zlacker

I personally don't see the content of the articles degrading as much as the comments. If anything there seems to be more movement and moderation of the articles which mostly is an improvement. The thing that I notice is the depth and quality of the comments. It took me a while to build up enough confidence to go from a lurker to a member and actually make comments. It was nice to feel that sense of pressure to make a quality comment that actually adds to the conversation rather than simply take up space or repeat what another person has said so that I can make my post.

The moment a social news site begins to degrade in my opinion is when comments are posted that add little or nothing to advancing or starting conversation (for example "Modded up for _______", "Really Nice _____" or my favorite "When I read the title of this post I thought it said ___. I have had too much ________ today")

There was a period where it felt as though the same articles would sit on the front page all day. The increase in the gravity for old posts and the increase in total number of posts has caused me (and I would assume others) to become more active in the site. I think the focus in moderation should be on the comments to set an example for what is expected.

>>notdar+(OP)
Yeah, it's true, comments probably have suffered a bit. It might be possible to do something about this. Maybe I could use a statistical filter to auto-detect potentially vapid comments and ask the submitters if they're sure they want to post them.

>>pg+9
I was originally referring to stories, although for the stories that I disagree with, I'll get a massive karma beat down. So I guess it's more of a personal thing for me.

Maybe an informal etiquette reminder displayed with a "confirmation" for potentially bad comments. The downvote never hurts either.

>>pg+9
The stupid filter (http://stupidfilter.org/main/) is out there, time to start using it?