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

Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 278 posts

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#51

Post by jobigoud »

josefresco wrote: post #21

Not sure about likes but Twitter without retweets is a much better place. The people I follow rarely say something with their own voice, and I was tired of the "outrage" tweets for every new social issue. my feed is not much quieter, and when my Tweeps do say something, I pay attention.

Are there stats about original content vs RT? I would be curious to see the ratio. It also feels like 80% of the timeline is retweets.

It's like a curation engine where you can manually select curation sources.

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#52

Post by tenryuu »

caw wrote: post #13
tenryuu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have this option on tweetdeck, only a add to collections, gives me a popup with no content. Nice.

It’s on the official site, I’m not sure of 3rd party app support. To view your bookmarks, https://mobile.twitter.com/i/bookmarks

tweetdeck is technically first party, twitter acquired the team many many years ago

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#53

Post by Springtime »

aloisdg wrote: post #9
sbarre wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Discussion and debate should be more than hot takes.. That said, most people won't read a wall-of-text from a stranger - HN being the exception ;-)

Reddit can be quite good for that too.

I found it somewhat ironic at the downvotes considering the lowering in quality of HN comments I've observed over the past couple years, coming across comments in more frequency that remind me of stereotypical Reddit one-liners and off-the-cuff remarks (not true for all subs but it is a common perception), in some threads even being among the highest rated where previously they would be looked down upon.

Thinking back it coincides somewhere around the same time HN improved their mobile viewing experience. Unsure if it's related but does feel HN reached some wider audience, or at least has a broader acceptance of varying levels of quality for comments.

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#55

Post by pjc50 »

liftbigweights wrote: post #48

The hypocritical media and leftists: Social media is evil because it spies on you and it manipulates you. The same hypocritical media and leftists: Social media is evil because it doesn't spy on you and manipulate you the way we want it to. The hypocritical media and leftists: Net neutrality is a human right. Everyone should have equal access and opportunities on the internet. The same hypocritical media and leftists…

A good example of how not to conduct a debate: setting up straw man arguments and attributing them to vaguely defined enemies.

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#56

Post by p2detar »

nurino wrote: post #24

The fav button was a useful tool back when it meant "fav" as in "bookmark" and not "like". Maybe they should go back to that? I know they've recently added a "bookmark" button as well, but I hope they don't keep it hidden the way it is now. On the other hand: Twitter does not have to be a debate site. You can surely debate using it, but it's just a website where you can post short messages and follow your friends. Th…

I've always been confused about this change. I was using the "fav" exactly to bookmark tweets rather than approve their content.

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#58

Post by claudiawerner »

coldtea wrote: post #35
sbarre wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Discussion and debate should be more than hot takes.. That said, most people won't read a wall-of-text from a stranger - HN being the exception ;-)

> That said, most people won't read a wall-of-text from a stranger - HN being the exception Then most people need better education (and not just vocational training).

I don't think we should confuse lack of willingness to read long form text on the Internet as a lapse in education of those people. A lot of people don't have time or the interest. I'm not sure if I qualify, but I'm a third year university student and all I've learned is that the Internet is tiring, and responding in detail will guarantee people don't read your comment.

The amount of things discussed in philosophy and science journals which people aren't aware of is mind-boggling, to the point where every argument online takes place not taking into account any research and resorting to pure speculation and fans of each speculative hypothesis (stated as fact of course) up/downvoting. This happens on Reddit and HN despite it being more visible on Twitter and such. But even I don't have the time to look up the research on any given topic I want to care about.

Re: Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate

#59

Post by liftbigweights »

pjc50 wrote: post #55
liftbigweights wrote: post #48

The hypocritical media and leftists: Social media is evil because it spies on you and it manipulates you. The same hypocritical media and leftists: Social media is evil because it doesn't spy on you and manipulate you the way we want it to. The hypocritical media and leftists: Net neutrality is a human right. Everyone should have equal access and opportunities on the internet. The same hypocritical media and leftists…

A good example of how not to conduct a debate: setting up straw man arguments and attributing them to vaguely defined enemies.

Having studied philosophy, I can say with some confidence that your comment is the straw man, not mine. My comment may have flaws, but the straw man fallacy isn't one.

Also, it's been my experience that a particular segment of the population loves to use "straw man", "whataboutism", "russian bot", etc attacks.

Pointing out hypocrisy, making an observation or caricaturing one side isn't a straw man.

Post reply on HN