4 ms·
The problem with aggregating comments is that it degrades the quality of discussion, and therefore, the community. There's no depth, no flow. Backtype does th
by blehn 16y ago
The problem with aggregating comments is that it degrades the quality of discussion, and therefore, the community. There's no depth, no flow. Backtype does the aggregation thing, but I find it just looks like noise.
Maybe there's a better way, but I've yet to see something better than the type of 5-10 level deep conversations that happen on reddit/HN.
- Volscio 16y agoI agree with you. But maybe the aggregation isn't for more conversation (people like to do that within their trusted communities), but to enable better filtering. That is, you could have a rough total count of interest in a topic. Then you could label comments different things like "funny", "anecdote", "primary source", "trolling", etc. So if I just want to read the funniest comments, I could. If I wanted to get more context from on the ground, I could select "primary source" or whatever. Not sure why this isn't done already...I'm sure enough random commenters would categorize comments on their own to make it useful.