3 ms·
I believe all of that can be done just as well if not better with a traditional comment section like the one here on hn. My other issue is that the conversation
by yreg 4y ago
I believe all of that can be done just as well if not better with a traditional comment section like the one here on hn. My other issue is that the conversation is very difficult to follow since it's split into many threads.
>it becomes more clear what specific parts of a discussion are especially engaging, confusing, interesting, etc. People can comment or respond to specific parts of the thread
Quoting solves this.
Obviously Twitter works for you, which I find enlightening since up until now I thought that the experience is subpar for everyone and the reason long form content is posted on twitter is purely because it's easier to spread it around. Clearly there's more to it.
- dredmorbius 4y agoFor what it's worth, I don't use Twitter. My comments above are based on my experience writing, reading, responding to, and otherwise interacting with and observing longer toot threads ("tootstorms" on Mastodon, comparable to "tweetstorms" on Twitter). And are compared with experiences on numerous other platforms and systems, ranging from Usenet to HN, and in particular including Reddit, G+, Diaspora*, and Mastodon. Mastodon is a rough Twitter analogue. It tends to give a broader exposure than forum-based or friend-based (e.g., Google+, specific subreddits) forums. And again, in particular what I observe is people responding to specific toots within a longer stream in a way that's simply not evident in other formats. It's not an unallowed good. It is a notable characteristic of the format, however. Some examples are hashtagged through my profile (though this link doesn't seem to be working at the moment): <https://toot.cat/@dredmorbius/tagged/tootstorm https://toot.cat/@dredmorbius/tagged/tootstorm> As an alternative, try: <https://toot.cat/web/tags/tootstorm https://toot.cat/web/tags/tootstorm>