[Chris Angelico] > Maybe not, but it's consistent. You can easily scan through a thread > in the order it was posted.
That's true in the case of a subreddit conversation too. I wouldn't suggest a system that doesn't let you see the whole conversation. You can order comments by post-time if you think that's relevant for whatever reason. [Chris Angelico] > Anything that allows things to be upvoted > above other things specifically encourages you to read only the > most-upvoted answers. Anything presented in a list format specifically encourages you to read only the things at the top of the list. I haven't read discussions from 2012 because they're way down the list and I only joined python-ideas recently. A voting system is simply an attempt to make sure the stuff at the top of the list is more relevant than the stuff at the bottom. [Chris Angelico] > it does not work for extended discussions (which is why SO specifically > discourages extended discussions in comments). Why not? I've seen it work many times for extended discussions just fine. [Chris Angelico] > Got any ideas for a "merit-based" ordering? Yes, a voting system. [Chris Angelico] > Or: got any definition of "merit" that would actually be useful to this > style of discussion? No. Merit is very hard to define, but again, there are subreddits with well curated discussions and in those subreddits, the voting system seems to be a decent approximation for merit. Even in less well-curated subreddits, the voting system seems to be a decent approximation to merit. I mean, the platform exists. We don't have to rely solely on theory in hypothetical land. It's kind-of like discussing whether an encyclopedia based on user-generated content could ever be useful. It's not even hard to make a subreddit. On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 3:06 PM Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:59 AM Abe Dillon <abedil...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Whoever posted last ends up at the bottom of the thread, so that I can > >> read threads from top to bottom in chronological order. Getting the > >> last word in shouldn't earn a spot at the top of the list. > > > > > > That doesn't like any closer an approximation to a merit-based solution > to me. > > > > Maybe not, but it's consistent. You can easily scan through a thread > in the order it was posted. Anything that allows things to be upvoted > above other things specifically encourages you to read only the > most-upvoted answers. That works for Stack Overflow, since individual > answers are meant to be coherent and self-contained, and have their > own comments threads; it does not work for extended discussions (which > is why SO specifically discourages extended discussions in comments). > > Got any ideas for a "merit-based" ordering? Or: got any definition of > "merit" that would actually be useful to this style of discussion? > > ChrisA > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > Python-ideas@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
