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

Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 347 posts

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#181

Post by jedberg »

unescape wrote: post #175
jedberg wrote: post #87

Reddit has had embeddable comment threads for over two years. It was a feature I actually worked on nine years ago, but the standards weren't there at the time to make it work with voting. I know I'm super biased, but I still find Reddit comments the easiest to read and follow (HN is a pretty close second, especially after they added comment collapsing). Is it really just bad marketing it on Reddit's part that keeps…

HN is a pretty close second, especially after they added comment collapsing Isn't comment collapsing in HN the same as downvoting? I find this confusing - or maybe I just don't have enough karma for the actual downvote button.

Collapsing only hides it for you.

With enough karma you get a downvote button.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#183

Post by blisterpeanuts »

viraptor wrote: post #161
seanwilson wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems like a mix of Reddit google's network algorithm could work - don't just upvote/downvote the post, but lend the commenter's credibility. So upvotes from hordes of poo-flinging monkeys aren't weighted as heavily from upvotes from credible sources. Are there site that do that? I know hackernews limits your voting abilities until you get so much karma. Sounds like some variation of the above ideas would work g…

Slashdot uses (used?) meta moderation. You could review votes others did - not the value itself, but the category. "Do you agree this post is (interesting/insightful/funny/...)?" Not sure how the results were used though.

On Slashdot, moderation power is (was) awarded periodically. Metamoderation was used to grade the moderators. If enough people disagreed with your moderation, eventually you got mod points less often. If people liked your moderation, you'd get mod points more often.

It's a way to police the moderators, a great concept at least, though it gets tiresome at times.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#185

Post by sbierwagen »

unescape wrote: post #175
jedberg wrote: post #87

Reddit has had embeddable comment threads for over two years. It was a feature I actually worked on nine years ago, but the standards weren't there at the time to make it work with voting. I know I'm super biased, but I still find Reddit comments the easiest to read and follow (HN is a pretty close second, especially after they added comment collapsing). Is it really just bad marketing it on Reddit's part that keeps…

HN is a pretty close second, especially after they added comment collapsing Isn't comment collapsing in HN the same as downvoting? I find this confusing - or maybe I just don't have enough karma for the actual downvote button.

Collapsing a thread is absolutely not the same as downvoting the parent. It's just a display toggle.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#186

Post by freeflight »

Wouldn't the easiest approach to this whole "issue" be to give every user access to individualized blacklisting tools? Just put a "This comment makes me angry" button next to each one and people who feel offended can click it to hide said comment and check a box to hide any future comments from that commenter.

There, problem solved with no need for fancy machine learning algorithms or other institutions to play big brother for the internet commenting culture. Voting based systems generally seem to do a pretty decent job most of the time, especially when the community can be segregated by topics/interests like on Reddit.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#187

Post by tmccrmck »

davesque wrote: post #96
creaghpatr wrote: post #4

Can't speak for WaPo but the New York Times comments sections are absolutely dominated by a handful of designated 'top commenters' who rush to post on any major story. Sometimes their comments are good, but then there's the guy who writes a poem every single time, or 'Socrates' who posts the same cookie-cutter 'blame-the-GOP-all-the-way-back-to-bush' comment with the most dramatic rhetoric possible, trolling for like…

It's funny that you mention that "Socrates" guy. I see him a lot. I also see a lady named "Chistine McMorrow." They're both frequently at the top of the readers' picks section. They must check the Times often for breaking stories.

Yeah he's everywhere. I remember that NYT did a featurette on their top commenters and he's actually Chelsea Handler's brother.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#188

Post by codinghorror »

thinbeige wrote: post #18

After reading this article over and over I am still clueless. What is this all about? Feature-wise it doesn't sound better than a comment system from HN, Reddit or StackExchange. Besides, Mozilla is really lacking communicational skills. This blog post feels like the documentation at MDN, tedious and unclear.

Stack Exchange is not a commenting system. Source: I am one of the co-founders.

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#189

Post by codinghorror »

devinhelton wrote: post #22
aaron-lebo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure how you could ever hope to have productive debate on say an article about global warming. It's not a local topic, it's a difficult topic, there's millions of regular people and trolls around the world waiting to blab about something they don't have any clue about. It's hard for me to imagine what a comment on a Washington Post article could add to the article or to anyone's knowledge. It's user involvement f…

I think the biggest thing forums and comment systems need to do is to ban tedious comments. On subjects that have been debated to death, it is really annoying to see all the comments for a new article just be repeated talking points that I have seen a million times before. I would suggest sites have a single mega-threads for debating hot topics. Then make a rule that for any new article, you can only write a comment…

While this is true, that would also eliminate 95% of potential posts. I am more inclined to "you cannot post until you have proven you read stuff" ala https://meta.discourse.org/t/additional-optional-barriers-be...

Re: Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

#190

Post by inetknght »

s73ver_ wrote: post #127
inetknght wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What people want isn't necessarily what they need . When people's needs are satisfied, they want more of that . So let's satisfy their needs instead. Echo chambers are ultimately self-defeating as they bring on more divisiveness and intolerance.

Needs aren't as profitable.

"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."; whether Henry Ford truly said that or not is immaterial as the quote itself is the point I was trying to make.

And your comment really rather touches on it.

Peoples' needs aren't as profitable -- not until what they need also becomes what they want.

Post reply on HN