Slashdot v. Digg
I’ve been a reader (and occasional contributor) of Slashdot for a long time. I’m not even sure how long. I have a relatively low user ID (11539 — I think new users are getting IDs up near one million now), so it’s been a while. I was in college — I know that. I’m guessing 1997 or 1998. I think back then it was much less dynamic. The pages were static, and I don’t remember if you could even comment on stories.
There are some ups and downs to slashdot. The main draw, for me, are the user comments. The news items are interesting, but the comments are what keep me there. There are plenty of idiots there, of course, but they have a relatively decent moderation and meta-moderation system which is governed by the users themselves. You can filter which comments you see based on how they’re rated. People complain a lot about it, but I think it works well most of the time.
The other thing that people complain about is the so-called “agenda” of slashdot. The editors (that is, the people who decide what stories to post, like CmdrTaco) decide what stories to post, and they sometimes toss in their own commentary (one of the more hilarious blunders by CmdrTaco was his addition to a story about the release of the first iPod — “No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.”). And yes, they do have a pro-Linux, pro-Open Source, anti-Microsoft (and in recent years, pro-Apple) perspective. They also seem to be somewhat liberal. None of this bothers me all that much.
Earlier this year, digg came to my attention. They involve users even more than slashdot. The users vote for (or “digg”) articles, and ones that get enough votes end up on the front page. It’s an interesting idea, though Kuro5hin has had a similar system for a long time.
I like digg. I go to the site several times per day. One big drawback, though, is their moderation. They actually do have one, but as far as I can tell, people rarely rate comments. So if you want to read comments, you get 90% garbage. A lot of people just leave dumb, uninformed one-liners. The focus is more on the moderation of “news” items rather than comments.
I browse slashdot at +3. That means that a comment must be rated at least a 3 out of 5 for me to see it. I probably miss the occasional good comment that way, but it works out. There’s much less garbage to sift through. I’ve tried filtering on digg for any comment rated a 1 or higher. I saw no comments. No one rates them there.
So thanks to the lack of moderation on digg, the impression I get is that it’s populated by primarily two groups of people — 15 year olds who still think building a 30,000-song library of ill-got music files is 3133t, and trade show guys. If you’ve been to a technology conference or trade show, you know what I’m talking about.
There are of course smart, insightful people on digg too, but it’s irritating to search them out. As it stands, I mostly go to digg to find stories that interest me, which unfortunately is only about 25% of them.
Some people are saying that people are moving from slashdot to digg. If that’s the case, I’m fine with that. Hopefully the trolls and morons go over to digg, where they apparently won’t be moderated so much. Hopefully, though, it will encourage users to moderate comments more.
I know most of you who read my weblog either don’t know or don’t care what I’m talking about. Eh.
December 19th, 2005 at 12:23 pm
You know what’s really funny? Reading the comments on that first iPod post. They’re better than Commander Taco’s commentary. People saying the iPod wouldn’t sell, or had no special features, or that it’s market would be limited.
Priceless. I’m no Apple fanboy by any means, but I think iPods are the cat’s meow.