3 ms·
I'm aware that this behaviour is somewhat "popular" on HN, to make their comment kind-of "stand above all other's", but I'm not sure if that is actually a good
by vog 9y ago
I'm aware that this behaviour is somewhat "popular" on HN, to make their comment kind-of "stand above all other's", but I'm not sure if that is actually a good idea.
The authors of those comments almost certainly won't notice your reply if it is in a new thread. And the others (like myself) are confused as soon as your fuzzy reference becomes more and more ambiguous.
- Sir_Cmpwn 9y agoI mean, that's not really the purpose of my comment. The purpose is more that I don't want to copy+paste my comment on the 30 different negative threads, nor do I think I should.
- vog 9y agoIndeed, it's a pity that discussion threads are trees rather than DAGs. In email and usenet, you can specify multiple entries in the "References" header, to theoretically you can refer to multiple parent messages. (Alas, that header isn't actually used for that purpose, but just to refer to parent, grantparent, etc. to have some redundancy in case of an incomplete archive or partially-private discussions.)