Kuro5hin got a bit of stick here in a recent discussion, apparently for being too clubby. the context was an inquiry about tools for porting sites based on scoop to slash.
Thing is that we run a small site with a restricted user base. Very few people log in and consequently the pool of people who can moderate is limited. Given that slash bestows jury service only on a fraction of those logged in, well nobody gets to moderate. For smaller sites I think that everyone should have moderation powers and K5 allows everyone logged in to rate.
Secondly the fact that Scoop allows one to consult the record of how users have voted on stories and rated on comments gives others a better indicator of whether they are *generally reliable*. Likewise disallowing posts by anonymous users (as K5 does) means that if someone posts something that seems factually dubious, a rumour, or ahighly contested piece of information, it's possible to make an evaluation based ontheir prior history. That's just a general problem of anonymity and I'm sure that Slash could be adapted to eliminate AC posting.
Lastly i like the voting queue and the elf-management facilitated by Scoop. What Vladinator regards as a potntial disadvantage describes what i would like to see happen to our site:
Scoop really isn't good for maintaining any kind of control, centralized or otherwise, over what you've built, sweated over, and spent money on. If you want a free-for-all that will devolve into a no-hold-bar'd "We're right because there are more of us" kind of situation, by all means, choose scoop.
Maybe i'll feel differently when we finally upddate to most recent version of slash and get to feast upon the ZOO system which I really like.