4 ms·

I, for one, appreciate that he did not actually derail the conversation.

• kbenson 12y ago
  Conversations are threaded here. It's not like we are limited to one or a few channels of active communication at a time on this, like when speaking with a group of people. It's very easy to carry on multiple conversations at once and keep track, and only slightly harder to keep track while reading (and that can be mitigated more through one of the numerous browser extensions that add more features to HN, such as collapsing threads). I'm not sure it's possible to derail a conversation here, they just naturally splinter into multiple aspects and tangents, which take differing amounts of time to run to their conclusion. An strong argument can probably be made about how the larger conversations on a page may reduce involvement in some other conversations, but I'm not sure I buy that it's necessarily a bad thing without careful consideration of the pros and cons, and wouldn't classify it as derailment.
  • saraid216 12y ago
    > (and that can be mitigated more through one of the numerous browser extensions that add more features to HN, such as collapsing threads) Yes, you have to be a power-user on HN to not be derailed. Not a UX person, are you?
    • kbenson 12y ago
      If you had quoted my entire sentence, and not just one portion out of context, your statement would be a non-sequitur.
      • saraid216 12y ago
        Your parenthetical is actually a necessary condition for the rest of your sentence to be true.