Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source commenting platform

Re:Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source c... by StavrosK on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @05:43PM (#15233116)

I think you two are thinking of different things, and missing an important point: Comments are only as good as the community that's writing them. YouTube comments are the kind of comments you don't want to read, HN comments are the kind you skip the article for.

Whether comments are valuable very much depends on the kind of people you have writing them, and I believe it's worth trying to maintain a good commenting community.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Washington Post integrates Talk – Mozilla’s open-source c... by richforrester on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @11:48PM (#15235377)

I kind of agree and disagree. Yes we might be thinking of two different things. But I think it's not about the URL, but about the content. There's plenty YouTube videos that are intelligent, with intelligent responses to it.

But that was kind of my point; by looking at the way a response to a piece of content is written, you can judge its merit somewhat accurately.

For example, on a video about the way the Suicide Squad movie was edited, you might see:

- "BRILLIANT 100% agree!"

- "While I think you're right, there might be a couple of things you missed out on [...]"

- "FU M8 DA MOVIE WAS AWESUM!!!1@2"

Each of these comments tells you something different. And yes, some say more about the audience than the content ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]