diary section is a cancer that attaches itself in a community sense to everything it touches.

Having diaries is not a bad idea, but making them unmoderated is the worst one. And because the powerful diary lobby has financial and political influence reaching to the highest levels of international politics, Rusty has so far hesitated to do anything about the growing problem. I'm sure he still remembers what happened to RustyTaco when he started moderating the diaries on KuroDot.
--
Copyright law is bad: infoAnarchy Pleasure is good: Origins of Violence
spread the word!
[ Parent ]

Good points (2.00 / 1) (#90)
by NFW on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:31:00 PM EST

You're right. A crap-reduction system would be handy in diaryville. Perhaps a mechanism where if enough trusted users vote a diary entry down, it goes away. I just don't want to see a ranking system... but you're right, they are fertile ground for attention-seeking losers like pancake-boy, and it would be good to be able to muzzle such drivel.


--
Got birds?


[ Parent ]

Re: drivel (none / 0) (#164)
by wierdo on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:40:17 PM EST

...and it would be good to be able to muzzle such drivel.

And perhaps if I think what you write is drivel, we should muzzle it as well? Expand your mind. Practice tolerance of viewpoints you find offensive and do not agree with. Despite what you may think, it really won't kill you. If you find what pancake-boy writes offensive, ignore it. Do not get together with others to decide what is or is not acceptable for others to view.

-Nathan



[ Parent ]
Muzzle (none / 0) (#215)
by NFW on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 06:14:23 AM EST

And perhaps if I think what you write is drivel, we should muzzle it as well?

Yes. Communities like K5 are welcome to include and exclude whatever they want. A community forced to include everyone isn't a community, it's just a bunch of people.

Expand your mind. Practice tolerance of viewpoints you find offensive and do not agree with.

I'm not talking about viewpoints, I'm talking about dead-baby jokes recycled from grade school playgrounds 20 years ago.

Do not get together with others to decide what is or is not acceptable for others to view.

I am not suggesting that anyone determine what's acceptable for others to view.

I am suggesting that the K5 community exercise its right to decide what's acceptable for K5.

Anyone who wishes to post something deemed not appropriate for K5 (including, but not limited to, rejected stories, zeroed comments, and (potentially) muzzled diaries) can still post it on their own web site, and more power to 'em. That's the beauty of the internet - you can say whatever you want, and nobody can stop you. That doesn't mean that you can say whatever you want, on any site you want. Things like that are up to the site administrator who may in turn leave it up to the community.

This is not the "first amendment" sort of issue you seem to think it is. This is just about an online community defining itself.

It's happening already, every day, for articles and comments. If you have a problem with that, then K5 is not for you. Go start your own purely unmoderated site, and it K6 or something. Ain't the internet grand?


--
Got birds?


[ Parent ]

An indirect solution... (4.44 / 9) (#21)
by by on on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:24:02 PM EST

Let people unsubscribe from a section. They will not see the stories in modsub, and neither on their front page or "everything" page.

Then, if you hate fiction, unsubscribe. The number of stories posted per day (with an appropriately lowered posting threshhold) will be increased, and K5 won't be so BORING.

Stories that commonly get voted down (4.50 / 4) (#26)
by izogi on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:43:14 PM EST

From what I've seen, stories that commonly get voted down include:

  • Political stories.
  • Religion stories.
  • Current events (especially war-related).
  • Popular opinion/culture stories that preach tp the converted. (eg. Linux is better than micro$loth windoze)
  • Plagarised stories, or stories that include a certain amount of plagarism. (Even if it's from a linked source.)
  • MLP (unless they're really good ones)
  • Stories that are poorly written or badly proofread with bad grammar or spelling mistakes. Also stories that are badly formatted, or include the intro as part of the body.
  • Meta articles that complain about K5 or make suggestions. (Often they should be taken to scoop, or just emailed to an admin if it's really simple.)
  • Repeated stories that have been posted before, usually within the past few months.
  • Stories that should really have been posted as comments of other stories. (Why should voters validate someone's attempt to make their opinion stand out from everyone else's?)

Probably some others, but those are the main ones that come to mind. If anyone wants to add any, please feel welcome to.

Solution for story posters: If you really don't want your story to be voted down, make sure it doesn't fit into any of the above categories.

Solution for comment posters: If you really don't want your comment to dissapper, wait ten minutes and see which way the voting's going. If it's below zero after 15 minutes, it's probably either not going to be posted or it's going to be a long and painful decision before it is... by which your comment's going to be obscurely hidden inside a large amount of debate about the story's quality, anyway.


- izogi


Stories that commonly get voted down include (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by pediddle on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:45:33 PM EST

... This story :)

[ Parent ]
So, what is left.... (5.00 / 2) (#30)
by jester69 on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:54:54 PM EST

your list about what gets voted down leaves out a lot of stuff don't you think? it says, technology and culture from the trenches at the top... Culture by nature is dynamic and current, so that being the case, why do we insist on voting down current events? I liked K5 more in the past, when there was a good mix of MLP, politics, religion, and etc. Now, it seems to be moving toward a lot of well written boring as hell crap. Just because it is well written, does not mean it is at all interesting. That seems to be a common fallacy here. take care, Jester
Its a lemming thing, Jeep owners would understand.
[ Parent ]
Curiously enough... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by NFW on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:57:29 PM EST

Stories that get voted up commonly include:

  • Political stories.
  • Religion stories.
  • Current events (especially war-related).
  • Popular opinion/culture stories that preach to the converted.

Go figure. :-)


--
Got birds?


[ Parent ]

I guess there's a lot of them :) [n/t] (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by izogi on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:01:02 PM EST


- izogi


[ Parent ]
So the only stories postable are boring stories? (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by Eric Green on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:02:49 PM EST

Let me get this straight. We should only submit stories to Kuro5hin if they are boring stories that snidely reinforce the already-existing prejudices of the denizens of this forum? We should not attempt posting stories that are challenging, that might cause discomfort to some people, because such stories are inevitably doomed anyhow?

If that's true, then why bother?

Actually, I already answered that question for myself. Thus my longish meanderings about latifunda are in my diary, not submitted as a Kuro5hin story. Making it a Kuro5hin story would have meant too much work on my part -- I would have had to track down the study that says that more than half of all Americans work for the Fortune 1000, I would have had to reverse my tracks to find the URL's on all the pages I've read about latifunda and the period of the Punic wars, I would have had to bring in examples of how the Great Depression and World War II destroyed family farming in America and destroyed the smaller industrial companies, such as how Willys invented the Jeep and General Motors got all the profits of making Jeeps and all Willys got was a trailer contract out of it, etc.

Why on earth would I want to do all that for a Kuro5hin story? Much easier to make something boring that doesn't challenge people, that people accept because "everybody knows that" rather than having to go rigorously track down dozens of sources that I browsed over the past couple of weeks because otherwise idiots will whine "But that's not true!". Or worse yet, they'll whine about how I didn't mention feature X of the Punic Wars, when feature X of the Punic wars had nothing to do with the overall gist of the article...

Pfui. I use my diary as an extension of badtux.net to allow people to do polls and discussions regarding content on my site, and that's all that's going to happen under the current Kuro5hin moderation scheme, which sets standards way higher than most people are willing to deal with.
--
You are feeling sleepy... you are feeling verrry sleepy...
[ Parent ]

Fair enough, but ... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:00:08 PM EST

The queue acts as a review system. For example, if the US is roughly like most Western countries, this statement:

more than half of all Americans work for the Fortune 1000

... is not true. If I'd seen it in the edit queue, I'd probably have commented, and might even have supplied you with a reference demonstrating the point.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

You prove my point about preconceived notions (5.00 / 3) (#75)
by Eric Green on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:43:03 PM EST

Actually, it *IS* true that more than half of all Americans now work for the Fortune 1000. It was a little-publicized study released back in November 2002 by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. My point was that I'd have to go track down that study if I was making my diary entry into a Kuro5hin submission, because people like you would pooh-pooh it as "Impossible! That can't be!". Way too much work. Much better to make a story submission that agrees with everybody's already preconceived notions. That way I don't have to track down studies supporting those preconceived notions, because if "everybody knows" it's true, they won't demand such studies PROVING that it's true.

Some thought-provoking stories have been dumped over the past couple of days, and the only stuff that's made it has been stuff that is about as thought-provoking as a slab of beef.
--
You are feeling sleepy... you are feeling verrry sleepy...
[ Parent ]

No I wouldn't (4.00 / 3) (#80)
by Simon Kinahan on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:54:11 PM EST

Had you posted it to the queue, I'd have checked. As it is, I'm not going to bother, because if you can't be bothered, I can't be bothered either. The general point is still true: articles that go through the queue get reviewed, in a way that diary stuff doesn't.

"Thought provoking" is a matter of opinion. I guess it depends what thoughts you've already had, doesn't it ?

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

there's more to it than that. (4.00 / 1) (#64)
by aphrael on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:06:11 PM EST

Most of my stories have been political; almost all of them have posted. A 'political stories fail' generalization is broken.

[ Parent ]
Stories that commenly get voted up (5.00 / 1) (#93)
by rdskutter on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:50:34 PM EST

From what I've seen, stories that commonly get voted up include:
  • Political stories.
  • Religion stories.
  • Current events (especially war-related).
  • Popular opinion/culture stories that preach to the converted. (eg. Trolling is much more fun than being trolled)
  • MLP (even really bad ones)
  • Meta articles that complain about K5 or make suggestions.
  • Repeated stories that have been posted before, usually within the past few months.
  • Stories that should really have been posted as comments of other stories.


Yanks are like ICBMs: Good to have on your side, but dangerous to have nearby. - OzJuggler
History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.[ Parent ]

Wrong (5.00 / 5) (#33)
by lorcha on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 05:57:59 PM EST

There must be at least 95 more people that like a story than don't.
This, quite simply, is wrong. 95 votes are not required. Here are some examples. In fact, the story linked to from "some" was posted with a score of only 34!

The autoposting algorithm is a complex one in which a story that generates good discussion but does not necessarily have a high score will still be posted. Here are answers to your suggestions

  1. Lowering the threshold is not necessary. A good article will post with a low score like 34, so what good will lowering the threshold do? If the threshold is 20, how will the posting algorithm know where it's a "good" 20 or a "bad" 20? Right now, the autoposter waits 36 hours, analyzes the discussion, then makes a decision. Believe me, there are plenty of "20s" that need to be dumped.
  2. Your suggestion is great. In fact, it's so great that it represents how the system currently works with the exception that the autoposter waits 36 hours intsead of 12. Way to go!
  3. Affirmative action for articles! What a fucking stupid idea! There are always more active sections than others. MLP is the most active, and "Columns" used to be the least active, before it got replaced by fiction. Are you telling me that when there was only like one post in Columns ever, that we should now arbitrarily declare that we will accept two "Columns" stories a week? A troller's paradise!
In summary, the system currently works. And if it ain't broke...

HAND.

--
צדק--אין ערבים, אין פיגועים

...and here... (5.00 / 2) (#65)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:06:47 PM EST

This story was dumped with a score of 72; it had over 300 comments and was very well-written.  I'm sure it would have been posted were it not for the 36-hour time limit, and I can't necessarily say the same for the story you linked to with a score of 34.

I'm not convinced that the system currently works very well.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Simplest Solution (5.00 / 7) (#37)
by mberteig on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:02:55 PM EST

Seems to be to just put all dumped stories into the diary section. Then those who want to keep discussing it can, and it is treated at the same level of quality as the diary stories. There need not be any change to the thresholds, to user preferences, to the voting procedure, to the timing, etc.




Agile Advice - How and Why to Work Agile
even that... (4.00 / 2) (#63)
by pb on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:01:33 PM EST

...would be an improvement.

Although some people might not want their stories moved into their diaries, maybe we could make this a user preference, and allow people to turn it off.  (more people post diaries than stories, anyhow...)
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Rusty has said (5.00 / 1) (#99)
by damiam on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 09:32:55 PM EST

That the diary section is for diaries. If an author wants to post a dumped story there, they can, but Scoop will never do it automatically.

[ Parent ]
The problem with that (5.00 / 1) (#101)
by Control Group on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 10:18:40 PM EST

Is that it would lose all attached discussion. I agree that stories probably oughtn't get auto-posted to one's diary, but I'd be all in favor of a way for an author to have the option for moving it to a diary with comments attached.

***
"Oh, nothing. It just looks like a simple Kung-Fu Swedish Rastafarian Helldemon."
[ Parent ]
You can (none / 0) (#143)
by damiam on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 08:27:07 AM EST

Post the story, then at the bottom, post a link to the discussion for the dropped story. Only the author can see a dumped story, but anyone can see the comments that went tith it.

[ Parent ]
Oops (5.00 / 1) (#149)
by Control Group on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 12:53:26 PM EST

I seem to have displayed my ignorance: I didn't know the author could see a dumped story.

You're right, that does work. I withdraw my earlier point.

***
"Oh, nothing. It just looks like a simple Kung-Fu Swedish Rastafarian Helldemon."
[ Parent ]

A more subtle problem with that (none / 0) (#210)
by baba on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 08:25:25 PM EST

is that commenters who wish to continue the discussion will have difficulty finding the article if and when it gets placed in a diary. Is there a solution for this as well?

[ Parent ]
It's still a whole lot easier (none / 0) (#211)
by damiam on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 08:46:05 PM EST

To find an article in a diary than a nonexistant article. Presumably, most dumped stories won't have great discussion anyway, and the comments you've posted can be found with "your comments".

[ Parent ]
It shouldn't be a majority (5.00 / 3) (#40)
by fluffy grue on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:10:50 PM EST

I like the current balance. The idea is that there needs to be overwhelming support for an article for it to get posted; if the thresholds were the same, then it'd be way too easy for "joke" submissions to get posted.
--
"Ain't proper English" ain't proper English.
"Is not a quine" is not a quine.

[ Hug Your Trikuare ]

Solution (3.61 / 13) (#42)
by medham on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:14:35 PM EST

Allowing everyone to vote is clearly a bad idea. Stories at the mercy of whatever group of monkeys that happen to be logged-on at the moment. Intelligent stories during U.S. business hours have little--if any--chance, for obvious reasons.

So, I think a designated band of editors should be allowed to choose the site's content. Some voting could be used to choose them, but I think that attention to intellectual standards must override the donkey-braying of the masses, lest we seek ever further into the abyss of mediocrity.

The real 'medham' has userid 6831.

Join me, and we will bring order to Kuro5hin [n/t] (3.50 / 2) (#44)
by RyoCokey on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 06:15:57 PM EST



"Like all important issues, gun control is an emotional issue that will be resolved by politics, belief, and conviction, not by a resort to "facts'." - [ Parent ]
And we should ... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
by sonovel on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:06:47 PM EST

And we should rename the site as well.

I have a cool geeky unixy name that would be good.

I suggest we rename the site: slashdot.org.

[ Parent ]

I'm not a big fan of fallacies (1.00 / 1) (#71)
by medham on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:13:46 PM EST

But this is the argumentum ad Slashdotem at its worse. Obviously medham is not going to make the same kind of editorial decisions as Cpt. TAco, ESM, and the rest of the slashdot editors. Medham is going to choose stories with sufficient intellectual capital to turn k5 into the site for left theory on the web. The power is ours for the taking.

The real 'medham' has userid 6831.
[ Parent ]

The reason I don't like slashdot... (none / 0) (#85)
by krogoth on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:16:06 PM EST

is that, because a small group of people have complete control, they can post all kinds of stupid, misleading, and completely false things and all I can do is leave (which I don't want to do yet - they still have some interesting stuff).

I don't have complete control here, but I can still make it a bit harder for a story to get by if I don't think it should be on the front/section page. Right now, k5 has content that most of the members will find interesting (in theory) - you're suggesting that it should only have content that three or four people find interesting, and everyone can leave if they don't like it.

It's not that hard to set up your own slash site...
--
"If you've never removed your pants and climbed into a tree to swear drunkenly at stuck-up rich kids, I highly recommend it."
:wq
[ Parent ]

Then K5 would be Indymedia.org (n/t) (none / 0) (#79)
by opendna on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:53:38 PM EST



[ Parent ]
You want to know why they were all dumped? (4.57 / 7) (#69)
by Talez on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:09:34 PM EST

Because 2 were crap and the rest were fiction.

Quite a few people have not taken a liking to fiction. 99.95% of the section has so far turned out to be crap and many people (like myself) are implementing a blanket -1 to all fiction policy.

Let it settle down. Once people realise their stories aren't up to the level that K5 demands they'll hopefully either stop or write MUCH better fiction. If not, you can watch all the pretty submissions go sit in the queue and then dumped when they get to voting.

Si in Googlis non est, ergo non est

That's stupid, though (5.00 / 5) (#107)
by Menard on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 11:14:58 PM EST

The section was posted, and obviously by popular support. Now, if you want to read it, and hold it to a high standard, that's fair, but to vote a story down without reading it is pretty damn asinine.

[ Parent ]
It's not stupid (4.00 / 4) (#144)
by Talez on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 09:52:35 AM EST

The section was posted but IIRC the vote was somewhere around 65-35. Yes its a two thirds majority but many of those people were the "what the heck! it may turn out cool" type.

K5 is essentially a discussion site. The amount of decent discussion generated from fiction is meagre at best. To me its not worth discussing. Theres better ways to submit fiction to the wide world without clogging K5 up with crap.

Besides, the only reason people wanted to post fiction here is so they could whore themselves out to 40,000 members.

Si in Googlis non est, ergo non est
[ Parent ]

Not stupid, but sounds like spite to me. (none / 0) (#209)
by Kaki Nix Sain on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 07:50:02 PM EST

Which is a bit childish. You say the vote was 2 to 1 in favor, oh but you don't think the pro votes were for good enough reasons, so screw the will of the people. You know best, and that means doing what you can to torpedo the section. Whatever.

K5 is essentially a discussion site.
You see, I think this might be the root of what I see as your confusion. K5 is essentially many things to many different people: a discussion site, a diary site, a story site, maybe for some it can become a fiction site. It is not your place to tell the rest of us what we can get, do get, or want to get out of our time here.



[ Parent ]

From the K5 Misson (none / 0) (#214)
by Talez on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 10:57:04 PM EST

Kuro5hin.org is a community of people who like to think.  You will not find garbage in the discussions here, because noise is not tolerated.  This is a site for people who want to discuss the world they live in.  It's a site for people who are on the ground in the modern world, and who sometimes look around and wonder what they have wrought.

So when exactly do we draw the line? Should every site become a fiction whoring place simply because thats the thing that a large group of people want?

I say fuck off to them and let K5 carry on its stated mission. We don't need wannabe authors clogging this site up with shit. We get enough of that in the diaries.

Si in Googlis non est, ergo non est
[ Parent ]

You missed some other parts... (none / 0) (#232)
by Kaki Nix Sain on Wed Feb 05, 2003 at 09:12:23 PM EST

... like:
It's also a site for people who need a laugh now and then.
and
Kuro5hin relies on its readers -- it exists for them and through them. Submit stories about interesting things that you hear about, things you think of, or other things which strike your fancy. ... If you want to see something posted, you can make it happen by participating in the moderation of the stories in the submission queue. (emphasis added)
Some people have a fancy for fiction. They are a part of k5 too. If they participate and fiction makes it through the que, then k5 exists, in some small part, for fiction.

If you don't like fiction, you are welcome to vote it down, but it seems childish. Seeking out something you would rather not interact with, spoiling the enjoyment of others when you could more easily not, doesn't strike me as a mature response to a vote not going your way. I'd recommend ignoring it and spending your time on k5 intereracting with things you enjoy more.



[ Parent ]

So how can someone judge (none / 0) (#212)
by iasius on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 10:45:50 PM EST

the fiction stories being submitted without even reading them?
And judging a section by a week or so of submissions, well obviously someone doesn't have a lot of patience.
*quick glance to the fiction section*
Wow, 5 stories posted by now. Looks like K5 is really being overrun by fiction stories. Sure, there were quite some fiction stories being submitted, but I looked into the future and foresaw less submissions in the future, but better ones because people who just wrote their quick 4 paragraph stories to try out the fiction section already submitted them and the people who are more serious about quality, well, takes time to write good fiction.


the internet troll is the pinnacle of human evolution - circletimessquare
[ Parent ]
Voting (4.85 / 7) (#72)
by godix on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:32:21 PM EST

If authors want me to vote +1 they need to follow a few simple rules:

If you write fiction then post to a site that's core purpose is to evaluate and post fiction. It'd also help if you could learn how to write, but after reading the submissions I realize that's way to high a requirement for most people.

If the basis of your article is 'I think...' then it isn't news, politics, or technology. It's op-ed. If it's mis-sectioned I'm voting it down.

There have been many articles on Bush, Iraq, and Israel/Palestine. Make sure your article on these topics has some original thoughts in it. 'Bush sucks' deserves a -1, I've heard it before.

If the article wasn't interesting enough to read in the queue then it won't be interesting enough to read on the front page. -1.

Any MLP that makes me think I'm reading slashdot or fark gets nuked. If I wanted that, I'd be reading slashdot or fark instead of K5.

If your article is based on facts, make some effort to get those facts correct. And link to them damnit, I'm not just going to take you're word for it.

If you're one of the small % of articles that doesn't fall into the above, then you're probably going to get my vote.


Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease. It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.

I think (5.00 / 5) (#73)
by heng on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:35:28 PM EST

I think that the emphasis should be on positive votes. Most of the time I really can't understand why 300 people think that a story is good and 250 think that it's crap. Is the story good, or is it crap? Voting clearly doesn't differentiate.

I'm sure a lot of people vote a story down just because they don't find it interesting, or they don't agree with it, which, in my opinion, is an abuse of a community moderated site. It's as bad as what much of the ranting is about (it's exactly what politicians do all the time - "vote" down unfavourable lines).

Of course, people are free to vote as they like, but I think people should think a little more before clicking the -1.

I cite an example of the recent link to the channel 4 streaming "Between Iraq and a Hard Place". In my opinion, that is exactly what an MLP is about. The article was well written and had some information about the link. The link itself was by far the best I have ever got from k5. So why was it voted down? I don't know. Anyone?

Maybe they have different opinions? (en tea) (5.00 / 1) (#81)
by krogoth on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:08:01 PM EST


--
"If you've never removed your pants and climbed into a tree to swear drunkenly at stuck-up rich kids, I highly recommend it."
:wq
[ Parent ]
The opposite (5.00 / 2) (#96)
by godix on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 09:10:59 PM EST

"Of course, people are free to vote as they like, but I think people should think a little more before clicking the -1."

Hell with that. I'd rather see people think a little more before clicking +1. Although is it rather amusing the few times tumeric manages to hit the front page because people didn't realize he was trolling.


Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease. It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.

[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0) (#139)
by heng on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:53:58 AM EST

in that case, if people thought a little more before making any positive decision, then the outcome might be better. i.e, more abstainees.

[ Parent ]
In my case... (5.00 / 2) (#98)
by dark on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 09:18:17 PM EST

I was prepared to grumpily skip the RealMedia audio and settle for reading the transcript... which turned out to be in Microsoft Word format. The combination went over my daily crap quota.

[ Parent ]
there was an HTML version as well (n/t) (none / 0) (#138)
by heng on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:52:24 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Don't vote down stories that are uninteresting? (5.00 / 1) (#170)
by christonabike on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:35:43 PM EST

I am, admittedly, a K5 newbie. I never vote down a story that I disagree with, because stories that I disagree with provide a chance for discussion. However, I do vote down a story that I find boring. Why shouldn't I? Seriously, I'm new, if I shouldn't, please explain why. Provided it is a topic I'm familiar with, if I find it boring, I expect others will as well. Now, if it's a topic I'm not qualified to vote on (usually out of ignorance) I will abstain.

[ Parent ]
well (none / 0) (#175)
by heng on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 07:13:32 PM EST

If everyone finds a story boring, then it should not be voted up. However, many stories get about equal votes. I'm sure those that vote against it do so because the find it uninteresting. But the fact that an equal number of people find it interesting is enough (in my opinion) to leave it around.

That leaves a point, why not have an "ignore" option. This would mean that the story is no longer visible to the voter, but remains in the basic k5 page. The vote would count as an "abstain". Also, a majority voting system would remove the situation where a minority of voters can supress a story (as happens all the time).

[ Parent ]
Hehehe (3.00 / 2) (#74)
by SwampGas on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:39:47 PM EST

Wouldn't the author be pissed if this got dumped real quick? :)

+1 FP though...I agree.

The story's current score (4.14 / 7) (#77)
by Control Group on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:49:39 PM EST

Either fortunately or un-, depending on your point of view, the current score of this story rather makes the poster's point. After two hours of being in the queue, it's got 72 posts, only 9 of which are editorial. The rest are topical comments either for or against the idea. To me, this is indicative of a story which has engendered discussion - which, in my mind, is K5's goal.

Out of 159 votes, 78 were for dumping it completely. What makes this article worth banishment? What standard has it not achieved which it must to be saved? Please read this as an honest question - I've already registered my official opinion as a vote, and I'm not trying to sway others into changing theirs. If well-written articles which foster discussion aren't the standard to which submissions need be held, what is?

Personally, if an article generates discussion, I'm all in favor of it being maintained in a permanent fashion. To use a previously-cited example, Yellowbeard's recent post was parent to quite a bit of informed conversation (I'm biased, naturally, since I posted several times to it...), and is now banished into the aether from whence it came.

I would rather have seen both Yellowbeard's article and this one (if it gets the axe) end up on their respective section pages, and I voted accordingly.

On the other hand, even given the definition of this as a "problem," I don't see it as one susceptible to a technical solution. If the K5 voting populace, by and large, chooses to vote for or against articles based on whether or not it agrees with them, then that is the way the core constituency of the site wants it to be, and therefore that's the way it should be. The system as designed, IMHO, works excellently as a way of reflecting the will of the people who care enough to express it.

***
"Oh, nothing. It just looks like a simple Kung-Fu Swedish Rastafarian Helldemon."

my -1 comment (none / 0) (#108)
by SocratesGhost on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 11:21:33 PM EST

It's navel gazing/masturbation. We all do it, but that doesn't mean we brag about it in public. These articles come up about once per month. So, if we talk about it "en queue" and then mod it into oblivion, we don't make it seem like K5 is the only thing we talk about.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Comments != good indicator (4.00 / 1) (#127)
by regeya on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:28:59 AM EST

Then we'd have some kiddie writing a perl script that'd flood stories with "+1 FP" entries or just random garbage in an attempt to get them posted.

Quite frankly, I think that any use of comment ratings (which the current system does, iirc) is also bad, as there's a possibility of several people posting messages along the lines of "this is utter garbage why are people flooding the fiction section with sex stories?" and getting high ratings for them.

As far as I can tell, the author of this story was merely peeved that stories that he/she found interesting didn't make it. Well, gee, I suppose that feeling wasn't shared, which is why the stories never made section. Too bad. Personal interest, and differing interests from a majority, do not a Scoop bug make.

[ yokelpunk | kuro5hin diary ]
[ Parent ]

No (5.00 / 5) (#78)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 07:50:46 PM EST

Real K5ers only read the stories in the queue and are tired of them after they post unless they're in the middle of argument or the story posts very fast.

So, either a story is dumped quickly because it sucks, dumped after a while because it's medicore, or it posts. So the stories that post are good and of interest to casual readers, and stories that are okay are found by the obsessive K5ers who care.

By the way, -1 my Scientology auditor told me to vote it down.

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour

I guess people often ask you this... (5.00 / 2) (#86)
by the on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:18:11 PM EST

But why have you spelled Ayn Rand's name incorrectly in your sig?

--
The Definite Article
[ Parent ]
Why do you misspell James Joyce? nt (5.00 / 1) (#87)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:23:25 PM EST



I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour
[ Parent ]
I misspell it the same way he did (nt) (5.00 / 1) (#92)
by the on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:38:43 PM EST



--
The Definite Article
[ Parent ]
So you are mocking a great author (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:57:00 PM EST

you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour
[ Parent ]
I'm sorry (5.00 / 2) (#97)
by the on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 09:13:08 PM EST

I didn't mean to mock you

--
The Definite Article
[ Parent ]
I think its (5.00 / 4) (#106)
by Hast on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 11:01:19 PM EST

too piss off the Ann Randians

[ Parent ]
Got a shock reading that... (3.33 / 3) (#84)
by Imperfect on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:15:59 PM EST

Check the end of paragraph 6...

To me, the voting queue should merely be a place to make editorial comments and to weed out spam and trolls. With such a high threshold, it is instead a place to discriminate against imperfect, but not necessarily bad, stories.


I thought he was referring to me!!!

lolroflassaoendoanedorfofloloo!!!11

Not perfect, not quite.
Dump the democracy (4.40 / 5) (#88)
by kholmes on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:25:58 PM EST

"Stories about popular opinions obviously have a better chance of getting voted in (although ideally they shouldn't). Authors with minority opinions or with ideas for stories that aren't necessarily interesting to everyone therefore have a disadvantage."

Bingo.

If you treat people as most people treat things and treat things as most people treat people, you might be a Randian.

re: the sudden rise in child kidnappings (4.00 / 5) (#91)
by dr k on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:38:19 PM EST

It seems like every other day there is another child kidnapping on the news. This situation is reaching near epidemic proportions! We need to pass stronger laws now and get those criminals behind bars!

On the other hand, not many celebrities have died recently. We really ought to do something about that.


Destroy all trusted users!

k5 (5.00 / 5) (#94)
by calimehtar on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 08:55:50 PM EST

I like k5 just fine. As others have pointed out, bitchy moderators are what makes k5 what it is. I'm sure I voted down most of the articles you refer to myself.

Since the addition of the fiction section a lot of really pointless (not necessarily bad) stories were posted which deserved to go on another site specializing in fiction

The pure democracy of k5 is an important part of what it is. I wouldn't spend nearly as much time on this site if all the editorial decisions were made by others. If I want a site edited by smart people I'll read the Globe and Mail, or you know, something other than CNN. If I want a site edited by geeks I'll go to Slashdot. K5 is something completely different and that's why I'm here.



Huh? (5.00 / 2) (#132)
by ti dave on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:28:12 AM EST

If I want a site edited by geeks I'll go to Slashdot.

Please define "edit" in this example.
I think k5 fits the bill for that point.

Watch for Ice!
[ Parent ]

And they really do just vanish (5.00 / 8) (#102)
by nsayer on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 10:30:44 PM EST

I suppose this is asking too much, but one story that was accepted is still available under the 'your stories' link. One of the ten stories that vanished last night was one that I submitted. I don't mind that it was voted down (much), but it's not available in the 'my stories' link, so I can't read any of the feedback that was left that might help me improve the article and try again or whatever.

If nothing else changes, then at least rejected stories should be fetchable by the submitter, if for no other reason than so they can go get the story text.


They are (5.00 / 7) (#111)
by rusty on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 12:06:12 AM EST

If nothing else changes, then at least rejected stories should be fetchable by the submitter, if for no other reason than so they can go get the story text.

You get an email when your story goes down which includes a link to it. The author can always see their own story. And anyone can see the comments, so assuming you know what you wrote you can see the feedback. If you didn't get the email, check your "real email" in your user prefs, and/or any filters you might be running on that address.

If there was one thing I wish, it would be that people wouldn't complain that the site doesn't work the way it does work.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Voted down --> diary, maybe? (5.00 / 4) (#115)
by Greyjack on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:13:39 AM EST

Hmm.  Maybe a "Post story to my diary if voted down" option when submitting stories would let articles meet a less ignominious end, vs. disappearing 'em into the void.  Since you can post any old crap in your diary anyway, what the hell, why not.

(I'm not advocating the idea, it's just an idea.  M'self, can't say this issue is one I've worried about overall)

--
Here is my philosophy: Everything changes (the word "everything" has just changed as the word "change" has: it now means "no change") --Ron Padgett


[ Parent ]
Diary (3.57 / 7) (#129)
by rusty on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:53:14 AM EST

I swear, if I hear that "post it to the diary" idea one more time you're going to start seeing news reports from the Maine wilderness about an unknown assailant with an automatic weapon gunning people down in the streets and screaming something that sounds like "The Diary section is for Diaries motherfucker!"

I'm just saying. You know.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Please step inside the vehicle, Mr. Foster (5.00 / 1) (#133)
by gusnz on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:36:51 AM EST

...and remain calm. It's for Maineland Security.


[ JavaScript / DHTML menu, popup tooltip, scrollbar scripts... ]

[ Parent ]
Gee. (none / 0) (#140)
by pb on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:59:04 AM EST

It's funny that so many people keep saying it, though.  Or some option like that.  So that people could see their old stories.  It must be a conspiracy or something.

Because if it wasn't a conspiracy, I might get the mistaken impression that people are actually requesting a feature like this.  And if they were, then I'm sure it'd be on kuro5hin, right?
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

If I always went with the majority... (4.33 / 6) (#148)
by rusty on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 11:55:38 AM EST

There'd be no voting. Or rather, there would, but in the end everything would be posted, because every discussion is a precious flower that the whole world should (nay must!) be able to read evermore.

There are no ideas I'm not willing to listen to, but there are quite a few bad ideas that get repeated over and over. I've considered that idea, and I think it's a bad one. I never promised that everyone would always get everything they want. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

And that's your right. (5.00 / 1) (#167)
by pb on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:01:28 PM EST

At the moment, every discussion IS a precious flower that the whole world CAN read for quite a while--but it makes very little sense without the context, i.e., the original text of the story.

I agree that automatically moving stories to diaries with no way to stop such behavior is a bad idea; therefore, I would not suggest it.  I for one would be happy with being able to view the text of a dumped story, even if it isn't linked from anywhere but my comments page, and especially if I commented in it!  (otherwise, what the hell did I comment on?)

I suppose, alternatively, someone could write a bot that periodically scans and archives the kuro5hin queue, and keeps track of the links.  That would be an unfortunate solution that would provide a useful service to the rest of us.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Totally off-topic, but . . . (none / 0) (#225)
by ZorbaTHut on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 09:08:58 PM EST

I find it really strange how the best sites often have the most dictatorial admins. I think you're doing a great job, personally.

I disagree with you, I think there should be some way to read old stories ;) *but* if you went and listened to every half-thought-out idea, this site would suck, just like so many other "community" sites out there.

At this point I'd almost be a little disappointed if you changed your mind.

(Hrm. Maybe I should write a story on this . . .)

[ Parent ]

people use diaries for drafts.. (none / 0) (#146)
by infinitera on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 10:34:50 AM EST

Why not for final releases that have been dumped? I mean, sure, it'd be nice to have a works in progress place somewhere, but lacking that, people use diaries. ;) As for diaries, yeah, it would really speed up their scrolling pace, which would suck.. maybe just an option for authors? And maybe only for those stories that didn't get spam marked (if that's currently a good indicator).

[ Parent ]
So... (none / 0) (#152)
by Greyjack on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:52:08 PM EST

...does that mean we won't be seeing that feature in the next site update, then?  ;-)

--
Here is my philosophy: Everything changes (the word "everything" has just changed as the word "change" has: it now means "no change") --Ron Padgett


[ Parent ]
Rusty (4.00 / 1) (#163)
by godix on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:33:23 PM EST

You got something other than 5's? Wow. You know there's something odd going on when Rusty gets less than a 5......


It's from Indymedia. It sure as hell is fiction.
- Rusty[ Parent ]
Yeah, but (5.00 / 1) (#118)
by Funk Soul Hacker on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:48:40 AM EST

You have to keep track of the emails if you want to come back to your old stories. And not only that, but getting to the comments on a deleted story requires manualy changing the URL.


--- Right about now, Da Funk Soul Hacker
[ Parent ]
If you say so (5.00 / 1) (#128)
by nsayer on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:32:52 AM EST

I did get a message the one time I wrote a story that was accepted. I did not, so far as I know, get one about the story that was dropped. But if you say that's the intended behavior at least, then my complaint is ameliorated.

[ Parent ]
your ie-blocker home page is gay [nt] (3.14 / 7) (#145)
by mjl on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 09:55:35 AM EST

new technology

[ Parent ]
Agreed (4.00 / 1) (#168)
by TheOnlyCoolTim on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:19:22 PM EST

Dumb and elitist as fuck. Not to mention easy to bypass.

Tim
"We are trapped in the belly of this horrible machine, and the machine is bleeding to death."
[ Parent ]

Whatever (1.00 / 1) (#186)
by nsayer on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 03:48:47 AM EST

Dumb and elitist as fuck.

You're welcome. And I must say, so articulate and erudite a retort has scarcely ever been uttered.

Not to mention easy to bypass.

Bypass all you like. The easiest way is to use a different browser. It's not a security system. It's there to make a point.



[ Parent ]

Nah (none / 0) (#187)
by TheOnlyCoolTim on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 04:11:47 AM EST

Installing another browser, that's download time and a small bit of work. Turning off JavaScript, that's simple.

Tim
"We are trapped in the belly of this horrible machine, and the machine is bleeding to death."
[ Parent ]

The point is dumb. [n/t] (1.00 / 2) (#230)
by Bridge Troll on Wed Feb 05, 2003 at 03:40:03 PM EST




And besides, pounding your meat with a club is a very satisfying thing to do :) -- Sleepy
[ Parent ]
Count me in on the agreed crowd (4.00 / 1) (#196)
by richardo on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 03:04:56 PM EST

Heh - you can't take a person too serious who puts up pages like that...

[ Parent ]
But does the link work? (none / 0) (#220)
by Cro Magnon on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 01:33:41 PM EST

When my story got dumped, I got the email, but when I clicked it, the story wasn't there. It wasn't a big deal, since it was a troll story anyway, but I wouldn't be happy if I'd lost a serious story that way.
Information wants to be beer.
[ Parent ]
It should work (3.00 / 2) (#221)
by rusty on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 02:11:05 PM EST

If you were still logged-in as the author, then it should have been there. If you've still got the email around and can dig out the URL, I would be glad to check it out for you.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Sorry (none / 0) (#222)
by Cro Magnon on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 03:23:07 PM EST

But that was awhile ago, and the email & URL are long gone. :(
Information wants to be beer.
[ Parent ]
How about (5.00 / 1) (#213)
by iasius on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 10:55:59 PM EST

creating a link somewhere to recently dumped stories. I agree that a diary section should be what the name suggests, but maybe there could a dumpster or trashcan page where links to recently dumped stories are listed.
Then people that want to continue a discussion can do so. Stories could be removed from that after a week or so, after that there rarely would be any discussion anyway.
Pro:
- Doesn't clog up diary section
- People can continue discussions if they like
- Maybe people that don't want to see dumped stories anywhere could get an option (maybe turned on by default) that you don't even see the link to the trash can.
Con:
- Tell me :-)


the internet troll is the pinnacle of human evolution - circletimessquare
[ Parent ]
The Ghetto (4.80 / 5) (#103)
by spcmanspiff on Fri Jan 31, 2003 at 10:31:02 PM EST

The answer is simple ... stories that don't get posted instead get stuck into a (logged-in-users-only?) "ghetto" section that is invisible to all without a preferences change.

That way, the site as a whole can still have high standards without running the risk of "losing" anything; the Ghetto section might even become a sort of stomping ground for those who would either cause trouble / get bored and disappear, much like the Diaries section is now.

 

+1 Section to generate comments. (4.25 / 4) (#113)
by Imperfect on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:06:55 AM EST

It's an interesting convo, I say.

Not perfect, not quite.
Totally Disagree (4.91 / 12) (#114)
by DarkZero on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:07:10 AM EST

Personally, I think that 95 is too low a threshold. It allows stories that are popular with a small group of people at a certain time, such as the dumpster diving one (which I, personally, liked, but I digress), to be posted almost instantaneously without a lot of people seeing it and being able to vote on it. The "Three Day Rule" of stories that are three days old and still in the queue being immediately posted has also put some real shit into the sections in the past and that bothers me.

You, on the other hand, think that the threshold should be radically reduced and stories should be automatically posted after twelve hours so that fewer stories will be voted down. I think you are far too lenient and would allow crap to be posted to the sections and front page, but most people would probably say that I'm sort of a bastard for having ridiculous standards and voting -1 on most of the stories that I read on K5... and that's exactly why the queue is perfect as it is. It's a compromise and it's one that works. A harsh person says it's too lenient and a lenient person says it's too harsh, which is exactly what a sane and moderate system should be.

Agree somewhat, but... (5.00 / 1) (#198)
by LJ on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 03:15:30 PM EST

While the 95 threshold should be increased, so should the -20 threshold. K5 now has many users, and increasing the thresholds to say, 120/45 would solve some problems. But I think that rusty would be somewhat wary of screwing around too much with the vote queue, as it may drive away any number of people, and has the potential to end up not working at all, or worse yet, just tossing a bunch of crap onto the front page, so perhaps we should take the reconstructionist approach. Study for three years, followed by discussion for six months. But the truth of the matter is, the vote queue is busted, and should be fixed. The only question is: How?

-LJ
"A feature is a bug the programmers don't want to fix"
[ Parent ]

How so? (5.00 / 1) (#205)
by DarkZero on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 06:16:51 PM EST

But the truth of the matter is, the vote queue is busted, and should be fixed. How is it busted? There are a lot more stories getting voted down, but from my perspective, there's a lot more crap in the queue that should be voted down. I don't see any worthless shit on the front page and I think that that is all that matters, regardless of whether some mediocre (as opposed to shit) stories get voted down. I agree with your original idea about both thresholds being extended, though. I remember Rusty saying about a year ago that he planned to change both thresholds as the amount of users on the site grew, but I have yet to see that happen.

[ Parent ]
Just checking (5.00 / 6) (#122)
by twistedfirestarter on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:21:13 AM EST

you do know that you can get to a story's comments by taking the kur5hin.org/story/XXXX/X/XX/XXXXX/XXXX/ link and replacing story with comments. I didn't know this for ages and so was really pissed off when discussions disappeared.

It should be in the faq, it wasn't when I last checked.

Kuro5hin isn't a true democracy (I think) (4.40 / 5) (#123)
by lvogel on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:28:36 AM EST

But the voting system provides the next best way to represent one, at least in very basic terms. Unless we are fraudulent and have multiple logins(and shame on those who do), you only get one vote for each article, though you get four options. I've never taken the time to really think a whole lot about how it works, just like I never think about what galaxy that missing sock goes to, but I trust rusty enough that my favorite time-killing web site is adequately designed to provide a fair balance to voters when it comes to modding a story up or down. If I were rusty, I'd only let paying subscribers vote, so all of us cheap bastards should thank rusty for not being me.
-- ----------------------
"When you're on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog!"

-a dog
that is, if everyone could vote (none / 0) (#178)
by CBravo on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 08:02:56 PM EST

the funny thing is, that I recently submitted a story and it was voted down by a 5/25 ratio within the hour. That means about 1/24 of the readers could have voted for it, more likely the ones that reload every page every 30 minutes. In fact, about 85% of people who posted an edit-mode-comment did not vote at all. Basically, this means that my story got voted down by people and I don't know why (at least not for sure).

This makes it very hard for me to think this is a discussion forum, more like a voting game which can be played in many ways (multiple accounts?, voting stories down quick, commenting in certain ways).

[ Parent ]

Current problems with k5. (4.38 / 26) (#124)
by la princesa on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:48:22 AM EST

Firstly, a significant chunk of 'voters' are single users or small groups with multiple accounts voting things up or down at their whim.  This puts the lie to that notion being tossed round that voted-down anything was voted down necessarily because 'everyone thought it crap'.  That's not the case for a majority of voted-down stories.  

Secondly, when the non-multiple account-holders do get in a vote somewhere, it's hardly a paean to quality.  That is, stories are rarely, if ever, voted up on sheer quality of writing.  It really is a popularity contest of sorts, sad enough.  This puts the lie to the notion that stuff is uniformly voted down because it's bad writing.  

Lastly, the fucking troll obsession has done more to fuck up the writing and discussion quality of this site than anything else.  The little rapid-reload and irc-k5 cliques scamper round claiming any story or comment they don't like is a 'troll', or 'too well-written'.  People have actually been fucking inane enough to say that things should be voted down BECAUSE THEIR HIGH WRITING QUALITY MIGHT PERSUADE PEOPLE TO CONSIDER AN ALTERNATE VIEWPOINT TO THEIR OWN.  Holy fuck, could that maybe BE the point of discussion?  Just possibly it could be.  But no, k5ers want only to proclaim their views to an audience of equally self-absorbed minds and never learn a goddamned thing.

And this article, fuck, the comments in it do nothing but prove me correct.  You've got shit with giant fucking spelling errors uncorrected getting voted up, things more incoherent than anything dear turmeric has thrown down being praised to the heavens and voted up, and yet people have the gall to actually dare say stories are chosen based on quality.  Fuck you and your delusioned, treacherous lies.  Fuck you and your incorrect belief that your pablum is sweeter than non-internet pablum.  Fuck you and your ultimate average patheticness, that believes itself more literate and well-written and open-minded.  Couldabeen contenders, the whole sorry lot of you.  Enjoy that bland schiess you lot call 'quality writng' (that's the way it would appear in a voted up story, of course.)      

 

___
<qpt> Disprove people? <qpt> What happens when you disprove them? Do they disappear in a flash of logic?

Aerial swine (none / 0) (#134)
by cafeman on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:47:35 AM EST

I agree with La Princesa. It's official - I'd better go make amends. The apocalypse must be nigh.


--------------------
"No Silicon heaven? But where would all the calculators go?"


[ Parent ]
I love you. (n/t) (none / 0) (#160)
by DeepOmega on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:13:26 PM EST


Peace and much love...
[ Parent ]

I like the second point (5.00 / 4) (#126)
by ryochiji on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:22:06 AM EST

>use a simple majority (not counting voters who abstain), but only after a certain threshold of either votes or time

Personally, I think this is a good idea. For example, if an article gets 300 votes and manages to stay around 0 (+/-5) it most likely means that it's a controversial topic and also worthy of discussion.

I think part of the problem is that most people seem to vote based on whether they agree with the author or not, instead of looking at whether it's a worthy topic or piece of writing. It therefore becomes a question of how many people in the K5 crowd agree with the article, which in turn may eventually become self fufilling.

---
IlohaMail: Webmail that works.

The problem (5.00 / 5) (#135)
by epepke on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:55:27 AM EST

The Fiction section just got created, and a bunch of people who were obviously waiting for the opportunity fired off a bunch of fiction posts.

If you want to evaluate how K5 works, do it during a time of relative equilibrium.


The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.--Terry Pratchett


-1 just in case (4.00 / 2) (#137)
by lvogel on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:11:13 AM EST

I don't think the "fiction" category was a good idea, nor do I think your idea of making things "fair". If anything should change, rusty should only allow paid subscribers to vote. Make a buck or two.
-- ----------------------
"When you're on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog!"

-a dog
No Good (none / 0) (#190)
by The Turd Report on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 07:41:23 AM EST

rusty should only allow paid subscribers to vote

Considering how many people you hear about not re-subscribing, rusty would have to set the posting level at 5. There would only be 8 people who could vote.

[ Parent ]

What if (2.00 / 3) (#141)
by GRiNGO on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 06:51:13 AM EST

That when voting we see the intro copy only. That way we could vote for stories that we think might interest us, and not vote something down because we disagree with the writers opinion. This would be too open to abuse... but what if trusted users could see the whole story

--
"I send you to Baghdad a long time. Nobody find you. Do they care, buddy?" - Three Kings


That suggestion walks the fine line (none / 0) (#142)
by MrLarch on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 07:53:25 AM EST

between laughingly absurd and frighteningly serious.

[ Parent ]
One idea (none / 0) (#150)
by skim123 on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:07:08 PM EST

It's similar to your suggestion #2. The positive votes needed to get a story through the queue would decrease as time went on. That is, for a story to get posted quickly, you would need 95 more people than the majority, but, say, two days after sitting in the queue, only 50 more people than the majority need to like it. If it's been in the queue for so long, then a simple majority is all that's needed...

Money is in some respects like fire; it is a very excellent servant but a terrible master.
PT Barnum


Some observations that I've made (4.83 / 6) (#151)
by Rogerborg on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 01:37:43 PM EST

Many people who enjoy making comments on stories haven't actually submitted any.  Nothing personal godix, I just liked the comment linked to above and was therefore disappointed - but not surprised - to find that you haven't submitted any articles.

I have to wonder why this is.  There is no K5 cabal, and it's not that hard to have articles accepted if you just take care to pitch them right (and I should know).

What I'd really like to hear is why people choose not to post articles.  It seems blindingly obvious to me that we - yes, you and I and nobody else - are responsible for what K5 is.  There is no cabal.  If you, dear reader, want to see more articles make section or front page, then vote them up.  If that doesn't work then write your own.

Complaining that K5 isn't what you'd like it to be seems like rather a waste of effort when the solution is in your hands.

"Exterminate all rational thought." - W.S. Burroughs

Well written articles (4.80 / 5) (#161)
by godix on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:24:59 PM EST

As I'm sure you know, a well written article requires time and effort to do. It requires research, proofreading, and a good basic knowledge of english. I occasionally do the research, never do the proofreading, and my knowledge of english is a lot more theoretical than practical. Since I can't met my own standards, I'm not going to waste everyones time proving that. The last thing K5 needs is yet another semi-coherent rant on current topics.

However, as with art, books, and porn; just because I can't do it doesn't mean I can't judge how well someone else does it.


It's from Indymedia. It sure as hell is fiction.
- Rusty[ Parent ]

Reactionary (4.00 / 1) (#172)
by DarkZero on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 06:05:17 PM EST

What I'd really like to hear is why people choose not to post articles. It seems blindingly obvious to me that we - yes, you and I and nobody else - are responsible for what K5 is. There is no cabal. If you, dear reader, want to see more articles make section or front page, then vote them up. If that doesn't work then write your own. Some of us, such as myself, are much better at picking apart someone else's arguments than formulating our own. We need something to react to... to bounce our ideas off of. We return instead of serve, if you will. I'd like to think that I make some pretty good comments on occasion, but most of my attempts to write a story have been deemed a personal failure before even being submitted. Then again, I think we have enough stories right now. If we had as many regular submitters as commentators, the entire comments system would be rendered useless and there would be a glut of stories in the queue every single day. Three stories with five hundred comments each is better, in my opinion, than five hundred stories with three comments each.

[ Parent ]
BAH! Correctly formatted now. (5.00 / 1) (#173)
by DarkZero on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 06:06:34 PM EST

What I'd really like to hear is why people choose not to post articles. It seems blindingly obvious to me that we - yes, you and I and nobody else - are responsible for what K5 is. There is no cabal. If you, dear reader, want to see more articles make section or front page, then vote them up. If that doesn't work then write your own.

Some of us, such as myself, are much better at picking apart someone else's arguments than formulating our own. We need something to react to... to bounce our ideas off of. We return instead of serve, if you will. I'd like to think that I make some pretty good comments on occasion, but most of my attempts to write a story have been deemed a personal failure before even being submitted.

Then again, I think we have enough stories right now. If we had as many regular submitters as commentators, the entire comments system would be rendered useless and there would be a glut of stories in the queue every single day. Three stories with five hundred comments each is better, in my opinion, than five hundred stories with three comments each.

[ Parent ]

Another suggestion: votes for discussability (4.00 / 2) (#153)
by glor on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 02:41:57 PM EST

As interesting as the articles themselves on kuro5hin are the discussions they generate. An article which lingers without being voted up or down, but generates hundreds of topical responses, clearly has merit and perhaps that merit should also push it towards publication for general, non-voting consumption and further discussion.

I'm not sure how the mathematics should work. Perhaps each post should count as a fraction of a vote (1/20th or so), so voting against and then writing, "-1, you're a moron (nt)" is still a vote against. Perhaps top-level posts shouldn't contribute to the score, but replies by other users (indicating actual discussion) should. Perhaps the weight of each post could be determined by the voter-to-poster ratio: if everyone who read my article felt compelled to comment, I'm having an affect on them regardless of what the comments say.

Maybe instead of posts counting as partial votes, you could say that certain numbers of posts reduce the voting threshhold for that story: twenty posts drops the threshhold to 85, fifty posts drops it to 75, one hundred to 65, two hundred to 55, and so on semilogarithmically like that. This is similar to posts counting as partial votes, but has the interpretation that a large discussion votes for itself.

I like that kuro5hin has high standards that favor the publication of long, well-written articles from the general public. That fills an important niche on the web and shouldn't change. But I think that often, even when the articles are weak, the discussions they generate speak for themselves.

--
Disclaimer: I am not the most intelligent kuron.

No way (3.75 / 4) (#155)
by richardo on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:01:44 PM EST

Do you have any idea how much crap would make it's way to the front page if we lowered the threshold? It would be like slashdot!

Sorry dude, the way things work now are fine.

Is this Slashdot-phobia or what ? (n/t) (3.00 / 2) (#193)
by acheon on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 01:51:21 PM EST



[ Parent ]
No... (5.00 / 2) (#195)
by richardo on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 02:59:12 PM EST

But kuro5hin would slowly migrate to slashdot. If you lowered the posting threshold, more stories would get to the front page. It doesn't take a genious to figure out that the time a single story stays "live" would shorten. If you lowered it just enough, it would be just like slashdot - 10 stories a day followed by 1000 mindless comments only to be forgotten the next day.

No thanks, the system works just fine now.

PS: I think slashdot sucks major rocks. Just so you'd know my bias.

[ Parent ]

Good point, but more options should be available (5.00 / 2) (#156)
by cribeiro on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 03:25:24 PM EST

I voted for your story, because I believe that there is a lot of room for improvement. However, I don't agree with your proposal; in fact, I was a little upset because you forgot to include an option to 'change to something else' on your poll.

The first thing that comes to mind is that there should be a difference between 'just dump it' (for thrash and /. style stories), and 'not good enough but still a valid attempt'. The thresholds have to be set in such a way to avoid thrash from permeating into K5, but still leaving room for some stories to be discussed and probably kept in a separate location.

Another related suggestion is not to change the voting method, but simply to add more options to locate 'dumped' stories, and to check them out - why were them dumped, etc. They're also part of K5, after all... Of course, this will take up some disk space, and it is one more feature to administer and support, but it's still a relatively simple change that does not mess up with the voting method.

Going a little bit further with the idea, one possible solution to limit disk occupation is to keep just a limited archive of dumped stories - for example, just the last 100 or so... but that's up for discussion. That's my $0.02 worth.

Dumped stories SHOULD disappear. (5.00 / 3) (#194)
by mr strange on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 02:23:53 PM EST

Dumped stories are killed dead. That may be a shame for the minority that didn't quite make it, but it does help discourage idiots from posting any old crap.

Even as it is, the queue often has a couple of clearly troll or spam stories. Imagine how much worse it would be if the trolls could see the result of their labours even after they were 'dumped'.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

Yes, but keep something in user history (none / 0) (#227)
by tedoneill on Tue Feb 04, 2003 at 01:51:08 AM EST

Dumped stories should stay dumped, but I'd like to see something in the user history to note that the story existed. With the "Spam" button on the edit queue now, I especially like to see the user's posting history. If I see reasonable stories posted in the past, then I might feel more forgiving. If I see the same crap submitted again and again, then I know it is spam. I suppose even keeping the titles around would invite abuse, but how about at least a line in the "Stories by..." that says ***SPAMMED***, or ***DUMPED*** and the date/time? Just a place holder to help people who don't have the time to perch over the edit queue like hawks and identify serial offenders.

Yes, this is an extremely picky point.

--Ted

"Always be wary of any helpful item which weighs less than its operating manual." -- Terry Pratchett
[ Parent ]

Not really that bad of an idea (none / 0) (#158)
by X-Nc on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:00:52 PM EST

I do think that the ratio could use a little adjusting. Maybe use 95/50 or 75/20. Just make it a little harder to shitcan stories. I mean, this one here is at +26 (when I voted) but it's so completely and obviously a +1 FP that it isn't even funny. Anyone who does not like this idea should be voting it up. But that makes to much sense. Then they'd actually have to explain why they want to keep the current system in place. Oh, well.

--
Aaahhhh!!!! My K5 subscription expired. Now I can't spell anymore.
definitely not fp (3.66 / 3) (#162)
by Delirium on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:25:10 PM EST

First of all, this would automatically be a crappy FP story because it's meta. The only meta stories I could see justifiably being on the front page are really major changes to the site that are actually happening (not proposals for such changes). Kuro5hin should be discussing issues, not discussing itself all the time (though some discussion of itself in diaries and the meta section off the frontpage is fine).

And as for the story threshhold issue, this has been brought up a million times before, and the threshholds actually have been adjusted several times. What we're at now seems to work pretty well; we get about the same number of posted stories as we've always gotten, which most people seem to like. Sure, since there are more submissions, more are getting dropped, but imho most of those aren't really ones I want to read. I'd rather have 3-5 good articles a day rather than having to wade through 15-20 mediocre ones.

[ Parent ]

Re: Crappy FP?! (4.50 / 2) (#166)
by wierdo on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:59:20 PM EST

First of all, this would automatically be a crappy FP story because it's meta.

My god man, can't you see the real story here? This is a well written story that as I speak sits at 28. Not only that, but it is a story that touches something deep within us all (something that is reflected in the voting so far, in fact).

The real story is that we're all so stupidly selfish that we lock ourselves into a tiny little world-view and vote down stories that conflict with it. Case in point, this story. Two-hundred and some people have -1'd this story. I can certainly understand only giving it +1 section, but to give a -1 is to continue to live within your blinders. The simple fact of the matter is that we should be allowing differing viewpoints to flourish, not being as moralistically judgmental as the religious right, only wrt the stories that we allow to be posted, rather than about sex and drugs.

Shame on all of you who vote down stories because you disagree, and not because they are poorly written; shame on you too, if you support this sort of closed-minded groupthink. A special shame on you, rusty, being our fearless leader, so to speak, and supporting this sort of queue abuse. If you really cared about quality stories, and not intellectual masturbation of certain members of our group the edit queue would be much longer than two hours.

-Nathan



[ Parent ]
It is not (necessarily) disagreement (4.00 / 2) (#171)
by Simon Kinahan on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 05:59:41 PM EST

I voted this story +1 section, but I can understand why people might vote -1. It is not that they think the author is wrong (I think he's wrong, as do several other +1 voters), but whether the story stands as something worth reading in itself. It doesn't really. I voted +1, because I think the discussion is worth preserving in an easily-accessible form.

Oh, and the edit queue time is 24 hours now.

Simon

If you disagree, post, don't moderate
[ Parent ]

In part, I concur.... (5.00 / 2) (#159)
by artsygeek on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 04:05:51 PM EST

It should be harder for folks to slam a story dead... perhaps lower the rejection threshold to, say -30 or -40, at times -25 could allow a story that actually is good to come back....*shrug*

User-Defined Hide Threshold (4.00 / 2) (#223)
by curunir on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 07:34:37 PM EST

Perhaps the hide threshold could be user defined. That way, those who like the -20 threshold can keep it. Those that want to see more articles that might have been prematurely dumped can set it lower.

The time limitation can be maintained so that articles are eventually purged from the database if they never receive the requisite 95.

[ Parent ]
+1 Archive (5.00 / 4) (#176)
by Eight Star on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 07:48:35 PM EST

Why not have a special area where unapproved stories go? Have a +1 Archive voting option, if a story doesn't qualify for the front page, and over a certain percentage of votes are +1 Archive, then the sotry doesn't go to it's section, but to an archive. If I understand correctly, all posted stories are kept stored, even if they are voted down they just aren't linked to, so this wouldn't increase storage requirements. This way, the things that are interesting, but not good enough, will be relatively easy to find. Spam and trash will still be de-linked. (because it won't even get enough +1 Archive votes) And articles will get out faster, because people will be more willing to give a +1 archive, because it won't affect the actual site.

gah, that was supposed to be plain text (nt) (none / 0) (#177)
by Eight Star on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 07:50:08 PM EST



[ Parent ]
I like K5 just fine (3.50 / 4) (#181)
by halo64 on Sat Feb 01, 2003 at 10:07:07 PM EST

I don't always vote and I don't always comment, but I read the stories daily and visit the queue. Most of the time when I don't vote it's because I really could care less whether the article posts, doesn't post, or whatever. Sure I should use the Abstain choice, but I don't because I'm too lazy to push it and wait for the screen to reload so I can read the comments. I also have to agree that by the time something reaches the front page or the section, I've read the article and posted as much as I am.

/* begin sig here
I don't have one because I'm lame
finish sig here */

This article (5.00 / 6) (#188)
by godix on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 05:25:20 AM EST

I would like to point out that this article made section without getting 95 votes. What was that about needing to reform K5's voting system?


It's from Indymedia. It sure as hell is fiction.
- Rusty
so? (4.00 / 2) (#203)
by pb on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 05:14:32 PM EST

This isn't about the articles that get posted; this is about the articles that don't get posted.

Sorry, I can't seem to find that story.
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

One problem I see... (5.00 / 1) (#219)
by MKalus on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 01:04:47 PM EST

... is that it really depends quite a bit on WHEN you post a story.

Example? I posted last year an article that was critical of the US policy, it wasn't written by me but the author gave me persmission.

So far so good, the mistake I made was that I posted it in the later afternoon east coast time, the only people who ever saw it were the ones on the east or westcoast and within 5 minutes the thing was out of the queue and dumped.

Was the article "good" or "bad"? I think it raised some interresting points and could have had some interresting discussion.

Another example was another article I wrote, there was a lot of back and forth between people who wanted to see it posted and people who didn't. In the end I think the "want to see" people lead by 60 votes but that didn't prevent the story from getting dumped (No idea why, I figured it would go in the section but apparantly I was wrong).

Now, that is no bitching, apparantly the system works for most people and that is fine by me, just some observations.
-- Michael
[ Parent ]

Repeating a comment I made elsewhere... (4.00 / 3) (#191)
by Ubiq on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 11:32:00 AM EST

It would be nice if there were two ways to vote a comment down, just like there are two ways to vote one up. Something like:--

  • Don't post. (-1)
  • Dump it! (-1)

That way people can continue their conversations even if the majority of k5 thinks the article is not interesting and trash still gets eradicated from k5. Plus, rusty can keep his calm because they don't end up in the diaries :)



+1 Funny (none / 0) (#201)
by coryking on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 04:49:32 PM EST

No, wait that should be +1 informative... wait no... is it +1 insightful? Naw.. -1 Troll, wait -1 overrated.

[ Parent ]
Moderators - Why is this -1 dump it!? (none / 0) (#202)
by coryking on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 04:51:38 PM EST

It should be -1 dont post. Sheesh - damn moderatiors.

 

Your idea is too slashdotesque. One of the cool things about k5 is you dont get a bunch of posts going "why was this moderated x instead of y". With your suggestion - "you guys suck - this really should be -1 dump it.. this guy is a troll you idiots".

[ Parent ]

Ah, but it's not the same at all (none / 0) (#217)
by Ubiq on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 12:27:04 PM EST

In this case, the different voting options actually do something different, i.e., dump an article completely or keep it alive (albeit in limbo). Just like the +1 options.



[ Parent ]
There is definitely a problem (4.77 / 9) (#192)
by acheon on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 01:32:28 PM EST

It's pretty obvious that when one third of the articles a voting system selects for the front page criticizes it, then the system has a problem.

I should also say that no system will do the job if the majority of *voters* have a problem too. Too many times I've seen people dumping stories for idiotic reasons instead of abstaining (either symbolically or for real).

Such reasons being :
a) NO SUBMISSION should be voted down because people are bored with the subject. Let it even be about Iraq. The only similar case is for dramatically redundant submissions, in what case pretty much everything has been said about it anyway.
b) NO SUBMISSION should be voted down because it's "too X-centric". Besides, most often it looks more like a pathetic excuse to boot a story people simply disagree without being able to bring in arguments.
c) NO SUBMISSION shoud be dumped simply because people disagree with the author's conclusions. If one disagrees with the article, he should *comment* instead. The only similar case when a story should be dumped is if the article is so drammatically inaccurate that one can -- and does -- provide a certain amount of references to refute it. What too few people do ; instead, they just claim it to be inaccurate but "they won't waste their precious time showing it". Yeah, sure. Go to Hell.
d) Last is for our dear friend rusty : NO ONE SHOULD EVER EVER VOTE DOWN A SUBMISSION BECAUSE HE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT IT. In that case, one should *abstain* instead. That kind of mentality is partly responsible for this situation in the first place ; since the voting system sends to the front page only articles a vast majority of the crowd likes, and that the crowd is hardly unanimous on anything, then this is no surprise most people will agree the system sucks (since it jams the queue), post submissions about it and vote them up, and that an always greater proportion of the front page articles deals about it.

What I believe in my heart is that most people here don't have the maturity to vote according to such guidelines. But just in the fortunate case I'm wrong, I'd like such voting guidelines to be stated clearly, posted on the front page once a year, permanently linked from both the FAQ and the bottom of the front page, and bold-blink-linked from the Moderate Submissions page. If that works then there is hope. Otherwise it'll shortly become just as pathetic as The Other Site.

Consider this (1.37 / 8) (#197)
by Under OS X is Linux on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 03:07:39 PM EST

We will always need taxi drivers and janitors.  Not everyone is destined for success, as is evident by the members of this Web site.

Standards too high? (4.33 / 6) (#200)
by dogwalker on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 04:49:16 PM EST

Nope.

I have only two suggestions:

1. Dumped stories get automatically converted into a diary entry for the author, comments intact.

2. Get rid of the fiction section.
--
share and enjoy

Good suggestion! (none / 0) (#208)
by netman on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 07:38:40 PM EST

1. Dumped stories get automatically converted into a diary entry for the author, comments intact.

That's a pretty good idea. It is my understanding that currently those stories go to /dev/null. Maybe those should go into the Diary section or maybe a Dump section?



Order is for idiots. Geniuses can handle chaos.

[ Parent ]
No (none / 0) (#228)
by rdskutter on Tue Feb 04, 2003 at 07:36:21 AM EST

Ther author can do that at the moment if they wish to. It should not be automatic.


Yanks are like ICBMs: Good to have on your side, but dangerous to have nearby. - OzJuggler
History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.[ Parent ]

Actually I put my fiction stuff in the diary (nt) (none / 0) (#231)
by olethros on Wed Feb 05, 2003 at 08:06:30 PM EST


-- Homepage| Music
I miss my rubber keyboard.
[ Parent ]
No further progress is possible. (3.66 / 6) (#206)
by Noam Chompsky on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 06:48:05 PM EST

The only way to improve this Tupperware party is to hire strippers.

--
Faster, liberalists,

K5 Theory (3.00 / 2) (#207)
by 5s for Everyone on Sun Feb 02, 2003 at 07:27:34 PM EST

If a majority of K5 wants a story to be posted, it will eventually be posted (although if it's a 51% majority, it may wind up being posted without reaching +95), no matter how high the threshold is. If a majority wants it junked, it will be removed from the mod queue quickly (-20).

Fiddling with the thresholds won't change anything; it might get the liked stories posted faster, but I don't think we're in any rush. The only way to get more stories posted is to tell people to vote +1 more.
--
There is Damezumari in the Bamboo Joint

A good point (5.00 / 1) (#218)
by fluffy grue on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 12:57:21 PM EST

It's easy to forget that the majority influences the direction, regardless of how far it has to go to get there.
--
"Ain't proper English" ain't proper English.
"Is not a quine" is not a quine.

[ Hug Your Trikuare ]
[ Parent ]

Answer to your title's question: (3.66 / 3) (#216)
by mcherm on Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 12:00:32 PM EST

NO. The standards are not too high. They are sufficiently high.

-- Michael Chermside
fiction section (1.00 / 1) (#229)
by cronian on Wed Feb 05, 2003 at 01:30:41 AM EST

I think the fiction section needs lower standards. Just look at how few stories actually get posted in there. What is the point of a fiction section if nothing ever gets posted there?

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
The standards are just fine (5.00 / 1) (#233)
by krogoth on Sat Feb 08, 2003 at 03:29:12 PM EST

See this story, mirrored since it won't last long in the submissions queue. Stories like that should not even need 20 people to vote against them.
--
"If you've never removed your pants and climbed into a tree to swear drunkenly at stuck-up rich kids, I highly recommend it."
:wq
Timing, geography, and censorship... (5.00 / 4) (#235)
by skyknight on Tue Feb 18, 2003 at 01:48:16 PM EST

One thing that I find particularly odious about the present voting mechanism is that a story is instantly hidden upon reaching a certain threshhold score. Since the threshshold of -20 is so small, a little bit of up front negative noise can have a sufficient additive effect as to blow a good piece out of the water before the whole K5 populace has a chance to vote. This flaw seems to manifest itself with a high frequency in the politics and op-ed sections, where many people would rather squelch unpopular ideas than debate them, as opposed to other sections where voting is more typically based upon quality of writing. If one makes a post at a particular time of day such that the active audience is sharply opposed to one's views, a perfectly good article can get shot down in what is effectively preemptive censorship.

So, how can we fix this? I think the answer is simple... We can have threshholds based on percentages, but the really important thing is that we have a 24 hour voting period, and then the hide/show decision is made based upon a snapshot of the score after 24 hours of voting. The 24 hours is crucial, as it will make posting at any given time of the day non-discriminatory as to time zones. Otherwise, people with controversial views are left trying to guess which time zone is awake and voting, so as to optimize the chances of their story getting voted up. This, in my mind, seems quite silly.



It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
Improvement Badly Needed (5.00 / 3) (#236)
by OldCoder on Fri Mar 07, 2003 at 05:11:44 AM EST

The political censorship in Op-Ed is just to fast and too nasty to continue, as genuinely controversial and well-written articles are shut down in just a few minutes. Most recently it was a pro-war article "An alternative view of the US-UK-Iraq situation", that actually raised some interesting issues regarding the "America First" movement that many K5-ers probably don't know about.

Maybe if there were a "Disagree" button in addition to a "Don't post" button it would allow people to express themselves without censoring opposing viewpoints.

--
By reading this signature, you have agreed.

I posted that article (none / 0) (#238)
by duffbeer703 on Tue Mar 11, 2003 at 01:58:02 PM EST

And I was shocked at the speed with which it dropped through the queue.

I posted that on Saturday night around midnight and decided to post another MLP story around 8-9 Sunday morning and another Monday.

Alot of the same people happened to vote me down at 1AM Sunday and 9AM Sunday, which I find odd.

I think the story moderation system needs something put in place to prevent people from sharing accounts or running several different accounts.

Just as I found it odd that Kuro5hin was the only known Nader stronghold in the 2000 elections, I find it odd that the loudest voices on Kuro5hin are rabidly anti-war. I travel a bit and find that most people I run into are slightly pro-war or vaguely anti-war.

Here it's a different story, which leads me to believe that there is a more organized force churning out dozens of anti-war articles a day and ruthlessly moderating dissention away.

[ Parent ]

I agree (none / 0) (#239)
by freality on Thu Mar 20, 2003 at 03:44:02 PM EST

I just had a story voted out, and indeed it did need some work.  However, almost no useful comments.  Mainly disagreement.

People like playing like they're on Hardball with Chris Matthews, cutting somebody off with a big "-1".  It's infuriating, and will lead to a boring k5.

I come here less often now that I've seen this happen on a few stories, both mine and others'.

Any voting system that allows readers to dump a story because they don't like the opinion it is broken, or more to the point, jingoism.

[ Parent ]

There is another way.... (4.00 / 1) (#237)
by MajorMajor on Fri Mar 07, 2003 at 04:28:46 PM EST

I don't generally post, but have been frequenting K5 for several months. I find that there often aren't any interesting new stories for several days. I think there should be a system where there is a new story posted every 24 hours (or maybe 23, so that different time zones get to view the story first on different days - that would give some of us a chance to post when the story is still hot, as opposed to just festering). The highest rated story would get posted at the start of each time slot. Possibly the different sections could have stories posted at different rates, e.g. maybe MLP could be updated more frequently.

K5ers don't follow moderation guidelines (4.00 / 1) (#240)
by splitpeasoup on Thu Mar 27, 2003 at 10:36:12 AM EST

K5ers don't abide by moderation guidelines, so depending on your point of view, either the system works because of that, or it doesn't work because of that.

What I am referring to, of course, is that people vote -1 very liberally, whereas the -1 is intended as a tool to weed out submissions that are abysmally bad, or spam, or both. From the moderation guidelines page:

"When you should vote -1:

This is almost the inverse of when to vote +1. Stories with horrible formatting (to the point where it is painful to read), broken links, and flamage-inspiring content are generally not liked by too many people. This applies to any kind of content, be it "NT sucks," "Linux sucks," "VMS sucks," etc. Another good thing to vote -1 on are advertisements. We don't get these often, but it does happen. Most of the time it's unintentional (a person is working on something with a company, and it just happens to be interesting), in which case it's best to leave an editorial comment about what's wrong and see if the author responds. If the story itself could be interesting in a certain context, but doesn't have "wide appeal," just vote +1 to the section it's listed for and be happy."

Obviously, this is not what people do.

-SPS

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

The standards are fine (4.00 / 1) (#241)
by latestringtones2003 on Tue Jul 01, 2003 at 10:44:43 AM EST

Disregarding the emotional aspect of your piece you spent hours on getting dumped in 5 minutes.

It's correct, though, the bar is sufficiently high. It's time for the people to write better stuff.

Standards Too High? | 241 comments (218 topical, 23 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!