Timeline for Evolving comments: An experiment to encourage engagement and follow-up questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 25 at 17:34 | comment | added | rebusB | @Lundin - the argument against it is the purpose of comments here is supposed to be limited and they are supposed to be secondary to the question both in intent and visually (reflecting that intent). They exist to help flesh out the question, not become their own discussion (thread). There simply should not be 50+ comments and if there are then that is an indication a) the question is very bad and needs lots of resolving and/or b) the users have lost the plot, ie they are not trying to improve the question and are on some other agenda. | |
| May 4 at 20:16 | comment | added | wjandrea | "promote comment to answer" - I suggested something similar myself: "copy this comment to an answer" | |
| May 1 at 15:51 | comment | added | TylerH | @Lundin I don't think Mad Scientist's (or anyone else's) arguments here are against threading in general, just this specific implementation/design proposed above. There's a lot of room between the current unthreaded layout and... Reddit's comment design. | |
| Apr 30 at 12:09 | comment | added | Gloweye | attaching a forum might not be horrible, but comments are very much not a suitable place for that. Comments are great getting clarification and help improve questions/answers. Allowing off-topic is bad. If people want reddit, they can go to reddit. | |
| Apr 29 at 16:16 | comment | added | zcoop98 | @Mast "The forum/Reddit market is saturated"– sure, but those aren't integrated with high-quality Q&A, either. Integration is a valuable asset, if they avoid damaging existing Q&A. | |
| Apr 29 at 13:40 | comment | added | Lundin | "this looks a bit like you want to turn a Q&A site into a forum (or Reddit)" Rather it looks like they are finally going to fix the last place on the whole Internet that doesn't have threaded comments. It's long overdue and there are no sensible arguments against it. Try to read a popular comment field after some 50+ comments. It's impossible, everyone are having their own monologues there. It soon turns into a complete mess and the moderators have no option but to give up and nuke the whole thing. Kind of like weeding ones garden using a flamethrower. | |
| Apr 29 at 13:36 | comment | added | Lundin | Or maybe they want to turn meta into a useful place where discussions can actually be had, in place of the current "everyone posts a monologue of their own" model which is horrible. We have a room of some 20 people all holding their own monologue instead of a room with 20 people where everyone who has something to add can do so in turn, in an organized manner. | |
| Apr 29 at 7:24 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | It really looks a lot like Reddit. | |
| Apr 29 at 7:24 | comment | added | Mast | "Doesn't mean this is automatically a bad idea" why not? The forum/Reddit market is saturated. Turning a Q&A into either of those seems like making the problem worse, at least on first glance, for me. | |
| Apr 28 at 16:49 | history | answered | Mad Scientist | CC BY-SA 4.0 |