News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by justinlardinois on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @02:47PM (#12307257)
> What are your thoughts on incentivizing constructive comments? I've seen publishers (The Guardian, if memory serves) select thoughtful comments and re-print them as micro-articles in their own right.

I don't think you're correctly identifying the problem. In my experience, the problem with comments, especially on news sites, is a glut of bad comments, rather than a lack of good comments. This solution doesn't disincentivize bad comments.

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by r0muald on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @03:53PM (#12307840)
The solution to bad comments is deleting them before they are even visible to other users. Deleting aggressively, as is done in certain subreddits (r/science) may seem offensive towards naive users who just want to add their "2 c" to the discussion, but it's the only effective AND honest strategy: if your comment adds little of interest, it's worth nothing. The bar should be very high, the more popular the website the higher the required quality. But in the end I think NPR are making the right choice. Comments on websites are not a constitutional right, after all.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by snerbles on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @04:00PM (#12307910)
The aggressive moderation in /r/science is quite honest compared to other subreddits, which is partly why its moderators attract less controversy when compared to others such as /r/news.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by dageshi on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @03:32PM (#12307648)
The slashdot system for categorising comments seemed to work really well at making the highest quality comments stand out, I wonder why other sites haven't tried something similar, I don't think I've seen it used elsewhere.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by basch on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @04:20PM (#12308098)
it seems sites find it to complex to implement.

slashdot nailed moderation, no one has attempted something similar. most systems are simple up/down vote or like/report

i am also starting to wonder if the agegroup being hired to implement "social" for websites is now young enough to have missed slashdot in it s prime.

the fact that people are still brainstorming from scratch instead of talking about how to improve slashdots model reeks of reinventing the wheel because they never heard of it.

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by edraferi on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @07:57PM (#12309453)
> i am also starting to wonder if the agegroup being hired to implement "social" for websites is now young enough to have missed slashdot in it s prime.

That's me! Can you explain the Slashdot model and why it worked? Or point to a good write up about it somewhere else?

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by qu4z-2 on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @10:40PM (#12310081)
Been a while, may not be entirely correct:

Slashdot's model was perhaps a little overcomplicated, but my favourite feature was the ability to tag up/down votes with flavours. +1 Informative was different to +1 Funny, and "Factually incorrect" was a different downvote to "Off-topic spam" (whatever they were called).

Other quirks off the top of my head: it capped at +5 and ... -1, I think? The score represented a thing closer to the up/down ratio than "Facebook likes". There was a dedicated -1 Overrated moderation for "I don't disagree that it's interesting, just not +5 interesting".

Also, logged in users got a fixed number of moderation points at random intervals, and you couldn't moderate in a story that you commented in. I'd like to believe this discouraged "throwing away" points on low-effort joke comments, but I'm not sure the facts of Slashdot comments entirely bears that out.

EDIT: And then there was meta-moderation...

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by flomo on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @09:25PM (#12309833)
Slashdot's method of scoring comments was overly complicated and probably did not produce any better results than reddit-style voting. However, Slashdot's killer feature was that the reader could filter by comment score and thus only read the 'good' comments, and not have to wade through hundreds of replies.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by basch on Thursday August 18, 2016 @10:55PM (#12317701)
correct, they were better than reddit because they let the user sort based on their preference. slashdot generated a ton of metadata that described their content, and then gave you the power to intelligently utilize that metadata.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by basch on Thursday August 18, 2016 @10:54PM (#12317698)
I suggest reading the FAQ

https://slashdot.org/faq

especially all the Moderation, metamoderation, and Karma sections!!

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by dredmorbius on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @05:34PM (#12308662)
Slashdot's moderation system was vaguely effective. Complete crap rarely rose to the top.

A great deal of high-quality commentary was buried, however, often the best and most informative. That's fairliy much par for the course.

Much the early vibe on the site came from the fact that it was simply where intelligent people were commenting online -- especially the early Free Software crowd (well, early in terms of Web 1.0 -- there was the whole 1980s and early 1990s contingent as well).

ESR (before he went fully whackjob mode), Ted T'so, Alan Cox, Bruce Perens, Rasterman, and others.

Much that group seems split amongst HN, LKML, LWN, and Google+ these days, along with some blogs.

Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by showerst on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @09:37PM (#12309870)
Interestingly for this discussion, CmdrTaco is now at Wapo, after a brief spin through their various internal startups.
Re:NPR Website to Get Rid of Comments by dredmorbius on Wednesday August 17, 2016 @10:06PM (#12309962)
And WashPo's clickbaitism is getting unbearable.

I'm about ready to blackhole that domain.