Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-24 14:25 (#15N) It's such a shame that Soylent (horrible name) has so much more activity than Pipedot.This site has better editorial control, a much better appearance, better article selection, and even seems to load faster.I don't know if a Pipedot/Soylent merge is one of the choices in the Soylent name poll, but it damn well should be.From my point of view the only big mistake Pipedot initially made was banning anonymous posters, but you seem to have fixed that.In any case, no matter what happens, thank you for making such a strong effort! Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-24 22:27 (#15S) A big problem I've noticed is Pipedot has very few articles posted. Start posting more articles and there will be more to discuss. With more to discuss, more folks will start coming, as I agree that this site is technically better than the other ones. Unfortunately, that technical "betterness" means nothing if you don't have the content. Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 3, Insightful) by omoc@pipedot.org on 2014-04-25 07:07 (#15V) More articles yes, but more importantly more comments. A lot of articles without comments won't make it better, you go to /. for the discussion mainly. Just go out and advertise this site.The biggest thing missing here feature wise are notifications on a reply IMO. Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-25 14:27 (#15W) Damn, even the threaded display is worlds better than Soylent. I can see all these replies so cleanly.Perhaps one solution is to be unabashed about partially copying/mirroring good links from other sites, whether or not they are individually submitted by Pipedot members. People at Soylent are bitching at people who complain about old articles -- "why didn't YOU submit it then, big shot" -- but there's nothing wrong (ethically or legally) with using some links at another aggregator as a basis for discussion here. You can separate it into a "The Slashdot Feed" category if you must, though I wouldn't recommend that...The idea is to use the same articles (everything at Slash/Soy/etc. is pointing to 3rd and 4th party sites anyway) as a starting point for discussion on a site that people DO enjoy using...(Loving these text captchas by the way.)
Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-24 22:27 (#15S) A big problem I've noticed is Pipedot has very few articles posted. Start posting more articles and there will be more to discuss. With more to discuss, more folks will start coming, as I agree that this site is technically better than the other ones. Unfortunately, that technical "betterness" means nothing if you don't have the content. Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 3, Insightful) by omoc@pipedot.org on 2014-04-25 07:07 (#15V) More articles yes, but more importantly more comments. A lot of articles without comments won't make it better, you go to /. for the discussion mainly. Just go out and advertise this site.The biggest thing missing here feature wise are notifications on a reply IMO. Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-25 14:27 (#15W) Damn, even the threaded display is worlds better than Soylent. I can see all these replies so cleanly.Perhaps one solution is to be unabashed about partially copying/mirroring good links from other sites, whether or not they are individually submitted by Pipedot members. People at Soylent are bitching at people who complain about old articles -- "why didn't YOU submit it then, big shot" -- but there's nothing wrong (ethically or legally) with using some links at another aggregator as a basis for discussion here. You can separate it into a "The Slashdot Feed" category if you must, though I wouldn't recommend that...The idea is to use the same articles (everything at Slash/Soy/etc. is pointing to 3rd and 4th party sites anyway) as a starting point for discussion on a site that people DO enjoy using...(Loving these text captchas by the way.)
Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 3, Insightful) by omoc@pipedot.org on 2014-04-25 07:07 (#15V) More articles yes, but more importantly more comments. A lot of articles without comments won't make it better, you go to /. for the discussion mainly. Just go out and advertise this site.The biggest thing missing here feature wise are notifications on a reply IMO. Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-25 14:27 (#15W) Damn, even the threaded display is worlds better than Soylent. I can see all these replies so cleanly.Perhaps one solution is to be unabashed about partially copying/mirroring good links from other sites, whether or not they are individually submitted by Pipedot members. People at Soylent are bitching at people who complain about old articles -- "why didn't YOU submit it then, big shot" -- but there's nothing wrong (ethically or legally) with using some links at another aggregator as a basis for discussion here. You can separate it into a "The Slashdot Feed" category if you must, though I wouldn't recommend that...The idea is to use the same articles (everything at Slash/Soy/etc. is pointing to 3rd and 4th party sites anyway) as a starting point for discussion on a site that people DO enjoy using...(Loving these text captchas by the way.)
Re: Pipedot Needs People! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-25 14:27 (#15W) Damn, even the threaded display is worlds better than Soylent. I can see all these replies so cleanly.Perhaps one solution is to be unabashed about partially copying/mirroring good links from other sites, whether or not they are individually submitted by Pipedot members. People at Soylent are bitching at people who complain about old articles -- "why didn't YOU submit it then, big shot" -- but there's nothing wrong (ethically or legally) with using some links at another aggregator as a basis for discussion here. You can separate it into a "The Slashdot Feed" category if you must, though I wouldn't recommend that...The idea is to use the same articles (everything at Slash/Soy/etc. is pointing to 3rd and 4th party sites anyway) as a starting point for discussion on a site that people DO enjoy using...(Loving these text captchas by the way.)