Juan Cole's testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee presents a view which isn't quite as foreclosed. Not pretty, and with options more limited than they were before, but not inevitably catastrophic.
Yes, not having things marked as [new] would be bad. dKos (and I imagine other scoop sites, but I've not seen any I'm aware of) do flag them, but it requires hitting the FIND NEXT button to get from one unread comment to another. Notes has a variety of ways to make use of what it calls "unread marks", and the Domino (that's the name of the Notes server) is also a web server, but I don't know if there's a way for the a web browser to make use of unread marks. I suspect there is, but it would require the page to be read with an applet, which a lot of people wouldn't want.
The last 300 comments page, however, could still work exactly the same way it does now. It's organization of the comments within a particular main post that I've been talking about.
First, I apologize for misspelling your name.
Do you not find that frequently it's either time-consuming or just impossible to tell who someone's responding to? And, assuming you use what nowadays I see called "nested", rather than "threaded", every post is visible. So I don't see how there's any "ignoring the chaff" implied by hierarchical organization of information. Personally, I think the amount of chaff is miniscule. In most threads, I read every comment if I read any at all. That applies even the long threads at dKos.
Obviously I got your hackles up. My phrase "reasoned and detailed" was unfortunate. The conversation here is both. What I often find missing here and at other flat-comment sites is the 'talmudic' discussion which refines particular points so that an entire position arises that is wiser and more informed than any of the individual participants. That does happen here. But I believe the formatting discourages it and makes it happen less than it otherwise would.
In other words, while people post things which are both reasoned and detailed, we are discouraged (but not prevented) from reasoning about the details. That's what I meant to convey.
And no, preferring something as a user doesn't necessarily mean you want all the consequences. A lot of the time one has no good reason to even think about what all those consequences might be. But people who build tools have a greater responsibility to consider the effects of those tools. And having both experienced for myself and seen corporate-culture studies confirming the strong benefits of retrievable conversations with response hierarchies, I've got strong and, I think, well-founded opinions on the matter.
Now, if Epacris's experience is common and comes from using "nested" style, I'll have to re-think my position. I'm already aware that formats which display some comments in full, while only providing titles and links to other comments, are often found confusing. And I have occasionally heard that even about formats which only display titles and links for all comments, with a separate page for each comment. But the only common complaint I'm aware of pertaining to what I'm referring to as "nested" is that pages can take too long to load. However that complaint only makes sense in comparison to formats which collapse at lest some comments into linked titles. That doesn't apply here or at the other blogs I read.
So what are the drawbacks to a "nested" format? It can take a minute or two to get used to, the first time you see it. That can be a biggie for a site that doesn’t want to scare new users away. What else?
Is that still fucking offensive? Have I so pissed you off that I shouldn’t introduce myself when I come to see Whisperado on Thursday?
I use "nested" at dKos. Having got my techie start managing Lotus Notes discussion databases (and lots o' other Notes stuff) and then having read Usenet groups, it seems to me that any system that doesn't support response hierarchies just doesn't consider detailed, reasoned discussion a high priority.
Not that users of such technology, such as the Nielson Haydens, don't so prioritize; you take what tools are available and come closest to meeting all your needs. But the inability to have the discusion organize itself ("self-outline" would be an ungainly but accurate way to put it) seems to me a big drawback.
I'm looking forward to meeting you. I just made arrangements to stay with my old housemates in my old place at 5th and Bergen.
In the 1935 plans for invasion of Canada sidebar, the contingency being planned for is a possible war against "Red", where Canada ("Crimson") is assumed to be on Red's side. It seems farily obvious that Red is the UK, but I didn't see any confirmation. Does anyone know for sure?
Also, why are comments here not threaded/nested?
Another form of Conservatism, one of method, rather than objective,is the Burkean notion that sudden changes are likely to have unintended consequences whose detriments generally outweigh any positive effects of the change.
From 1933 through 1980, it was not especially confusing to use the same word for both conservatism of method and conservatism of ideal, because most changes being sought and implemented were inimical to both. Since 1980, the usage had become more problematic.
Conservatism: The movement to keep power in the hands of the elites who have traditionally held power. That includes primarily the economic aristocracy, but also the religious leaders who preach that their parishoners are dependant on their church for salvation.
Since the 1930s, conservatism has been associated with reducing government spending, because since the 1930s, a fair proportion of such spending has been to mitigate the effects of differences in wealth and opportunity.
And I should also point out, that the nature of the desperate Dean attacks over the last couple of weeks seems calculated to undermine ABB fervor in those supporting Dean. It is possible to attack Kerry without calling him a Republican. That charge is not only very incorrect, it works against whoever is the nominee, even Dean. I would have expected such from Nader or Sharpton. From Dean I expected better.
BSD, I wish the Iraq vote were as isolated as you make it seem. The Patriot Act vote is also quite troubling. I don't doubt that, given his druthers, Kerry is a lib. And I'll strongly support him, assuming he wins the nomination. But I see plenty of signs that he is as much inside a Washington bubble as many Deaniacs were inside an activist bubble.
I wonder if the grating samrtipants is who I think it is. If so, his very public career reflects only a tiny portion of the damage he did to this country behind the scenes by spending his daddy's money as the most effective conservative organizer in the late 1950s and 1960s.
Note: email address munged in obvious way
Does it mean he's comfortable, or does it mean he's completely numbed himself to run for President and doesn't (at the moment) have enough soul to feel anything other than ambition?
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2004 | 13 |
Total: 13 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Dvd Avins:
Show all comments by Dvd Avins.