Re^4: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers

Thanks. Your post is about 20x better than the OP since it contains evidence and logic and a name.

The headline above the replies is “Replies are listed “Best First’” so it’s perhaps less confusing than the OP wants us to think. It is a fairly common default on many sites and it’s more clearly labeled here than on some.

That said, I think there should be an option to browse chronologically at the top. That’s how I have my settings, as you suggest. :P But I usually read entire threads if it’s a topic I care about. Folks just passing by looking for specific answers don’t. I don’t know for the casual, non-monk reader if having the best on top is objectively better or not. I can see arguments for both so affording both with ease seems best to me.

That said, I don’t demand free work from others—I still haven’t broken in my commit bit—so my opinion is just a data point for Gods.

Comment on Re^4: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers (linear boards) by LanX (Saint) on May 06, 2019 at 15:53 UTC
The real "problem" is far more fundamental and wouldn't be changed by chronological order. It's the old ideological war between linear° and threaded discussion boards. And as usual people want the cake and eat it too. (Threaded discussions with linear order? WTF ) Please note that SO is limiting to 3 "levels" depth. (Question/Answer/Comment- And I am always confused by that structure) IMHO the only possible answer is a "flexible" adjustment to the needs of the current reader. I.e. DHTML to optionally show the sub-tree overview like in RAT, reordering the replies, folding and navigating them. There is for sure no right order for threads, if one reply provokes a large subtree, then the next direct reply is buried behind, even if it's the "second best" reply. Folding is the only alternative which comes to mind. BTW: I'm still waiting for an example where another answer was implicitly referenced without linking or naming the author. I remember rare instances of people talking about "the former reply". But most replies here are from regulars, which don't do this. So it's not happening "often" Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice} °) compare phpbb if you don't know what linear boards are, or look at WP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation_threading	[reply]
Re^5: Listing Best Replies First: destroys threads and annoys readers by LanX (Saint) on May 06, 2019 at 14:37 UTC
> I still haven’t broken in my commit bit In case you are interested ... ;-P The replies are generated in list replies `my $orderby= $VARS->{notesortorder} \|\| $settings->{orderby} \|\| "createtime";` [download] The sort order is labeled in shownote 24: my $orderby= $VARS->{notesortorder} 25: \|\| $settings->{orderby} 26: \|\| "createtime"; 27: 28: my %orderby_labels = ( 29: 'createtime' => 'Oldest First', 30: 'createtime desc' => 'Newest First', 31: 'reputation desc' => 'Best First' 32: ); 33: 34: my $replies_info; 35: if ( $orderby_labels{$orderby} ) { 36: my $fmt_replies_info = htmlcode( 'formatRepliesInfo','', $NO +DE ); 37: if ( $fmt_replies_info =~ /^[^0]/ ) { # something other than + zero 38: $replies_info = qq(<span class="note-ordering">Replies a +re listed '$orderby_labels{$orderby}'.</span>); 39: } 40: } 41: [download] List replies is called later. `47: htmlcode('list replies')` [download] So I think you can change line 38 to show a select box changing `$VARS->{notesortorder}` and performing a reload. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Syntactic Confectionery Delight
	PerlMonks