Great thread
1 Like
tags could lead to this kind of automated view:
http://www.marketwatch.com/tools/stockresearch/marketmap
Not, obviously, a financial diagram! But if those boxes were say the top 300 keywords, and the major topics (religion, civil liberties, constitution, bananas) were the big boxes, that might be cool. Then a time horizon selector and bingo.
I saw an implementation more interesting than this (which I havenât looked at in 5 years - amazing how a good thing sticks around) for I think theeconomist.com topics under discussion. It had kind of moving bubbles representing whatâs going on right now.
Everything from twitter to reddit to hacker news to metafilter works, essentially, as a comment forum where discussion is on âanother tabâ to the original URL. Itâs the default nature of the web â one thing hyperlinked to, rather than appended to, another.
This is why Iâm convinced that these problems are local UI problems (e.g. hidden links from BB posts to BBS at one end, and the ugly auto-posts that start discourse threads at the other) rather than issues of fundamental healthiness.
It would work better if whatever site the BB editor was linking to was also linked to from here, not just the BB article.
3 Likes
Thatâs a good point. And actually, that makes me want the capability to merge any arbitrary comment stream into the main source for viewing (there must be some software that already does that).
Is there a possibility I could have the option of forcing my preference for threaded view, like comments were presented in Discus?
And, why does this message keep appearing:
âWelcome to Boing Boing BBS â thanks for contributing to the conversation!
Does your reply improve the conversation in some way, however small?
Be kind to your fellow community members.
Constructive criticism is welcome, but remember to criticize ideas, not people.
For more guidance, see our FAQ. This panel will only appear for your first 2 posts.â
You are a basic user, that should not be showing up cc @eviltrout
1 Like
That is an excellent idea.
I think the word is maybe too fancy, but thereâs an ecological puzzle in this.
If the BB post stands alone in its own rightâdue to its own commentary, criticism or originalityâthen the BBS OP should link to the BB post without worrying too much about the BB postâs own links being reposted. If theyâre needed for context, theyâll get posted (as they often do on Reddit and HN) anyway.
But if the BB post was just a link and a quote and âgo read thisâ, then that original link should be posted here.
In fact, thinking it through, perhaps short posts shouldnât really have their own permalink at BB at all, since theyâre just links. Short, single-paragraph, linky posts at BB should really pretty much just exist here at BBS instead? Or, at least, be reproduced in full here as the OP.
6 Likes
A âjust AJAX in the damned comments from Discourse, dammitâ button could be the final cherry on top of this when BBS is so perfect you wonât want it.
Concur, the only time I object to clicking through is when the original post is crazy short and little more than a link to another site.
Per connecting a BB post and the corresponding BBS commentary: I havenât found a good way to transit from a comment in âFrom our Forumsâ on the post page and the corresponding comment in BBS. Sometimes a selected comment in FoF replies to another BBS comment (that hasnât been included in FoF). So Iâd like to be able to jump to the selected comment in its BBS incarnation, to see what itâs replying to.
1 Like
Great point, we will add the proper link.
Itâs intriguing how BBâers are responding to user posts.
Iâve just read one on racism that I had imagined would cause a stir. Didnât - hardly any views, Iâm the first responder. Yet the âGrandpaâs ghost booksâ post garnered tons of views and response (I loved the post btw!)
Are BBâers resting in nostalgia?
Also, I read one post, maybe a response to something (canât spot it) with c. 75 clicks on the link inserted, but one like. That means either a lot of visitors are popping through, or BBâers arenât recognising eachother.
Then again, Iâve seen some extremely funny and interesting posts / responses get high likes - maybe the bar has simply gone up!
There is something a little off-putting about the heart. I wince and click it anyway. More adjusting. Did not realize how un-flexible I am or have become.
3 Likes
I know. But I love you anyway.
2 Likes
Iâm really finding it irritation to try and follow threads on the new system, too. I can read direct replies under a post by uncollapsing them (but then I have to scroll past them again later, which means Iâm double-reading every other later post in a topic - annoying) but I canât really follow replies to replies.
Thatâs my major peeve with the new system. I miss follow-able conversations. 
2 Likes
Apparently, the problem is you; you just donât get it: It looks like a threaded view, but it ainât
3 Likes
Just saw that thread. Ignoring all perceived tonal issues, I found that thread disheartening. I use Twitter and I can follow the discussions to the extent that I need to, but Iâve always liked following more in-depth threads on Boing Boing and Twitter isnât designed for that type of back-and-forth. And neither is BB anymore, I guess?
Still gonna try though but Iâm finding the reading-the-same-thing-twice thing so irritating that Iâm generally not clicking the reply links on a post, preferring to wait until I come across the replies naturally later on in the post, even though itâs not at all clear what theyâre replying to when I come across them down there.
2 Likes
Yes. Tis a shame, cos as other people mentioned, I found the most interesting things in the comments. I feel BB dropping off my radar a bit.
1 Like
Click on the âin reply toâ button to get the needed context.
