Freedom comments! Or "each according to merit"
There is nothing sadder in the world than the life cycle of a comment. It does not even matter where he began his existence, in the privileged underbelly blogs or in the general carriage of the forum thread. Sooner or later, as a brick, it will be immured in the mass of its own kind in the wall of communication obstruction.
How long will this continue, citizens? Why break into a cake, at least set forth in the comment amazing revelations, anyway, the chances of independent existence he will have zero, or almost zero?
At the most, on the page with comments, links will be added and search engines will begin to give it out as deeply relevant. But these are search engines, and the society itself, the system itself, in which this non-diamond diamond has appeared, will show zero attention. Well, except that the compassionate will put a dozen advantages - a pathetic price for genius.
')
Why in progressive systems like Habr a good post emerges and is exhibited by the masses, and the good comment gets the role of Cinderella (in its pre-slipper stage)?
Yes, they made it so that the “bad” comments collapse (to be honest, the effect is the opposite, personally I always watch them. I suppose that the others too).
But what to do with the "good" comments?
I have been thinking about this for quite a long time, and here is the thought.
And what if the good comments show exactly as beautiful as a blog entry? At least in the tape announcements. Thus, a good comment will receive additional exposure and additional traffic. This is the first.
Secondly , when moving from the announcement of such a commentary, position the attention on it, and not on the root message. Reddit has such an option (see the picture) - to show a branch on a separate page, it looks extremely logical, and does not show any peripheral information noise.
Thus, we receive an injection of attention exactly inside the tree of communication, and increase the effectiveness of the focus comment.
Yes, there is a danger that such a comment or message will still look taken out of context and still have to look through the history of the discussion, which means that a significant proportion of readers will not understand what it is, and will not be able to engage in communication.
Here we come to the third point, I would say to the key in the struggle for the life of our comments.
Generally speaking, a commentary claiming an independent existence should be as self-sufficient as possible. That is, it must contain or coexist with the digest of the previous discussion so that the reader has a minimal need to unscrew the communication tape to the parent messages.
If contain, it will resemble an English fairy tale, remember:
And this is a funny bird tit
Which often steals wheat,
Which is stored in a dark closet
In the House,
Which is built by Jack.
etc.
You tell me - some kind of nonsense. And you will be right.
Why an accurate, good, brilliant comment to drag the load of the old context ?! So you need another solution - coexist .
I have two sentences:
1. Let it be an opportunity to look at the discussion tape in the "bird flight" mode. That is, a kind of strategic view - only the strongest * (highlighted important phrases) and announcements of very positive comments (I wrote about it here ). You can algorithmically limit the number of messages in a window, say, to 10-12, that is, leave the most characteristic. We get a kind of automated digest of the history of our focal comment.
2. Let, besides the writer / reader roles, there will be another role of the “Digest”, that is, a person who from time to time briefly captures the achieved positions of his interlocutors. For this, the digest will receive fat pluses in karma, and it is clear for what - he does the work of a "medic of the discussion tail".
* A little about strongs . This is an opportunity for a non-author to emphasize / highlight meaningful phrases in a message. When the message is expanded, they are not visible (why spoil the style given by the author). But if the message is minimized to show a bird's flight mode, then it is these highlights or strong lines that are visible . Essentially these are headlines.
Thus, in order to equalize the Comment in the rights with the Post, we must:
1. Learn to direct traffic to decent comments. That is, to give additional exposure.
2. To provide such comments with the demonstration interface that is as clean as possible from neighbors in the tree. At a minimum, start a page with a focus comment.
3. To enable the reader to quickly determine the context for the appearance of a comment, that is, to give access to a manual digest or view of the comment and the previous “bird's-eye” discussion.
Why am I writing all this? I am looking for constructive interlocutors. The task of creating an ideal system of communication is much broader than the problems described here.
How long will this continue, citizens? Why break into a cake, at least set forth in the comment amazing revelations, anyway, the chances of independent existence he will have zero, or almost zero?
At the most, on the page with comments, links will be added and search engines will begin to give it out as deeply relevant. But these are search engines, and the society itself, the system itself, in which this non-diamond diamond has appeared, will show zero attention. Well, except that the compassionate will put a dozen advantages - a pathetic price for genius.
')
Why in progressive systems like Habr a good post emerges and is exhibited by the masses, and the good comment gets the role of Cinderella (in its pre-slipper stage)?
Yes, they made it so that the “bad” comments collapse (to be honest, the effect is the opposite, personally I always watch them. I suppose that the others too).
But what to do with the "good" comments?
I have been thinking about this for quite a long time, and here is the thought.
And what if the good comments show exactly as beautiful as a blog entry? At least in the tape announcements. Thus, a good comment will receive additional exposure and additional traffic. This is the first.
Secondly , when moving from the announcement of such a commentary, position the attention on it, and not on the root message. Reddit has such an option (see the picture) - to show a branch on a separate page, it looks extremely logical, and does not show any peripheral information noise.
Thus, we receive an injection of attention exactly inside the tree of communication, and increase the effectiveness of the focus comment.
Yes, there is a danger that such a comment or message will still look taken out of context and still have to look through the history of the discussion, which means that a significant proportion of readers will not understand what it is, and will not be able to engage in communication.
Here we come to the third point, I would say to the key in the struggle for the life of our comments.
Generally speaking, a commentary claiming an independent existence should be as self-sufficient as possible. That is, it must contain or coexist with the digest of the previous discussion so that the reader has a minimal need to unscrew the communication tape to the parent messages.
If contain, it will resemble an English fairy tale, remember:
And this is a funny bird tit
Which often steals wheat,
Which is stored in a dark closet
In the House,
Which is built by Jack.
etc.
You tell me - some kind of nonsense. And you will be right.
Why an accurate, good, brilliant comment to drag the load of the old context ?! So you need another solution - coexist .
I have two sentences:
1. Let it be an opportunity to look at the discussion tape in the "bird flight" mode. That is, a kind of strategic view - only the strongest * (highlighted important phrases) and announcements of very positive comments (I wrote about it here ). You can algorithmically limit the number of messages in a window, say, to 10-12, that is, leave the most characteristic. We get a kind of automated digest of the history of our focal comment.
2. Let, besides the writer / reader roles, there will be another role of the “Digest”, that is, a person who from time to time briefly captures the achieved positions of his interlocutors. For this, the digest will receive fat pluses in karma, and it is clear for what - he does the work of a "medic of the discussion tail".
* A little about strongs . This is an opportunity for a non-author to emphasize / highlight meaningful phrases in a message. When the message is expanded, they are not visible (why spoil the style given by the author). But if the message is minimized to show a bird's flight mode, then it is these highlights or strong lines that are visible . Essentially these are headlines.
Summary
Thus, in order to equalize the Comment in the rights with the Post, we must:
1. Learn to direct traffic to decent comments. That is, to give additional exposure.
2. To provide such comments with the demonstration interface that is as clean as possible from neighbors in the tree. At a minimum, start a page with a focus comment.
3. To enable the reader to quickly determine the context for the appearance of a comment, that is, to give access to a manual digest or view of the comment and the previous “bird's-eye” discussion.
Why am I writing all this? I am looking for constructive interlocutors. The task of creating an ideal system of communication is much broader than the problems described here.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/185442/
All Articles