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.
Nested comments work fine on the Guardian and Roy Spencer’s blog. They kinda work on Judith Curry’s site but look terrible. For me it’s the clear demarcation between responses and a new comment. I voted yes.
I also vote “nay.” The threads aren’t as long-lasting here because of the rapidity of the posts. If people want to respond to a comment up thread, just right click on the time and date stamp and then “copy link location.” Copy and paste. Or note the commenter’s name and time of comment to give other readers a hint as to what post you are responding to and where to find it.
I find most of the extended debates at CE boring. But I am a non-scientist who does not have the time to become thoroughly educated in climate science and related fields. I’m interested in this as history of an ideological/scientific process in the making.
“Unthreaded comments mean you have to work a little harder to follow an argument. ” Threaded comments make it almost impossible to locate the most recent comments, though, because instead of just going to the bottom, you need to check every single thread for new comments.
I encourage those who have voted “unsure” to read the comments, reconsider, and then vote again.
Here is the compromise I would suggest: NUMBERED comments. When replying to a comment some ways up, use comment number you are referring to.
If you want to see how well threaded comments work, just go to Jo Nova’s blog. Some observation evidence for people that are making comments about this that are not borne out in the real world.
PS even though the Guardian is garbage they have a superb commenting interface. You can format text, add hyperlinks, blockquote quickly. I not those functions on Jo Nova’s site. Can’t this be done for WUWT?
PS I was told once on WUWT that nested responses was tried once and was a disaster. This maybe the case but I don’t understand why it’s not a disaster on other sites. Jo Nova’s site is an example of a response format that works. I have no problems with it BUT I have to say the Guardian’s is the best. The only problem is they have a cut off line where comments beyond a certain number are hidden and require a click for more. Just some ideas.
That sounds like Amazon’s system, except that it provides links at both ends. But it’s probably proprietary.
The problem I have with threaded systems is that when I refresh the thread, the new comments aren’t prominently highlighted–so I have to reread the beginning of all the old comments.
Maybe only had out the right to make threaded comments to long-time, cool-headed commenters?
I think the current format works fine. I recall someone requesting the return of the ”Like” option. Sometimes I read a comment, and a ”Like” is often what I feel is an appropriate response to express my agreement with the comment.
I typically start reading the earliest comments (at the top please) after having at least perused the post, to get the gist of it. If I am goaded to comment on the post, I do so right away, otherwise, I read down to see what has gotten other folks’ goat; or someone gets mine. Then I comment on that. But I read on down, doing that till the list is reasonably long.
When I come back to a thread, I do the exact opposite. I start reading the latest comments to see if any discussions have developed; or perhaps my own comments, have led to loud guffaws, requiring me to learn what caused that.
I know at least one popular web site that is multithreaded. It works quite well. The site host doesn’t allow any dissention; but “differences of opinion” are ok. Dissention often leads to the entire thread being 86’d.
I voted no on threading at WUWT. The present T&D stamps serve to establish order of events.
Main gripe is too many posters fail to adequately distinguish between a cut and paste from someone else, and their own ruminations on it. So I can’t tell who said what.
Some people like to italicize; some go to bold. When I cut and paste any of those; they ALL revert to Henry Ford Black, and become indistinguishable.
But if WUWT went to something else, I’d probably change too; and probably in an unpredictable way; excuse me, that’s unprojectionable way !
I prefer that things be left as they are here. If I read an article on Dr. Spencer’s site and make 5 comments out of 300 before going to bed at night, there could be 500 comments next morning. And if I wanted to see if any responded to me, I would have to save my 5 items individually to check them out. As well, there could well be additional excellent comments to other comments that had nothing to do with my comments. So I would have to go over all 500 comments briefly to see which are new to be sure nothing new was missed.
But at WUWT, I just save the last comment on each post that interests me and I know I will not miss one that may have come over night or even over the next few days.
I also do like the way comments flow at JoNova’s site, learn a lot from the discussions. Not that you don’t get to do the same here it’s just that when the pros get onto a subject it would be nice to have them together. But I will leave it to the pros to decide.
Reply to John, I could be wrong but years ago plenty (Mike Reagan, Beck comes to mind) called Communist China’s situation similar to that of the end of the former USSR. That communism would collapse. Anyway, that’s what I get for re:talking points from a few economist’s I follow.
crosspatch says:
May 4, 2014 at 4:03 pm
“Here is the compromise I would suggest: NUMBERED comments. When replying to a comment some ways up, use comment number you are referring to”
Agree! Number the comments would also make it easier to find the place you left off. And yes I also read from the bottom up when coming back.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
WUWT ain’t broke.
I voted no.
Hi. A successful example (IMHO) of fora using “threaded comments” is the photographic review site DPREVIEW DOT COM. Very well laid out and easy to use. Whilst it is possible to “mispost” and respond to the wrong comment, in practice this is a very rare occurrence and as one of the ‘nets most popular photographic websites the vast majority of users appear to have no issue with the format.
The user is also offered a choice of “threaded” or “flat” views. Also of use is the feature that allows the user to assign a subject heading to their post/comment which can assist forum users in determining at a quick glance whether or not to read a given comment (due to relevance/interest). This feature assists greatly when perusing a post when limited reading time is available and one is able to sort the “wheat” from the “chaff”.
It may be worth a look to see if a similar system would work here.
Cheers.
Crosspatch at 4:03 pm
Agree.
I voted yes for threading but rating (and sorting by rating) would be far more useful and interesting.
I prefer the format here over Judith’s site.
That’s probably not a reflection of the threading discussion – it’s more about her incredible tolerance for the few idiots who regularly persist in infesting her blog. Luckily, the main culprit gives one a visual clue as to what is best ignored.
Having said that, despite her light moderation and the predictable distraction of her house morons, the site is still a must read.
Please, NO, NO, NO to nested comments (on any high traffic site).
My approach tends to be to visit only daily after the first full day and search by yesterday’s date for new comments. I find this annoying, and neither do I find searching recent comments of value.
Numbered comments are good for keeping a handle on context, providing that any deletions are not simply disappeared.
Johan says:
May 4, 2014 at 2:44 pm
Lesson learned: people resisting change are more vocal 🙂
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The people resisting change are giving very good reasons for their positions. If you have good reasons to the contrary, by all means state them.
FWIW, I’ve used a large variety of electronic conference formats going back the the early 80’s.This one isn’t perfect, but for a wandering conversation in which following the discussion and systematically reviewing new comments, threading absolutely sucks.
I voted no since I like to come back and start reading where I left off. Threaded comments mean that new comments are all over the place. I tend not to read threaded comments. On a few systems I’ve seen the indentation get ridiculous tothe point where there is only one word per line.
In my opinion, threaded comments make everything more confusing to follow, this works just fine.
On the subject of weather vs. climate though, we’re currently in the midst of an apparently unprecedented heatwave with temperatures up to 102 and may get up to triple digits again in a few days. This is the second time in 3 years that we broke the record for earliest 100 degree reading in 130 years of record keeping, even though it might be the perfect storm of extremely dry air and southerly winds (people were still out because the humidity was like 5%).
Now I’m not sure if this pattern played out before on the eve of previous cold events such as the Little Ice Age (considering that some are predicting its return this year), but if global cooling fails to commence or we return to seeing a consistent upward tick in temperatures, perhaps it might be time for this blog to reassess whether it wants to change its position on CO2-induced warming (away from the skeptic position) even though it may not be even close to as dire as the models predict.
I don’t want to have to come to the conclusion that we need to pay through the nose in carbon taxes to develop green replacements for existing power sources, because I would like to see a high CO2 world where plants grow like no tomorrow compared to today.
I think multiple level of comment nesting becomes awkward when you want to reply to someone at say level two and you have a couple of screens worth of comments at level three in between that person’s comment and where your reply gets placed. At Judith’s site she has cut back to only one level of nesting. I imagine to cut down on clutter. Then there is the problem of time frame where replies might be missed unless you review the parts of the thread you have read already.
The system used at Climate Audit for about a year before Climategate brought Steve’s sight down and he moved to WordPress hosting, I thought worked well. He had a reply button which inserted a link at the beginning of someones reply which led to the comment to which someone was replying. Those links at CA no longer work due to renumbering of the comments after changing systems. But it worked somewhat like this link to a comment near the top of this thread.
Theo Goodwin May 4, 2014 at 1:13 pm
In this case if Theo was replying to someone else in that comment, his reply would start with a similar link to it.
This allows people to selectively follow a conversation by following the chain of links created by each reply back to the source. Someone not interested could simply continue reading from where they left off previously since all comments would be in date/time order.
Wordpress didn’t support such a system at the time. Don’t know if they have come up with something similar since then. If they haven’t, they should. It helps keep trolls from interfering with interesting reading.
I don’t like the threaded format. In the narrow format of this blog and Climate Etc. the available levels soon get filled. Then your response ends up way down in the pile. It works passably only in a full-width format like at Climate Audit. Having only a few levels doesn’t work.
What I like about the unthreaded format is that all of the replies are in chronological order. So I only have to check one place to see what’s new in a post to which I’m not subscribed.
w.
I voted yes, but then I read the thread, and I’m convinced that it would be a bad idea. So make one of those ‘yes’s a no!