4 ms·
There are similarities here to the adblocking debate, in terms of having to load 3rd party scripts. Disqus, FB etc - load through another request once the page
by danpeddle 11y ago
There are similarities here to the adblocking debate, in terms of having to load 3rd party scripts. Disqus, FB etc - load through another request once the page is up and running, degrading the experience. Removing these parts will mean a quicker web, if as others have mentioned, at the cost of less immediate interaction.
Vice seem to have correctly identified that the quality of that discussion (and the branding) was not adding much to their content. Thumbs up for trying something different.
- throwaway7767 11y agoI think this is a great idea. I've mostly learned to ignore comments sections precisely because the S/N ratio is so low. Now, given the decline in quality recently, one can only hope VICE employs the moderation tactic to their own articles too...
- oneeyedpigeon 11y agoPersonally, I think third-party comment widgets are a terrible idea: security/privacy issues, page weight, loss of ownership of content, homogenisation, etc. It's interesting commenting about the quality of comments on a site that is nothing but. Maybe Hacker News, etc. is the future, although I'd like to think that on-site and off-site comments can co-exist (and for 'off-site' read twitter, facebook, etc.) The problem with all the off-site options is that you have to know they exist. At least on-site comments provide a fixed, available 'place' for discussion to take place. I have a feeling the solution is just better moderated comments sections. Many sites just chuck up a form and auto-publish anything entered into it; that might work at really small scale, but soon descends into chaos once a critical mass is reached. One day, I think, more comment sections will looks like mini-HNs.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago> homogenisation That one wouldn't be actually bad if people stuck to good solutions in terms of usability. I mean, half of the forum boards on the Internet would be an order of magnitude better if the owners started them as a subreddit instead.
- oneeyedpigeon 11y agoYeah, I agree. I think I didn't actually mean homogenisation; more like "ghettoisation". I'm really referring to the fact that you have to have a disqus account to voice your opinion on quite a few unrelated sites.
- gipp 11y agoNot sure I agree; to be honest I miss old-style discussion boards, since they seem to have phased out in favor of Reddit-style aggregation and comments. I think there's a place for both, but the Reddit-style boards make every discussion ephemeral. No matter how interesting the topic or diverse the discussion, it's gone and forgotten in 2 days at most. On old-school boards, a major thread of discussion can last for months, or longer. Plus there's something to be said for a chronological presentation of posts. Yeah, trolls get more exposure, but it also means everyone sees every view (up to whatever the moderation policy of the site is), so you don't get the Reddit hivemind effect nearly as much.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoI think I agree with your sentiment. I should have been more precise; I don't think all discussions should be done in an ephemeral, upvote-based format, but threaded discussion would be a big improvement for most of the old-style boards I participated in. Also, Reddit UI strikes the right balance between simplicity and functionality. Most boards are overloaded UI-wise.