Live data from Hacker News

Web Discussions: Flat by Design

codinghorror.com

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#11
post #4

> Poems about trees are indeed lovely, as Joyce Kilmer promised us, but data of any kind represented as a tree … isn't. If you don't see tree data structures as "lovely", then I have to wonder if you even understand them. Putting data into trees can make difficult problems easier to solve in an elegant way: searches, file systems, space partitioning, and so on. > Rigid hierarchy is generally not how the human mind wo…

> Rigid hierarchy is generally not how the human mind works...

Jeff's sneaking a lot into the qualifier "rigid" here. The human mind loves hierarchies of many sorts, but most when the hierarchy is based on the context. For example: house cats could be mammals (near tigers) or pets (near fish).

A concept or object that is relevant to different contexts needs to show up in differently-organized hierarchies, or failing that, probably ought to be organized non-hierarchically (e.g. flat or "tagged"), so as to reduce cognitive dissonance.

Over-simplifying considerably, comments on Reddit/HN tend to be interesting mainly in just one context, so a hierarchy is probably helpful.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#12
post #6

The only time I've ever seen flat comments work is when there is essentially no discussion (stack overflow) or where there is an obvious mechanism to indicate (and link too, ideally) the comment you're replying to. Threaded comments allow for more in-depth discussion, while making it obvious where the current thread finishes, so that skimming through is possible. Adding thread collapsing, or have threads auto-collaps…

> an obvious mechanism to indicate (and link too, ideally) the comment you're replying too. Like say quoting the relevant bits you're referring to? :)

It really depends on the style of conversation. It's not unusual on some forums to use the quote block (linking to the the comment being replied to) but leave it completely empty to respond to the whole comment. people can click the link to see the context, but don't have to re-read the whole thing again if they're following the conversation already.

On the other hand, quoting individual lines to comment on a specific section happens plenty too.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#13
Am I the only one who thinks twitter is terrible for conversations? "@somebody @somebody shortened url ..." That does not stand alone. And every flat comment system now includes people using @previous-poster to compensate for a lack of threading, but without the proper context.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#14
post #6

The only time I've ever seen flat comments work is when there is essentially no discussion (stack overflow) or where there is an obvious mechanism to indicate (and link too, ideally) the comment you're replying to. Threaded comments allow for more in-depth discussion, while making it obvious where the current thread finishes, so that skimming through is possible. Adding thread collapsing, or have threads auto-collaps…

> an obvious mechanism to indicate (and link too, ideally) the comment you're replying too. Like say quoting the relevant bits you're referring to? :)

If the quote doesn't automatically give you a back-link, it can still be a pain to get more context. If it does, then that's probably passable but it still might be a few hops to get back to the start of a discussion and you don't get it all on one page (in a traditional flat system) if there is much activity at all. Twitter may be able to do better with a loose grouping in of related tweets (which should include all tweets being replied to) while still preserving some semblance of a flat system, but I don't know if they do - I don't use twitter extensively. I do know that I've found it sometimes difficult to figure out what is in response to what in the little I have used it, though, so I am skeptical.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#15
post #2

I very often will find a post on HN where the conversation forked in numerous unrelated directions: one thread taking about the politics, one talking about the economics, one talking about the font used on the website, and another angry that the post got enough upvotes to be on the front page in the first place. I consider it of immense value that I can skip most of the content I am not interested, and concentrate on…

Speaking of categories: I was browsing many pages deep in HN a few hours ago and I noticed a ton of "Ask HN:" topics buried on pages 6-10. That kind of implies those should be different category area on the site, rather than being mixed in with the regular "here's a link, discuss the content on that link", perhaps? To me, there seems to be a very broad divide between "here is a link to an article, discuss", and "here…

> I have almost 500 HN "rep" and I still can't find any way to downvote. Is this documented anywhere? At Stack Exchange downvotes require 125 rep to cast, and cost you 1 point of rep for each answer downvote. (Question downvotes are free, but still require 125 rep to cast..) This is all listed in the FAQ.

The min. requirement to downvote, I'm told, moves upward ever so slightly. I think I managed it just past 500, but that was several months ago (I lurk and/or comment on obscure communications articles). You're sitting at 496 as I write this so you're still a little while off.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#16
"precious few threaded discussion models survive on the web."

Citation needed. Seriously, you can't just casually throw out a phrase like that and not expect to back it up. HN seems to be going fine. Reddit seems to be going fine. Facebook has threads now I've noticed and it hasn't exploded in a ball of threading-related fire. I can't think of a website that has died because it uses threads, nor can I think of a website that is overly popular because it doesn't use threads.

Anyway. let's talk about his arguments a little:

1) It's a tree. His argument seems to be it's unnatural and confusing to read. This is sometimes true. What's even more confusing though, is when people wish to reply to one particular post, but since it's flat it all gets smushed together into some kind of massive confusing shouting match.

2) Where did that reply go?

- "How do you know if there are new replies?" Yep, that sucks, no question there.

- "reply at the wrong level" I'd argue that occasionally getting your reply wrong is better than constantly replying into a shouting match and never being heard.

- "responses buried somewhere in the middle" that kind of thing is lame totally, but it can be "fixed" (to a point obviously, imo, ymmv etc) with a upvote system

3) It pushes discussion off your screen. Aka "indentation is ugly". That is certainly true, but it can be mitigated (at least in terms of wasted vertical screen space) with expand / collapse buttons. In terms of horizontal space, I think that's an UI issue waiting for someone to solve it (I don't think it's a fundamental failure).

4) You're talking to everyone. Not sure what he's really talking about here, I don't think anyone thinks a reply to a comment is private-- you reply to an existing comment when you want to comment on the comment, not talk to the person who wrote the comment. Otherwise "polluting the tree with these massive narrow branches" seems to be #3 again.

5) I just want to scroll down. Basically, he finds it too hard to navigate in tree-space. The problem with this is that everyone else wants to reply in tree space, so even if your site has flat comments people still going to use @originalCommenter at the top of their comment, or if you're lucky quote the originalCommentor's post. And then originalCommentor will quote back, and so on and so on until, surprise!, you have threaded comments again, except this time it's adhock, ugly and with no collapse button.

I'm also confused as to why Jeff includes a couple of paragraphs implying that Stack Exchange is a good commenting system and then says "but remember: Stack Exchange is not a discussion system.". So then why bring it up? It not being a discussion system implies that perhaps the techniques used there may not actually translate into something that is a discussion system.

In the end, I understand that there are elements of threaded discussions that are frustrating, of course there are, nothing is perfect. But I would argue that flat discussions are, for certain types of conversations (specifically those had on HN and Reddit), far more detrimental. I'd go so far as to say that Reddit would not be even remotely as popular if it had a flat discussion system.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#17
I've mentioned this on here before, but the live-updating approach taken by SBNation sites (I'd guess The Verge, too, but I don't have an account there to know for sure) solves a lot of the issues, including the big ones of "where's the new content?" and "I just want to scroll down" (cause now you're using keyboard shortcuts to navigate to the new stuff).

Since I haven't seen the live-updating-with-keyboard-control threaded model on other sites, and haven't seen anyone else on HN comment on their model, I'm curious if there just isn't much overlap between HN and SBNation—though since the launch of The Verge, I would've expected more HNers to have seen it.

The complaints about stuff getting pinned to the far right are specious; a flat discussion thread is equally prone to getting hijacked over by two people having a fight. And when it happens on a flat discussion thread, it's not sequestered off to the side by itself, it's constantly being reinserted into the main flow where other people are talking too.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#18
post #2

I very often will find a post on HN where the conversation forked in numerous unrelated directions: one thread taking about the politics, one talking about the economics, one talking about the font used on the website, and another angry that the post got enough upvotes to be on the front page in the first place. I consider it of immense value that I can skip most of the content I am not interested, and concentrate on…

If I could add anything to HN, it would be branch collapsing.

And of course I can do that indirectly, via a bookmarklet of Greasemonkey.

Branch collapsing makes most of the navigation you describe easier.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#19
I think the better solution is to just hide the "discussion" part from the content by default. If you are in a comment section, you are looking for one of two things - information on the topic (usually restricted to the top 2 levels of a comment thread) or discussion (the deep trees Jeff complains about).

Making that discussion flat doesn't make people want to read it, get involved in it, or understand the exchange. Comments / forum threads are trying to serve two distinct purposes.

My solution would be to have the comment tree hidden by default.(tangentially, I wonder if a system where comments move to the right relative to their time posted, not just in order, since that is why we are moving comments rightward anyway - that way a comment thread would map the post times out rightward. Since replies could only come to already posted content, the flow still moves right, but the active discussions still show themselves off) If people want to see the discussion on top level comments, it should be a very obvious and very apparent mechanism to reveal a discussion tree, but otherwise, let people browse the top level first (with a ranking system, not just by time) and find discussions they are interested in. That is my biggest problem with all the reddit-esque sites where discussions take up tons of my vertical space by default even if I don't actively seek to engage in them.

Re: Web Discussions: Flat by Design

#20
By the way, if you have trouble finding which comments are new, I highly recommend the HNCommentTracker[0] extension for Chrome. It will tell you which discussions have new comments on the front page, and will highlight new comments on the discussion pages. I couldn't imagine using Hacker News without it! (By the way, I did not create it. I can't give you support for it!)

[0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hncommenttracker/i...

Post reply on HN