Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.mozilla.org

21–30 of 347 posts

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

#21

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…

I read the paper version of the Times most week days. There are no comments (well, I guess there are a few letters to the editor).

I don't miss them. I'm sure commentcowboy236523 from Atlanta has some important things to say, but I don't need to read them. If I want conversation, I'll come to a place like Hacker News or reddit, where conversation is the goal. I can find that when I want it.

But I don't need it when I'm trying to relax and enjoy the paper. Comments simply don't add any value to the experience. We don't need better comments. We don't need them at all.

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

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I'm not sure how this helps." Better tools to filter out trolls leaves more space for healthy debate.

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 that says something new or something specific about the article. Forbid writing generic arguments that have already been covered in the topic mega-thread.

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

#23
post #11

I would love to see a big site try to use Slashdot's old commenting system. Commenting felt like a privilege and so did moderation.

Slashdot's commenting system was 100% an echo chamber ;)

Ultimately it's very difficult to separate "that's a bad opinion, downvote", from "troll, downvote". People won't even agree on which is which, especially the trolls.

If you require someone to post really blatant stuff like "Hitler did nothing wrong" to be ejected from the discussion, then your discussion will be filled with ideological trolls who don't argue in good faith but insist that any moderation to their participation is censorship and echo chamber creation.

Their theory that Global Warming is a big conspiracy demands attention, and they have plenty of links to "studies" to back it up.

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

#24
post #8

Why should anyone care? I don't see anything technically novel or interesting in this. Edit: I'm not disparaging this, I'm asking a question...

The really hard problems in this area aren't technical. They're social. Any attempt to make comments sections useful again is a welcome step.

I disagree, at a very basic level.

I think comments -- and really the nature of online interaction -- is ripe for disruption using new technical solutions that alleviate many of the older pain points.

As an example, people propose social solutions to problems like trolls on Twitter, but that seems to stem more from a lack of imagination in technical solutions. Social solutions are things like banning trolls. A technical solution would be something like spam filtering to categorize content and then allow people to have filters built around those categorizations.

Of course, the reason people don't advocate those technical solutions is actually simple: they don't provide power to a centralized authority to enforce their will on others.

I'm leery of most of these "social solutions", because at heart, they all seem to be dubious people arguing why they should have control over the material other people can interact with. I don't think it's accidental that people are proposing dominance and control over freedom and technical solutions.

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

#25
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am happy to see an alternative to Facebook comments. > Talk doesn’t contain any tracking, or digital surveillance. > Talk is small — about 300kb — and lightweight Both are an improvement over FB IMHO

I realize that this could be considered lightweight by today's web standards, but to me this is still huge.

I hope that 300KB refers to the backend code size, since one of the selling points is organizations run their own version. There's no way you need 300 KB of frontend code to render HTML from a database.

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

#26
Doesn't work if you have Ghostery turned on. The Washington Post has 15 trackers, and the comment thing has a cross-site scripting request.

This thing writes many messages to the browser console. The last line apparently prevents even displaying comments.

    STARTING Paywall  c4d7fa1f35.js:41:468
    PAYWALL CHECK STATUS:   c4d7fa1f35.js:42:331
    "PWAPI URL: https://pwapi.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2017/09/12/state-department-official-quietly-visits-moscow-to-discuss-north-korea/?rplapisplit=1&referrer=https://www.washingtonpost.com/"  c4d7fa1f35.js:42:405
    PAYWALL ACTION: 0  c4d7fa1f35.js:43:138
    PAYWALL URL: N/A  c4d7fa1f35.js:43:218
    PAYWALL SUB: Unsubscribed  c4d7fa1f35.js:43:292
    PAYWALL METERED: Metered  c4d7fa1f35.js:43:393
    PAYWALL METER COUNT: 4  c4d7fa1f35.js:43:498
    PAYWALL MODE: 1  c4d7fa1f35.js:44:49
    PB Debug: Fired comment_count_target.init:[object Object]  c94e09db1d.js:381:443
    boomerang.nt: [info] This user agent supports NavigationTiming.  wprum.min.js:1:10101
    pt.fetchStart: 1505251033854  wprum.min.js:1:10803
    boomerang: [debug] Checking if we can send beacon  wprum.min.js:1:10101
    boomerang: [debug] Sending url: //rumds.wpdigital.net/metrics/?rum=%7B%22redt%22%3A0%2C%22nl%22%3A285%2C%22dns%22%3A0%2C%22tcp%22%3A0%2C%22rest%22%3A195%2C%22domt%22%3A904%2C%22uplt%22%3A3052%2C%22url%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fjosh-rogin%2Fwp%2F2017%2F09%2F12%2Fstate-department-official-quietly-visits-moscow-to-discuss-north-korea%2F%3Futm_term%3D.b5cb34fc201d%22%2C%22site%22%3A%22www.washingtonpost.com%22%2C%22title%22%3A%22State%20Department%20official%20quietly%20visits%20Moscow%20to%20discuss%20North%20Korea%20-%20The%20Washington%20Post%22%2C%22domn%22%3A940%2C%22section%22%3A%22opinions%22%2C%22cntt%22%3A%22blog%22%7D
	v=0.9
	u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fjosh-rogin%2Fwp%2F2017%2F09%2F12%2Fstate-department-official-quietly-visits-moscow-to-discuss-north-korea%2F%3Futm_term%3D.b5cb34fc201d
	if=  wprum.min.js:1:10101
    PB Debug: Fired sticky-vertical-sharebar.collides_with_main_content:false  c94e09db1d.js:381:443
    PB Debug: Fired nav.start_close:true  c94e09db1d.js:381:443
    PB Debug: Fired nav.finish_close:true  c94e09db1d.js:381:443
    Comments load: timer startedtwp-comments.js:1
    [Echo.UserSession] error : Unable to initialize user session, error response from IdentityServer API received  | args:  Object { response: Object }  499c2b4a02.js:294:297

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

#27
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I'm not sure how this helps." Better tools to filter out trolls leaves more space for healthy debate.

> Better tools to filter out trolls leaves more space for healthy debate. The very nature of US political discourse itself leaves no space for healthy debate. I'm sceptical that removing the trolls is going to be sufficient to fix that.

It would, but then there would be no one left to comment.

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

#28
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am happy to see an alternative to Facebook comments. > Talk doesn’t contain any tracking, or digital surveillance. > Talk is small — about 300kb — and lightweight Both are an improvement over FB IMHO

Wyatt from the Coral Project here. It's all about the news rooms owning the data of the comments, not social networks like Facebook. We're using tech like GraphQL to make the experience possible on multiple platforms through our extensible and pluggable API.

Does Mozilla have a copy of the data, e.g. does it work like Disqus?

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

#30
Let me distract you from the actual content of the article first (I am sorry), because I am a little frustrated (I usually don't, and always almost give credits to the awesome works done by Mozilla; disclaimer: used to be a Mozilla intern).

This article is too shy from actually showcase the product. Half of the article is devoted to PR announcement (which IMO is really a waste of time for most readers, even for the non-technical ones). Just first paragraph into the article, I had already given up reading through, but instead put my effort in spotting keywords to understand the motivations behind this new system, instead of jargons.

The second half is a brief overview of the new system, but only two lines are relevant to what I was looking for.

     It’s filled with features that improve interactions, including functions that show the best comments first,
     ignore specific users, find great commenters, give badges to staff members, filter out unreliable flaggers, 
     and offer a range of audience reactions.
Then the rest of the bullet points are the usual "privacy" and "open source" speech which of course are important nonetheless. So I still don't have my answers (also badges system is really an unnecessary feature for a commentary system, espeically at the scale of a news site like WaPo).

I suggest next time the writer should:

* tell readers the challenges/flaws in existing system concretely and perhaps showing examples

* the finding from their research participants, the hypothesis ,and how they conducted their experiments

* explain concretely how the proposed system will help address the prominent flaws and issues

This perhaps should turn into a research paper, but even as a blog post it should have more substances. At best, this article feels like a company quarterly performance announcement, which I just scan for keywords and move on, then I forget about all of it. So, what is the point of reading this anyway? README would have been far more interesting. I am disappointed.

----

Anyway, I don't really read comments on news sites. I can't explain why exactly but I feel disconnected and buried (much like what @creagpatr said about fixed commentary). I'd rather go on FB and comment there, even though there is a fairly good chance no one can read mine. Perhaps the social part of FB feels more lively and often comments are funny as hell. Yes, I know that comments on FB are just as echo chamber as many other places do.

There is a site allows people to take side and debate to death. I forgot the name though...

Post reply on HN