|
Re^4: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers
by haukex (Archbishop) on May 04, 2019 at 08:03 UTC
|
Replies listed out of order
AFAIK the site has always, or at least for a very long time, given users the ability to select an ordering for the replies. Nodes that were written to expect a certain ordering of nodes at the same level ("see the reply above/below"), and replies that were not posted as such, are the issue, not the site's ordering of nodes. And I think "best first" is a good default ordering of nodes.
a previous reply which has been suppressed
If you are referring to RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors, then see that thread for the reasoning behind this new feature, which I fully support. The "bad" nodes are hidden such that casual visitors and search engines can't see them right away, but as soon as one logs in, they are visible, plus any direct links to such nodes should still work.
| [reply] |
|
|
It's always the same guy making broad claims, attaching the admins, showing no evidence and insisting that loging in is not acceptable.
Just don't feed!
| [reply] |
Re^4: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers
by LanX (Saint) on May 03, 2019 at 22:20 UTC
|
> the best reply often refers to a previous reply which has been suppressed
Please show an example where the best reply refers to a "suppressed" one - and this without explicitly linking to it.
Should be easy if this happens that "often".
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
(S)He does have a point.
I once noticed my colors were wrong, meaning i hadnt been seen as logged in, and realized i had gotten to perlmonks.org rather than www.perlmonks.org and that must have messed up my "is logged in cookie". If that would work for you too then this https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=1233311 and this https://perlmonks.org/?node_id=1233311 link may show you the differnce without having to log out and in again.
While the point was made, since the reply was to the OP rather than the post that was mentioned in it, it is hard to determine how things could have been better handeled via "Replies are listed 'Best First'.". I do understand the points made for and against this policy, and kinda side with "best first" for non logged in visitors tho.
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
|
|
|
refers to a previous reply 3 times
nope, it says "The answer Anonymous Monk said", theres only one anon post in that thread, no ambiguity, no problem. your just butthurt your anon reply isnt first, tough luck, make an account
| [reply] |
|
|
Re^4: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on May 04, 2019 at 00:14 UTC
|
I know your ... um, voice ...writing style. It's familiar enough that you must have (had) an account, so why not log in?
Hm. I'll have to dig out the writing style analyzer and work out who you are.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
Suck that fhit
| [reply] |
