On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Azalais Aranxta <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, chasy wrote: > > > I also think the collapse feature is a better remedy than > > force-cut. Just my two cents. :) > > Collapse is much more awesome than force-cut, and I was > exaggerating slightly when I said "three paragraphs" (although I > know some people who write REALLY long paragraphs). > > But the only time I ever had to break a post up into multiple > posts on LJ (for Lightningwar) it was 38 pages long in my word > processor. It fit into two posts with no problem. > > You can get 16-20 single spaced pages of 12 point text with > fairly small margins into a single LJ post, and DW posts can be > even longer than that. > > Can you imagine what a post that size would do to your reading > page, uncut? Particularly if it was written by someone who was > very angry about some controversial topic and wanted to MAKE YOU > READ IT OMG? That's THEIR decision as the writer of the post. Not your decision as a single reader. You, as a reader, have existing choices: 1) Scroll. 2) Comment and ask the writer to cut the text. 3) Create a reading filter that doesn't include the writer. 4) Unsubscribe from the writer's journal. I am 95% against auto-cutting of text entries, no matter what they say and no matter why the writer didn't cut them. (The 5% is for accessibility; I can believe it'd be difficult to work around for a variety of reasons.) However, I do like the option for readers to collapse an entry (to the writer's username and the timestamp on the post) on their reading page and theirs alone -- in my imagination it works like Gmail messages in a conversation. > There really is a point at which there should be a force-cut, > because otherwise there will be unnecessary > defriending/unsubscribing. Even if you totally agree with me > about $ISSUE, even if it's fic and it's the best one you ever > read, do you really want 30+ pages of text on your reading page > in a single post? > Look, *I don't care* how long it is. The way I read my flist, I generally *want* all those long posts in their full textual glory on that page. I don't want to have to click a cut to keep going. It's the writer's choice how to present that text. It's the reader's choice whether to adapt the writer's presentation. I think that Dreamwidth as a service should give the reader *options*, but stay away from forcing the writer into certain modes of presentation. How hypocritical is it to say "Here, have x-thousand characters of writing space, but your readers are only ever going to see the first 140 characters before being forced to click a cut. CHOOSE WISELY"? ~ Rachel -- http://www.lastsyllable.net http://bohemianeditor.dreamwidth.org This is not the sig you're looking for.
_______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
