Just in case my 120 characters didn't explain the issue... :)

Use Moderation in moderation. Use it on the good comments, so people will see them. Use them on the pointless comments, so they don't waste time. But don't use them on comments that someone might find useful, or on comments that you don't agree with for a non-rational reason.

Also, if you disagree or think that a slashdot user simply needs to be corrected, or a point needs to be clarified, don't you think you should reply? And if your moderation is unfair, and people complain, don't you think you should reply, and simultaneously apologize *and* undo your mistake?

Moderation worked well on slashdot when only a few people had it, but now it's gone to hell, because it's anonymous. If there was some accountability, maybe it would succeed, but even meta-moderation doesn't seem to be helping, and I want to e-mail the offenders:

Read the frickin' moderator's guide again, or have your rights for it revoked permanently.

It says: "It's better to moderate *UP* the good comments, and reserve judgement on the other ones, except for the really bad grits-pouring, statue making, obviously offtopic, first-posting, natalie portman is my bitch wishing, 31337 d00d clueless posts, which deserve to be moderated down to -837,425."

Paraphrasing, of course. :)

But since I have official word that high karma is meaningless, and my karma is too high, I'm going to have to post at +2 all the time, and get moderated down a lot regardless of what I have to say, so I can get back into that "meaningful" range of Karma. What can I say, I've obviously been on Slashdot for too long for my opinion to matter, right? ;)
pb (#1020)