When I was younger I thought that Slashdot's moderation was brilliant, and every time that I tried to think up something better I invariably came back to that model. When I first stumbled across Reddit I thought to myself that it couldn't possibly work: too simple, too accessible, too easy to game. And yet over the years I kept reading Reddit and stopped reading Slashdot, and it dawned on me that Reddit's comment rating system miraculously was better than Slashdot's somehow, in a way that I couldn't put my finger on. Somehow their algorithm for knowing which comments out of thousands to place above the fold is basically perfect; even when I click on the "load more comments" links at the leaves of comment chains I nearly always find that the originally loaded comments were exactly where I wanted to stop reading. And of course Reddit still gets plenty of visibly-upvoted bullshit, but the difference is that on Reddit the top response to that comment will be a refutation that is just as upvoted, if not moreso. In contrast, on the rare occasion that I visit Slashdot these days, I wince at all the confidently-asserted yet blatantly wrong comments marked with "5, Informative", while the informed refutations languish invisibly below with a score of 1. Maybe Slashdot's moderation would work better on a more focused site, but in practice it just seems like the people selected for moderation just aren't often enough experts on the topic being discussed to distinguish the signal from the noise.