I miss the old site with comments on the same page

When I’m slouched on the sofa with only a phone to hand, only a phone will do :slight_smile:

(I’m still here, lurking!)

My four cents: Why not put a ‘quick comment’ box on the same page? That way anyone who feels only a weak urge to speak up will have their opportunity to bypass the barrier to entry.

1 Like

So I used to comment in here daily. For a long time. Then, like an unexpected rockslide, they changed the comment system. I kept lurking, but never joined back in again.

Until today. I still can’t figure this thing out. Can we have an alternate-universe Boing Boing for dumb guys, with the other comment system back. like right now someone else is typing the exact same thing as me in the right box. I can’t compete with that guy. He’s too fast and smart and yes I hated Disqus but at least I got it. It was like instant snarkification, I’m going to stomp that dude on the right, really, stop it, you’re not being funny copying me like that…

Yeah, I agree 1000%. The cogent/funny/provocative discussions were always a significant part of what made BB such a unique and enjoyable site. The new non-threaded & techy-ingroup-only system is really irritating. I haven’t been accused of being dumb all that often in my life (curmudgeonly, yes), but I feel both deliberately excluded and kind of stupid having to work so hard just to find and follow a discussion now.

I’ve often wondered what the REAL reason behind the switch was. I used to check BB a couple of times every day, but now find that days pass before I even remember to read it. Just doesn’t seem worth the effort now – sad.

9 Likes

To be fair, Disqust was horrible.

1 Like

Start another ‘meta’ thread… I tried with “Bbs = BS; Quality of discussion plummets” and it soon went way off-topic.
This unthreaded bbs option is more and more frustrating to me… the ridiculous::
“Best Of : There are 159 posts in this topic. That’s a lot! Would you like to save time by showing only the best posts?”
option is insulting; so I work my way through; scrolling up & down to follow replies or clicking ‘in reply to’ and having the whole presentation shift.
AARGH!!!

3 Likes

+1. Without the threaded commenting, its no longer a discussion. Its still fun reading from some of the smartest people on the planet, but its lost so much since the transition. I gather the people building this new commenting system have some sort of ideological objection to threaded commenting, but I’m hoping they see that an ideas-based website like BoingBoing has much different requirements than a fact-based website like StackOverflow.

The first time I used a non-threaded, jump-between-comments forum was on another site. it was confusing and intimidating to me, but once I started using it, I greatly preferred it.

this is a forum for a website for people who think a bit differently. Every member of the editorial staff are outspoken in their love for utility and good design. They can also code, and a majority of the sites users do, too (for the record, I don’t code.) Calling them the “techy ingroup” is missing the point. This is a site on the internet, in large part about the internet. The internet is links. your mind is links. this forum maximizes the potential of linking conversation(s) in different ways. It sacrifices some little traditions in trade for increased utility. A lot of drivers prefer a stick, but learning is always intimidating. (yes, I made a computer/car analogy. sorry.)

but… it shifts back to where you were when you click the little arrow.

i get that it’s jarring to you, but you do understand why it is used, right? I can explain it, or any other questions, if you want.

also, you can practice using Discourse in the sandbox, too.

1 Like

No, this system is designed to weed out dumb guys, people with poor design sense, and anyone who finds disruptive trolls disruptive. I’m about done myself. Seems like what the owners want.

I guess it weeded me out. I’m just not sponge-worthy.

I still love the content on this site though. I miss the banter with people on the same page as the stories. You new youngn’s are too smart. I wish I was not so crotchedy…

I’ll stick to my Cricket phone and Netscape browser now. But, still read every line of the front page. BB rocks. Discourse, IMO, is on the same track as Spoke and Friendster.

1 Like

You do realise, by the time you change anything, everyone will have got used to the clunky implementation, and will, predictably, go acka and moan again, right? Though what you’ve touched upon sounds very interesting. Discourse is obviously something extremely powerful, but it’s got some sharp edges you can catch your shins on still. But hey.

Well, it kind of made it stand out that folks’ arguments got narrower & narrower… :wink: Discourse is less of a fanny-on to check who’s been saying what in older convos, because of the bbs nature, I’ll give it that.

First off, I want to start off by thanking Jeff Atwood (@codinghorror) and the Discourse team for working on open source forum software. I really enjoy stackoverflow and I’m sure with time, Discourse’s kinks will be worked out.

I’ve been long time lurker on boingboing and I just wanted to add my 2 cents on what things can be improved. People are making arguments for Threaded vs Single Thread, when in reality I think they’re arguing about context or lack thereof (what was I reading, and what I’m responding to) vs scannability/relevance (is this post important? is it a pun or some trolls arguing with each other?).

Retaining context, is traditionally solved by using threads, or at least 1-level threading. While the latter can usually be alleviated with a reputation system and self moderation by the community (upvoting) and flagging for moderation rather than downvoting to avoid trollish behavior. (No downvoting also since, in a lot of cases there isn’t a right or wrong answer when talking about non-science related items).

Here’s an example of what I’m seeing when I’m reading this thread. It’s very pretty, but I lose context of what I’m reading about. Sometimes I click to see replies, and then am confused when I reread the post further down the line. The time stamp should be sufficient enough to let me know when that post occurred. Since they’re responding to someone, it just clutters up the rest of the thread when it shows up as a new thought. It shouldn’t be as important as a new idea responding to the main topic. They may have started a tangent conversation talking about how unicorns tears are the best, when the original thread was about tribbles in space.

I think the Kinja commenting system that Gawker uses, may have a few insights in keeping a conversation flat, and yet contained. It isn’t the best UI but I think they have a lot of things going for them. For starters I can quickly scan each sub topic and get a general feel for what that conversation is about. I may only see the first three responses, but usually that’s enough. If I’m interested I can expand the conversation. Also, even though they only support 1-level threading you can respond to other people than the thread starter. Chronological order generally only matters most in the context of a single thread, and when you have >100 posts it just becomes a mess when you try to retain it for everything. Good content can come before or after or in the middle of a huge comment thread, so letting good content bubble up at the cost of order isn’t that big of a deal.

To give you another example, think of how good content is bubbled up in stackoverflow. Upvotes by the masses, and what the question author thinks is correct. Does time matter that much in stackoverflow? Should time matter that much in a forum that is being used as a commenting system?

2 Likes

But for the love of god PLEASE don’t start using the bizzarro two column comment thing thing they have going on there. In whose mind does that make sense?

1 Like

Two columns wasn’t the point (I also find it slightly weird). It was about how Kinja keeps 1-level deep conversations separate from other thoughts. You can scan, and then expand conversations if you find them interesting.

The only good thing about Gawker’s commenting system is that it’s so horrible it puts you off reading the comments.

1 Like

Oh I totally get that, I was just saying that the 2 column thing is like the opposite of what makes sense to me, thus I expect to see @codinghorror implement is any day now.

1 Like

Two column design, comin’ right up!

But seriously the two column design is really really horrible. Kinja is awful, though I have seen it in single column mode (on iPad?) and it’s not bad there.

If you are seeing disruptive driving trollies, please flag it.

I think proper chronological order is absolutely essential to understanding any conversation. Re-ordering people’s statements by vote would be incredibly disruptive to a conversation.

Hello,

I have to say I really enjoyed reading this message thread.

The last time I did any ‘serious’ coding was when OS/2 Version 3 and Windows 95 were new operating systems—and I wasn’t particularly good at it, back then—but one thing I do recall is that some BBSes had options to view messages both in a threaded and non-threaded context. And that feature seems to have replicated across web-based mailing list archives and even other web forums in which I participate.

Now, my personal preference is for non-threaded, because I typically like to read everything in a conversation, but I certainly understand that message threading is a very individualized experience, like what type of keyboard or mouse a person likes.

So, maybe, just maybe, because the Discourse software is open source, someone can contribute code to add a threaded/non-threaded view option, with the view control available at a user level. That way, everyone’s happy. Or, at least, happier.

Personally, as far as annoyance level goes, I feel far more constrained by not being able to sign my posts

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

like I do every single other place on the web, because that’s how I’ve been doing things since back in the dark ages of BBSes, but by participating in this community, I did agree to abide by its rules, so there you have it.

1 Like