I’m busy with other things today, so an open thread is called for. I’m also asking readers to consider a question.
Topics from previous open threads are fair game, such as the poll on a climate skeptic society.
Some people have asked about threaded comments again. We’ve tried them before, and they weren’t popular…but maybe now that some other blogs have tried them (notably Judith Curry’s) perhaps people are more comfortable with the idea here.
The advantage of threaded comments is that replies to specific comments appear in context with them and it makes discussions easier because there is less scrolling involved. The disadvantage of threaded comments is that not everyone follows that convention, and some comments become orphans, way down at the bottom of the pile.
The difference is nested comments in context vs. one long linear string of comments.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I would like to ask people to comment on the limits that the warmists put on estimates of climate sensitivity, however defined. They somehow estimate a probability density function, (pdf) whatever that is, and seem to claim that this pdf is the equivalent to the sort of +/- values one gets when one makes a proper measurement. Do these limits have any meaning at all? I cannot understand how one can put limits on an estimate, or from what I can see, is actually little more than a guess.
The downside of threaded comments is that they encourage hijacking of a thread (or several threads). I realize that my claim might seem counterintuitive but my experience tells me that it is true.
I think WUWT has the best discussions on the web and it would be a mistake to change the format.
Unsure. They’re OK but you can’t tell when the comments were posted. if I was going to ever come up with a blog hosting website I would make the comments sortable on time. Why not have tab sort of thing like Windows Explore or Outlook where posts can be sorted on time, subject name, commenter name… I’ll share the profits…
The disadvantage of threaded comments is that not everyone follows that convention, and some comments become orphans, way down at the bottom of the pile.
I find that disadvantage to be a major one. It also results in trolls more easily hijacking threads. you wind up with these long strings of two people screaming “did not” and “did to” at each other and you have to scroll through them to find new comments worth considering. I find threaded comments to be very disruptive to the flow of the discussion, particularly on posts with large numbers of comments.
My experience on Climate Etc (where only one indent level is allowed) is that it’s worse than a straight list where ppl can quote as well as link the date-stamp and permalink if they wish.
Theading at C.E gives the impression of threading without actually achieving it.
If there were several levels it may work better.
I attempted a discussion with John Kennedy following my article on HadSST. With the best will on both sides it was an uphill struggle to follow even our own comments. On several occasions we just broke of and started again at the bottom.
Reply notification may help but with high volume sites like CE and WUWT, you’d want to be feeling really lonesome before turning on comment notification.
I find both formats good and bad. I want the choice.
In the 21st century, is it really too difficult to allow the user to set the option? Come on WordPress!
That reminded me – time to make a donation to WUWT. Come on lads, it’s worth the price of a pint every now and then, isn’t it?
there is less scrolling involved.
====
we’re all pretty good with copy and paste….
….no need for threaded at all
..for all of the above reasons
But here’s my – somewhat political – Open Thread question: When the asylum seekers have reduced their chosen countries of asylum into the piles of dust and rubble from which they sought asylum: where will they go next?
I voted no
But I would ask if possible to put the latest comments on top and not at the bottom to reduce scrolling required if you want to reply with a phone device
Alternatively
It would be great if the reader could chose whether last comment on top or first comment on top
If that were possible
As background: While I’m skeptical about AGW, I don’t follow the issue too closely.
The way I think of the starting point issue (“Is there global warming?”) is something like this: temperatures have probably been higher than usual in the 1990s and 2000s but not as alarming as the very spiky hockey-sticks.
When I put this to a friend recently, he said that Mann’s hockey stick has been confirmed by the “PAGES 2K” study and pointed me to this link: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/08/2261531/most-comprehensive-paleoclimate-reconstruction-confirms-hockey-stick/#
Searching, I found a post on Climate Audit that questioned some data used in the PAGES-2K study.
So, my question is: was the hockey-stick right after all? not right, but not that off after all? or what?
Is there any post that refutes the arguments made in the thinkprogress post to which I linked?
thanks for any pointers to a newbie
I don’t understand the question – how will it change from the present thread??
I think threads are helpful for focusing discussion, but I also like the occasional open thread as it facilitates discussion of issues not raised by Anthony or guest commenters when setting up a thread on a given point.
I opposed, because it makes it easier for trolls to hijack threads as others above had noted. I’ve seen comment threads on sites that have nothing to do with science or climate get hijacked by global warming fraud proponents. A lot of them self-identify (“Where did you get that – Fox News?”), but they also follow the radical left pattern of debating ad nauseum over trifles, avoiding relies and going off on tangents. The bottom line for a web site without deep pockets is that both greater bandwidth and full time comment policing are needed.
No, no, a thousand times no. (It would be easier if figured out how to game the poll….)
In those other blogs, I tend to visit them fairly occasionally, and like the threaded format there.
WUWT is special – I have a Firefox window just for WUWT. The first tab is for the home page and links to recent posts. Other tabs are for each active post I’m following. To get up to date, I reload that page, and the the oldest comment I have read is right there to read. Then I scan down to the bottom and am all set for the next update later in the day.
If WUWT switched to threaded displays, I’m not sure what I would do. Probably read each post one a day or write a python script to convert things to the time line (and discard the trolls). Hmm. That would be useful. I could highlight comments from people proven to post quality, just display a couple lines from the riffraff….
Okay, it’s a plan. Still a thousand times no!
What I don’t like about threaded comments is that you can’t find the new comments easily. With a site like this, where there are sometimes hundreds of comments, it’s easy to scroll down to where you last were, going by date and time, but threaded comments would mean having to examine them all again in hunt for that extra. Not just once, either, but again and again. I pop in here a lot and enjoy following the conversation. It would mean starting from scratch each time, which I won’t always do, so I (for one) will miss a lot of it. It will be frustrating. I vote no.
I vote no on the change. Horrible idea, IMO.
I understand the reason some like threaded comments but I have found them to be a net detriment. It maybe good for the particular conversation participants but it ends up burying new comments requiring more scrolling in order to check to see if new comments have appeared.
It’s next to impossible to easily check for new comments.
I have people ask me if I saw their reply in a thread and say no for that reason.
I had not scrolled down to check every conversation. And some require you to expand the thread for more comments to check.
I always recommend posting a new comment vs reply to others.
Simply refer to the comment you are replying to just as WUWT has been.
Otherwise your discussion gets buried and ends up being a private debate because all of the new visits have no idea it is taking place. How would they unless they checked the entire stream.
The root of the question is that there are people that make no effort to read ALL of the replies/responses/retorts before adding their own. I like things just the way that they are. And thank y’all for this most pleasant forum.
I voted “no”. If it ain’t broke,…..
I have spent a lot of time at threaded Climate Etc and threaded CA. I have spent a lot of time here at unthreaded WUWT and also at unthreaded BH and Blackboard.
I prefer the unthreaded format. It is a simple flowing read.
I voted to keep WUWT the way it is; unthreaded.
John
I voted NO.
It has already been tried on WUWT for a while and, in my opinion, was not an improvement.
I had read somewhere that if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increased the temps wouldn’t, because the amount of CO2 that is already in the atmosphere has already reached it max heat trapping potential. Is that correct? (apologies for the unscientific terminology).
Threaded commenting at Judy Curry’s site is poor, only allowing one level of depth. This can help a little. Jo Nova has threading down on her site. If you do implement this feature, please emulate Jo Nova.
BTW, thanks for putting the “Recent Posts” sidebar near the top, and expanding the number of entries. It makes finding a recent article that’s a few days old, much easier.
Leigh, Re saturation of CO2. I suggest you read an expert, Roy Spencer. Go to http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/04/skeptical-arguments-that-dont-hold-water/ and read 5.