One of the more 'interesting' problems with getting a relevant 1st post, is the number of people who, 'poke' their comments, as replies your comment. As you can tell from my most recent FP, there some basic types:

• Those who just go right out and use your comment. Without any pretense they just launch their comment without regard to a parent post.
• Those that just jump in negatively, insulting people (often wrongly), to to have the pretense of presenting their POV.

What really 'kills' me is that moderators generally ignore such efforts, and instead willingly allow discussion to get 'top heavy'. I'm not the only one who has seen 2nd and 3rd posts get marked "redundant" because someone 'rides a FP' to make the same comment.

Mod me down or mod me up, at least I got you thinking, even if your thinking, "man, that guy is an ASS!".

Well I usually make a real effort not to be a jerk, but it must be my nature.

From a comment that I made on search engines (correcting a small, but important error)...

I've even seen pages that return one set of content if your user-agent is "Googlebot", and another, totally different content (dialer, etc) if your user-agent is anything else.

This is probally Google's biggest problem. What they need to do is make a second pass at specific pages in a site which has recently been crawled with a more typical USER-AGENT to see if there is significant differences. It whouldn't have to hit every page. The second crawler could also check to see what is "visiable" to the user. When sites fail the second crawler, lower (or eliminate) their ranking. If the Secondary crawler has enough problems with a domain they can lower all of the rankings on it. If they have enough problems with an IP address (say over 35% of know domains)they can do the same for that address, ditto for subnets. Basicly use automated "scammer checks" to see if a particular area of the web is less "reputable" and then rank that area (directory, domain, IP address, subnet, netblock) lower. These scammer checks may change based on the flavor of the month.

I woke up this morning to find out that sholden doesn't believe that he ever insulted me (WTF). Also he admits to "following me" after posting to another thread of mine. The other post, which he claims was "non-trolling" and based on his experience with his muslium in-laws, had to been either an AC or FuzzyBad-Mofo, but I am certain that it isn't that guy, so it must be the AC. A choice line from the AC post (which is claimed to be "non-trolling"):

Anyway, if any religions need some first borns for sacrificing they'll be sure to come see you.

Certainly, that is a trollish statement.
Even funnier is his response to continuing on his Journal:

And I don't do journals... I whine on my own web space - less people see it that way :)

Of course nobody reads Slashdot articles.

My AC message indicating that I am pulling the was meet with yet another post...

So why am I labelled the troll?

He can call me a troll if he likes, I don't care.

I was a little rude, I admit. But I didn't insult you. You didn't insult me from what I read either.

Nice, until you read the next paragraph:

Are you from a parallel universe or something? Or does your browser rewrite stuff? Or are you taking drugs?

Ok, that's not insulting because, I am from a parallel universe, (I think) my browser is controlling me, and I am currently "high" on meth., much like saying that my writing is "drivel" because I used the hated BOLD tag.

He also again mention my last 24, which he brought up first, to show that he is more "intellegent" than me (from this post):

Based upon our "Latest 24" comments sections my comments seem to have been judged far more "useful" (which I'll define as rated insightful, informative, or interesting).

I never used it in that context, and I only used it in the AC post as a BURN for the importance he "obviously" places in it.

Over the past couple of days I have been draw into a circular argument with (to coin a phrase) a Format Troll. He jumped into the middle of a thread about political spying, and kindly explained to "all of Slashdot" that (something like) "I am trying to fool everyone" or "my writing is crap" mostly because the last couple of posted used the hated BOLD tag. I checked his last couple of posts and found that he wasn't in it just to be contrainian (like the professional trolls), and responded to his complaint. It was rude insulting to me and clearly off-topic. I, in return, flamed him for his over use of white-space, a minor compliant, but I built it up a little. We knocked back a couple of post, now we have desolved into "word analysis" and who insulted who first.

His last post says that he never directly insulted me, but that I had (pervious to comment asking him if he's 12 yo) insulted him. I think in the pissing contest about who insulted who first he is clearly the winner, just look at his first post (and every other post). Granted he did say the general term "the Author", and then only associated me directly to the most insulting of the two insults, but I think that his intentions were clear. In his last post he states his case for "you [me] giving the first insult":

You said "So rather than burst out with something truly useful (which apparently you can't)". The word "can't" means lack of ability. I can't see any way to interpete that statement other than that you said you think I "never have anything to say". Please explain the meaning you intended.

That I want to respond to directly, the opening sentance said: (quoting myself)"I, on the other hand, suspect that Grammar Trolls, Spelling Trolls, and Format Trolls, often disagree with the posts they FLAME, but have nothing intelligent to say (at least on a particular subject)..." (BOLD for the important part) and then the offending line begins. I thought that it was a pretty good line, I have been hit with spelling and grammer trolls, and now it looks like I have a "format" troll (maybe "style troll"). The funny thing is I don't use bold that much. I only used it in this post to clearly indicate what I think are key points, very similar to what I just did (beside indicating the BOLD word). After the guy complained about the use in a otherwise insulting post, I had to use it more, just to get his goat at the very least. Then I ran into the "style troll" (I think I like that term better, less insulting because it has Style).

I was going to open this up to discussion here, but frankly I am bored with it.

I suspect that Grammar Trolls, Spelling Trolls, and Format Trolls, often disagree with the posts they FLAME, but have nothing intelligent to say (at least on a particular subject). So rather than burst out with something truly useful they try to disparage the author of the original post for his "great crimes against proper etiquette".

• Great security is keeping 2 steps ahead of the crooks
• Good security is keeping 1 step ahead, and
• Average security sometimes a little ahead and sometimes a little behind.

Most systems/processes only have the budget for average security.

I think that Slashdot should have a +1 Politics, and a -1 Flame-politics moderation choices. That way those that are truely interested in political discussions of every technological idea can moderate them as such, and those that don't can set their preferences accordingly. It might be interesting to see really where the "group think" really is, at least for those interested in politics. As far as just keeping politics off of Slashdot, you whould have an easier time getting rid of the Trolls.

Just got my 2nd Foe, and my first Troll marking today. I am I doomed for hatred.

Sure I was over the top by posting amazon links for books for some author, but I think that his creditials are weak, his research suspect and his conclusions paid in full. At least for his work on that article. The man had the nerve to call SpamAssassin a "outmoded" product, damnit, it's the only thing that keeps the spam out of my inbox. I will not pay the $50/year for each account, but that author believe we all should. Hell that would be $100 a year just for my wife and I.

Oh well, I guess that I will just go eat worms!