I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

Current Shunts

Fri Nov 03 16:41:32 -0800 2006

manage

Despicable

I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

Bruce Perens

Fri Nov 03 16:50:05 -0800 2006

manage

Probably just a mistake. But annoying.

I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

guest

Fri Nov 03 18:31:59 -0800 2006

manage

Ditto "Despicable", but then it's exactly up to the usual quality standards that we all have come to expect from /. editors... (unfortunately).

As to: "I suppose that Wickline passed my article to Nick Farrell of the Inquirer and the attribution got lost along the way."

Possible, but also sloppy editing [either by Wickline, or the Inquirer], if so. One of the 'supposed' big points of editing is to catch errors...

Sigh, I know I always hope for to much...

OT: was I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

Andy

Sat Nov 04 15:21:02 -0800 2006

manage

 Is it just me, or has slashdot been accelerating downhill the last month or so? I don't get to read as much as I used to, but it seems there are fewer moderations and much less commentary than there were this summer. Given the quality of a lot of the articles/commentary lately, I can't say I'm surprised... yes, I know, it's Always Sucked (TM). But it seems it used to suck less than this, just a few months back.

A
 

/.

lars

Sun Nov 05 01:51:49 -0800 2006

manage

It's been more than the last month. It came into the mainstream in only a few steps and has taken a few hits with each step. Part of the problem has been paid shills (e.g. Team99, Scobble, & co) and others out to push an agenda.

My disappointment there is that /. seems in recent years obligated to pump out tripe from Redmond and has been letting IT-related issues slide. For example, the recent KDE release went unaddressed. I suppose it'd be easy enough, although time consuming, to review the titles and not the trends.

On the plus side, the OpenBSD 4 got a mention there.

/.

Andy

Mon Nov 06 15:47:08 -0800 2006

manage

 Well, I wasn't really talking about content itself (although I agree with you); I was talking about the number of comments being posted and the number of moderations being performed - both seem to have decreased considerably the last month or two. I suspect /. is bleeding readers ;-)

snarked

OT: was I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

Jyri Sillanpaa

Mon Nov 06 05:36:12 -0800 2006

manage

I think that it has been going downhill a year or so, I have basically stopped reading it in the last couple of months.

Social news sites suffering from poorly managed growth?

isolationism

Fri Nov 03 18:57:55 -0800 2006

manage

That sucks, Bruce -- but it seems like it's one of the pitfalls that have befallen all of the bigger "social news" sites; the world appears to have yet to work out a paradigm to deal with this sort of problem (and numerous others, you know the usual suspects).

One of the worst offenders of the bunch is Digg, which purports to be self-regulating because the users themselves wear all the hats, including 'Editor'. No offense to Kevin Rose and the Digg gang intended, but A) their ADD teenage audience couldn't edit their way out of a wet school newsletter, and B) The whole thing is bunk anyway; there's no magic algorithm, just a few men like Kevin behind the curtain.

As for Slashdot, it's nowhere near as bad but the same thing still happens too often: Good, relevant stories get trashed, crummy ones full of broken links and spelling mistakes get posted, and the amount of fact checking that goes on at all must be so little as to be negligible. It wasn't always the case, but as I said, some of these sites seem to be victims of their own success.

Technocrat.net may not have as many articles as /., but they're almost always engaging and not just "news for nerds," either, but things everyone should be informed about about (but that strangely seem to get glossed over in other popular media outlets, including the big guys mentioned above). Here's to Technocrat's continued success and managed growth.

Social news sites suffering from poorly managed growth?

tmg1

Sun Nov 05 21:07:33 -0800 2006

manage

This site *really needs* comment management a la some sort of rating system.     

Social news sites suffering from poorly managed growth?

Alan

Mon Nov 06 00:12:32 -0800 2006

manage

Not really, the number of posts is so low here that a single determined troll could screw it up by moderation. Slashdot needs it with approaching a million subscribers, and there are enough non-trolls to make trollish behaviour unrewarding. That's one of the things they do do well.

Social news sites suffering from poorly managed growth?

tmg1

Mon Nov 06 10:33:19 -0800 2006

manage

It's low *now* but if this site stays significantly better than slashdot, then it will grow, and as it stands right now it will not scale.  Given the nature of the internet, this could happen fairly quick.

Social news sites suffering from poorly managed growth?

Bruce Perens

Mon Nov 06 13:04:40 -0800 2006

manage

I have plans for a sophisticated moderation system, but have not implemented them due to the relatively low number of comments. I'm hoping we grow enough to need it.

Bruce

I've been plagarized or mis-attributed

Bhima

Sat Nov 04 00:05:38 -0800 2006

manage

I think this simply shows the flaws of Slashdot, Digg and to a lesser extent Technocrat.

1: Slashdot has no 'editors' they have copyists and posters but no editors.  Technocrat has editors and I think the befits the site are apparent (However I wish they'd do more).  This means that if: a person with credentials, a person who has created content in the past or who has competence to submit expert opinion, or in this case *all three*, submits a story there is no mechanism to favor that submission over one from the unwashed masses on the same topic (like me for example).  I have noticed this on Technocrat but presumably our editors would prioritize the submission of a known expert.

2: Slashdot & Technocrat have no mechanism to rate truthfulness or accuracy of a story or display that rating next to the headline.  Slashdot claims that it is the point of comments to assess validity; cynical people recognize this as not altogether accurate and it can lead to abuse.  Digg has such a system and during this election cycle has become a abused tool for political activists.  Kuro5hin also employs something like this which really slows the rate of story change down too much.

3: Now that it is very popular to monetize blogs, you see a frenetic pace of postings, to Digg especially, of dubious ethical motivations.  In this subject the copyists of Slashdot do an excellent job in screening them out and now that made what ever referrer link thing change they made, this practically a non-issue.  I do expect this issue to collide with Technocrat's submission incentive but I trust as we have editors it will not be so annoying.

your article is viral

zogger

Sat Nov 04 06:58:56 -0800 2006

manage

it appears to be getting around.

I noticed open office has blessed this merger with MS and Novell.

I never used it much anyway......the smaller text editors all work for what I need.

I've been plagiarized or mis-attributed

Nick Farrell

Sun Nov 26 16:14:05 -0800 2006

manage

I had an email from Tom Wickline which was cut and pasted from Bruce's article.  The only thing was that Tom failed to mention where he got it from.  Since it was a comment from him AND it didn't mention that it wasn't anything more than a press release, I banged it out as a story.
Next thing that happens I am getting accused of plagiarism...
More to the point after what happened is explained to him by WIckline,  Bruce has made no effort to point out that it was Tom's fault and not mine and it was all tidied up. Any sympathy I might have had because he had his story nicked tends to dry up in such moments. As does his rushing off to public forums bleating about professionalism and credibility before he has got his facts straight.
The INQ is pretty good on this sort of stuff