[David Mertz] > I have absolutely no interest in any system that arranges comments in > anything but related thread and chronological order. I DO NOT want any > rating or evaluation of comments of any kind other than my own evaluation > based on reading them. Well, also in reading the informed opinions of other > readers.
I would find it useless if not actively counterproductive to follow any > system where such ratings of comments existed. Then just sort by chronological order. On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:19 PM David Mertz <me...@gnosis.cx> wrote: > I have absolutely no interest in any system that arranges comments in > anything but related thread and chronological order. I DO NOT want any > rating or evaluation of comments of any kind other than my own evaluation > based on reading them. Well, also in reading the informed opinions of other > readers. > > I would find it useless if not actively counterproductive to follow any > system where such ratings of comments existed. > > There is one property that every system invented to supercede email have > in common. They are all dramatically worse in almost every way. > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019, 5:09 PM Abe Dillon <abedil...@gmail.com wrote: > >> [Dan Sommers] >> >>> Another point in favor of email clients over web pages is >>> that there are many of them, and *you* control the display >>> and other preferences rather than whoever wrote the forum >>> or owns the server. >> >> >> There is a tool called the Reddit Enhancement Suite or RES (and probably >> others) >> That lets you control a great deal of the display and other preferences, >> however; I'm not >> sure how that control compares to something like Thunderbird. >> >> One thing that's nice about Reddit is you can link to posts, so if you've >> already discussed something at length in another thread, >> you can simply refer to that discussion. >> >> [Dan Sommers] >> >>> In an optimal technical discussion, opinions from users >>> don't count for anything. The ideas stand on their own >>> merits and research and metrics; users only serve to >>> confirm the methodology. >> >> >> A lot can be said about how an ideal world would work. Ideally, we could >> define the meaning of life and good and evil and we wouldn't need this >> clumsy system of laws and courts to approximate the whole mess. >> >> I don't think it's that crazy to think that a voting system might >> approximate merit a little better than the timestamp on a post. >> It's not going to be perfect, but perfect shouldn't be the enemy of >> better. >> >> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 3:17 PM Dan Sommers < >> 2qdxy4rzwzuui...@potatochowder.com> wrote: >> >>> On 2/1/19 2:58 PM, Abe Dillon wrote: >>> > [Dan Sommers] >>> > >>> >> A mailing list is not a feed... Dan, a decades and decades long fan of >>> >> mailing lists and real email clients. >>> > >>> > >>> > I'm only familiar with Gmail which keeps reply chains coherent and >>> moves >>> > each chain to the top of my "forums" tab based on who responded last. >>> > I haven't explored the various email clients available, can you >>> suggest one? >>> >>> I used mutt for a long time, and then claws-mail, and now >>> thunderbird. They all met my needs, although I did give >>> up on claws-mail when I got a hidpi display (claws-mail >>> based on gtk2, which doesn't grok hidpi displays). >>> >>> Another point in favor of email clients over web pages is >>> that there are many of them, and *you* control the display >>> and other preferences rather than whoever wrote the forum >>> or owns the server. >>> >>> > [Dan Sommers] >>> > >>> >> 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. >>> Perhaps not all by itself. Many/most email clients allow >>> individual users to "score" emails by various criteria, and >>> then to display higher scoring messages "above" the others, >>> or not display certain messages at all. Personally, I don't >>> use the automated systems, but they're very comprehensive >>> (arguably too complicated), and again, *user* adjustable. >>> >>> In an optimal technical discussion, opinions from users >>> don't count for anything. The ideas stand on their own >>> merits and research and metrics; users only serve to >>> confirm the methodology. >>> >>> Dan >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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/ >> >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
