Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

independent.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 96 posts

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#51

Post by loomer »

michaelfeathers wrote: post #49

I wonder whether another way of approaching the problem would be to have to two commenting sections for a site. One would be moderated algorithmically and the other wouldn't. People could choose according to their tolerance.

I think that would only hinder conversation. The original idea of questions also seems dumb to me, since it feels like even many good posters who actually read the article would be too lazy to answer the questions, and if there was another comment section which didn't require answering questions, they'd just post in there. It also seems like having two comment sections would divide the conversation.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#52

Post by kurthr »

KekDemaga wrote: post #39
libeclipse wrote: post #29

> Google announced last week, for instance, that it had built an artificially intelligent tool that can read through comments and identify whether or not they are "toxic". Censorship at its finest.

"Censorship + Math != Censorship" evidently.

We seem to have a choice between that and S#1T Posting and Spamming. Now, I suppose Poe's law could limit some sarcasm, but I'm not sure that would be a real loss either.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#53

Post by kurthr »

loomer wrote: post #51
michaelfeathers wrote: post #49

I wonder whether another way of approaching the problem would be to have to two commenting sections for a site. One would be moderated algorithmically and the other wouldn't. People could choose according to their tolerance.

I think that would only hinder conversation. The original idea of questions also seems dumb to me, since it feels like even many good posters who actually read the article would be too lazy to answer the questions, and if there was another comment section which didn't require answering questions, they'd just post in there. It also seems like having two comment sections would divide the conversation.

I'm not sure it would be laziness. A good poster who bothers to understand the article and compose an interesting response probably isnt lazy.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#54

Post by kurthr »

tomjen3 wrote: post #43
pharrington wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cool thing about this kind of filter is that it specifically has nothing to do with what the potential poster is about to post . As long as the questions remain about the facts in the article, intuitively it seems terrible for virality (as it extends the time frame between casual emotion and action), so I doubt any large news outlet would actually implement this.

It can at most be about the facts of the article as understood by the writer (Murray Gell-Man applies here), which the commenter may very well know better than the writer.

As long as they are facts stated in the article (and the article has been read), I don't see an issue. However, a good NLP might still make automated spam posting possible.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#56

Post by BeetleB »

jk2323 wrote: post #35
kristopolous wrote: post #8

I was under the impression that comments on news sites were mostly to divert the readership from directly contacting the author or the company through channels that are listened to; merely a solution to keep the wacko segment of the readership occupied and satiated. At least in practice, this is how it appears to function; they're almost exclusively 3rd party plugins and nobody that works for the news organizaion see…

I find the comments most of the time more read worthy than the article.

>I find the comments most of the time more read worthy than the article.

What news site is this? For general news sites, I've found them to be of very low quality. I can't remember the last time I gained anything from them.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#57

Post by BeetleB »

libeclipse wrote: post #29

> Google announced last week, for instance, that it had built an artificially intelligent tool that can read through comments and identify whether or not they are "toxic". Censorship at its finest.

>Censorship at its finest.

I doubt you meant it that way, but it really is a fine way to censor.

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#58

Post by GoToRO »

Myrmornis wrote: post #25
hashmal wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

someone will quickly sneak in stuff like "is global warming real?" in the questions.

True, but maybe there could be some sort of democratic consensus system to establish the questions (one which by design avoids the superficial circularity).

Ask questions that a 5th grader could answer. The level does not hove too be that high for it to be effective.

Or... just ask science questions: "Is planet Earth flat?".

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#59

Post by icebraining »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #31

This reminds me of a literary test to vote. In this case it's: "Here's our news story. Answer some questions to be sure you understand OUR point of view, the words and ideas WE want you to acquiesce, in order to express your so-called opinion." Ungood.

Even with your wording, it doesn't seem that bad. Shouldn't the reader understand the POV of the author? Even if - or especially if - one considers the author's position as wrong or evil?

Re: Must answer questions before posting comments to prove you understand news

#60

Post by icebraining »

fruitcake wrote: post #4
protomyth wrote: post #3

I expect there will be some mockery of the questions if they are not careful. Imagine questions written by MSNBC & FoxNews for the same story. I can see the questions setting up an echo chamber effect.

> Imagine questions written by MSNBC & FoxNews for the same story. As far as I can tell from briefly viewing them, the MSNBC and Fox News web sites don't allow comments.

Are you sure you're not blocking scripts? A random Fox News story showed me plenty of comments: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/07/30/us-allies-ready-to-u...

From the source, it seems they're using Adobe Livefyre.

Post reply on HN