Comments on: Yes, I’m playing around with the layout

By: tangotiger

tangotiger — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:59:17 +0000

I implemented comment numbers on my blog because of linking issues:
1. If I wanted to provide a link to someone to a particular comment, I could. I’ve done that quite a bit.

2. If I wanted to say “check out the thread, particularly posts 17 through 21″, I could.

If it was only for the situations intra-thread (responding to posts within the same thread), I don’t think I would have bothered. That said, I often do something like:
Rally/15: Good point. Maybe we should…
And I do find myself as I page up and down, using the comment numbers as demarcation points.

At USSM, there doesn’t seem to be much inter-thread linking, so that really takes out that idea.

As for reading new comments, I always go by timestamp, not comment number.

By: NODO Dweller

NODO Dweller — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 04:37:19 +0000

I think we’re arguing a lost cause MKT

By: MKT

MKT — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:37:01 +0000

“All of the comments are time-stamped. There are never so many comments in the same minute that you should need a better way to figure out where you left off.”

See my comment made at 12:08 about how time stamps are a much less efficient way to navigate than comment numbers are. One example right here: that was 12:08 yesterday, and it was pm. None of that baggage is necessary if I could simply say see my comment #42.

Also, it’s not just a question of where the reader left off, it’s finding out, nearly instantly, how many additional posts have come in since they started reading.

9:07 “I was in a chaotic meeting with a ton of people today and we all managed to keep the conversation straight without saying â€œ#44 LOL #47 ITAâ€

Was that a face-to-face meeting? Oral conversations are MUCH easier to follow than interrupted, asynchronous, text-only conversations on a blog.

I agree that claiming that numbering is “crucial” for dialog is an exageration, but the poster was clearly talking about coversations via postings, not oral conversations.

By: Jeff Nye

Jeff Nye — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:28:11 +0000

By the way, I am testing this out on Google Chrome and it works just fine! (I hope Derek doesn't delete me for being off-topic!)

By: DMZ

DMZ — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:07:09 +0000

numbering is crucial for dialog.

Phhhhhhhhhhhhbbbllttt.

I was in a chaotic meeting with a ton of people today and we all managed to keep the conversation straight without saying “#44 LOL #47 ITA”

By: wabbles

wabbles — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:52:27 +0000

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU The new layout works great with my MSNTV2! I can read the comments again without having to copy and paste them into an e-mail (or read them in one-word columns that gives me a headache). It is very much appreciated. Thanks. Did I say that already?

By: Jeff Nye

Jeff Nye — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:30:45 +0000

“Crucial”?

Honestly I’d be pleased to see comment numbers never return, if only because it’d mean no more “oops, I was supposed to be replying to #44!” posts.

Really, just type the person’s name or blockquote their post. It isn’t that hard.

By: bratman

bratman — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:09:23 +0000

numbering is crucial for dialog.

great new layout though – always good to have some change!

By: Mat

Mat — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:38:20 +0000

My argument for comment numbering isnâ€™t about replies – it about navigation. Unless your someone who sits and presses refresh every 10 seconds the numbers are useful to see whatâ€™s changed (and how much) in a thread for the less â€œpersistentâ€ readers.

All of the comments are time-stamped. There are never so many comments in the same minute that you should need a better way to figure out where you left off.

By: NODO Dweller

NODO Dweller — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:04:33 +0000

My argument for comment numbering isn’t about replies – it about navigation. Unless your someone who sits and presses refresh every 10 seconds the numbers are useful to see what’s changed (and how much) in a thread for the less “persistent” readers.