Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Feature Request: Comments improvements to indicate assent or dissent with previously posted comments

+6
−0

Often I'm looking over a post and feel that I have what to add as a comment. But as soon as I look at the comments, I find that someone's already written exactly what I would have said. At that point, it would just be adding noise to write my own comment saying essentially the same thing, as it would be to write my own comment saying that "I agree with @NumericallyUnchallenged." Somewhere Else I might have upvoted the comment, but that's not an option here.

For contrast to the proposals below, here's an example of a user saying a comment (actual comment of mine), with two (fictitious) users responding — one in agreement, one in dissent:1

DonielF: "I feel bad for the users who found hundreds of notifs waiting for them." SRU: "Me too." NC: "NoU"

Proposal One: "Me Too!"

In lieu of having someone post a new comment just to say "me too," let's give them a button to click. In this example, SomeRandomUser no longer has to agree with me; he can instead click "me too!":

Let me just pop my name on in there behind yours

And if multiple people all give their agreement, let the system show simply "X other users," and clicking on that will expand out the user list:2

It's memes all the way down. I can still see you rubocop.

Proposal Two: Vote on Comments

We could always implement Somewhere Else's system of upvoting comments, but it's only right that if you can upvote a comment to indicate assent, you should be able to downvote to indicate displeasure. Sample mockup:

Just one comment. Nice and tidy. +1/-1 score balances out back at 50% Wilson Score.

Notice that these options are not mutually exclusive. We can always implement the upvote/downvote system and add "me too!" votes; we can always add the proposed reactions feature to comments as well.

  1. Courtesy of a Paint application. Thank you for using Arial; it made this a lot easier to work with.

  2. Dropdown was cropped out and edited based on the existing dropdown menu for the Sefaria Link suggester on Judaism Codidact, if that helps for whoever would be coding this in.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (5 comments)

2 answers

+5
−2

I support the me-too feature, as it saves people from repeating existing comments (and others from reading them).

I don't think we should have up- and downvotes on comments, as they don't necessarily indicate assent and dissent (respectively): they may, for example, indicate that someone thinks the comment was funny. Thus, they serve no practical purpose. (I'm basing this on SE, where comments got votes up for many reasons besides assent. Having downvotes will perhaps temper that, but probably not entirely.) I would even propose no votes on posts, except that we need them for readers' sake; but comments barely serve that purpose. (This all depends, of course, on what comments are for, so should be taken with a grain of salt. Cf. https://meta.codidact.com/q/277872#comment-3871.)

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

+3
−1

I believe comments need some sort of mechanism to allow 'good' comments to rise to the top.

Some posts attract a lot of comments. Sometimes they're a bit of back-and-forth clarification between asker and respondents, sometimes they're humorous, and sometimes they're mini answers in themselves. Naturally some comments (eg the mini answers or the clarification comment with a lot of detail) are far more important and relevant than others (eg the first two back-and-forth clarification comments). However the not-so-important comments aren't necessarily so bad that they should be deleted; they still have some relevance.

After five comments, further comments are hidden away under a 'Show x more comments' link. However the order of comments always remains the same. If someone comments a particularly useful bit of information as the sixth comment, it will always be initially hidden while less important comments are initially visible. It goes without saying that this isn't very helpful for future readers.

The comment system needs some mechanism to allow especially useful comments to be shown in those first five comments. An upvote system may be misused for funny comments, but if we look at the example of the SE sites, the system generally worked pretty well. Relabeling upvotes on comments to 'Me too' or 'Helpful' votes may further improve this.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (2 comments)

Sign up to answer this question »