SoylentNews

blockquote {border-left:3px solid #0F0 !important; padding-left:1em !important;}

/* Submissions */

.data .status0 {background:#FFF !important; color:#080 !important;}
.data .status0 a {color:#080 !important;}
.data .status0 a:visited {color:#0A0 !important;}
.data .status0 a:hover {color:#0C0 !important;}
.data .status1 {background:#800 !important;}
.data .status2 {background:#256625 !important;}

A day that will live in e-fame-y.

I personally had an encounter with the great FSM. I'm not writing here to convince anyone, just to have an article to cite when modding other religious believes as "incorrect", should the new incorrect-mod with mandatory citation be implemented. If it should be decided that I'm not allowed to cite myself, could I ask someone to copy this journal entry and post it again? Or do I have to create a second account myself?

One of the biggest issues I had with /. was the dupes. When there's new info available, resubmission is fine. But sometimes you'd get dupes weeks (or even days) later. The metamod process should have a #dupe tag (it did on /.) but that tag, when applied, should send a message to the editors, who should have the power to pull the story if it really is a recent dupe. You could even farm the job out to moderators.

Just my two cents.