Message me
We're going to try out a few things on the WC comments over the next few days...
1. User pics won't appear with comments. 2. Comments that get lots of downvotes will disappear gradually the lower their score.
Tell WC: Testing out some new commenting features
node/19352 - 2 weeks ago - 400 views
45 Comments Have your say. Vote up the best responses. ↓
Reactions on the web
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/wfci)
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/wfci)
Invite your friends
Top Press Stories This Week
Comments
For the next few days let's try out commenting without user photos with each comment. I want to see if it makes comments easier to skim and if it draws the eye to the voting arrows and scores more.
Also, we're testing out a new commenting feature related to comment voting. As a comment gets downvoted by users, it will fade to white. The more downvotes a comment gets, the more it will fade out...until there's nothing left.
Check it out in action in the CCT awards thread: http://www.windycitizen.com/chicago/press/2009/11/05/windy-citizen-award...
I think this should send some clear signals to people about what sort of comments are seen to be adding real value to discussion threads.
As always, try it out and let me know what you think.
I like the idea of the comments fading out. Some other site has a mechanism where downvoted comments disappear, but readers can show them if they want to.
Brad, Check out what's going on here: http://www.windycitizen.com/chicago/food/2009/11/06/look-at-xoco-from-ha... ChicagoBankerMan caught it:
"Amazing. Someone went through here and downvoted every single comment.
Why? Seriously, why?..."
Happens every afternoon about this time, Tamale Chica!
By fading out a comment till there's nothing left will make comments time sensitive to some degree. If a few people keep downvoting someone's comment even though others would upvote it, making it go all Casper will prevent later viewers from voting. I like the color change but making them into the invisible ones won't allow others to see what type of comments are getting downvoted.
Also, what do you think about showing everyone who also downvotes comments and stories? I'm noticing a resurgence of this happening on stories that should be neutral unless someone just has a thing for certain contributors.
It's kind of weird voting for a story that is terrible, but you're voting for it because it's newsworthy, not because it's a positive event when it's a negative event, by normal standards. Do I make sense?
How is it weird? If it's newsworthy/interesting/funny/important vote for it. If it's not, don't. It's good that everyone has their own definition of what to vote up, no?
This may be one of the issues with the whole downvoting thing. Not all of us upvote for the same reason. It is kind of funky to be upvoting a negative, yuck story, but I've done it if it is newsworthy, or well written.
There are probably people who downvote just because they don't like the topic - which can be construed as censure, in a way.
I really, really hate the idea of showing down voters and I'm not keen on showing upvoters either. Voting should be a secret ballot.
It would make me really uncomfortable to know who was voting down my stuff, and I think it would discourage people from voting down items that deserve it.
If someone wants to go on record as in favor or not in favor of a post, that's what the comments are for. Comments also give you an opportunity to say why you did or didn't like a post.
I've noticed people's posts getting downvoted like crazy, as if someone or a few people just go down the screen and keep hitting the downvote arrow. That's just rude behavior and it does nothing to create a sense of community. If this wasn't going on I'd say keep it anon, but clearly some people are hiding behind their anonomity to downvote willy nilly.
Couldn't it be that some voters just have very high standards? Is the point of this site to boost the other posters or to vote up and down things as they deserve?
Or should WC get rid of downvoting, period, like Facebook?
Getting rid of it would get rid of the problem, especially since the comments feature provides for plenty of interaction.
This morning I saw a lot of posts by one of our regulars that he must have just done, and they were mostly all zero's because someone just had a field day downvoting everything that he had posted.
Speaking of downvoting, someone already downvoted my most recent post, ha!
Maybe they voted him down because he posted too much at once. Isn't there a submission guideline saying not to do that?
I vote down more than I vote up. Anything that makes me feel like I wasted my time reading it, I vote down.
If he was posting all of his own stuff or some company he worked for, than I could see that. He posted mostly Chicago related articles (and one Chicago area article) from a mix of Chicago based news media, Chicago blogs, and other Chicago news sources.
This isn't the first time I've seen this type of downvoting behavior.
From the standpoint of someone that is interested in web technology, I would find the fade (probably done with JavaScript) more interesting than regular text. I haven't seen too much of the faded stuff yet. Please downvote me so I can see it! I'll say something stupid to get you started: "Something stupid!"
Be careful what you wish for...
That's the spirit, fellow citizens!
Uh-oh...update: now the post still appears downvoted, but its fade has unfaded. Or it's at zero as of this moment, so I don't know what has happened.
My post is changing its complexion more often than Sammy Sosa!
I think showing the down voters is a good idea. Most other sites like this do so.
As of right now, I'm not sure the up/down arrows and the points for comments are exactly intuitive for new users. It took me probably two weeks to even notice that they were there at all, and only figured it out when I wondered why my clout was changing unrelated to article votes.
I think you need to make the arrows and points more prevalent so people understand that there is something to do there. Right now to a casual observer it just seems like background.
Which sites show downvoters? I've not seen one in my travels.
Doesn't Digg?
I'm fairly sure Digg does. If they don't now, then I know they used to. Propeller does as well. Don't spend much time on Reddit so I can't speak to that one.
I went and looked. Digg only shows "Who Dugg this?" as far as I can tell.
Let me also point out that Digg is a national site full of fairly anonymous posters, whereas this is a local site populated by people who are often known to one another, many of whom work in the same industry.
One would think that anonymous downvoting leads to frivolous behavior, so non-anonymous would probably be the way to go, except then most people will be afraid to offend.
I have addressed the offending party, fellow Windy Citizens. Let's see if my diplomacy works!
Based on tante's comment, there is more than aggressive downvoter. But thanks for trying.
Ha, even this comment got downvoted! Gotta love consistency.
Gotta flush the birds out of the brush as my pheasant hunting brother-in-law would suggest.
Since I got two messages from qstrian, I'm apparently his "offending party" who needs to be urged to "play nice" in my comments and voting. I'm not sure what that's based on, other than my comments here and a couple of times I've disagreed with him on health-care issues.
I don't see myself as an "aggressive downvoter," but I'll continue to vote my opinion.
You are given the freedom to vote however you want. If you want to vote stuff down then vote stuff down. You are an active user and that is what really matters. There are far more that come to this site and never vote or comment or anything and I find that far far worse.
I agree. That would be my first suggestion (make them public) and the second would be, if that isn't how people want to go, then get rid of downvoting all together. There's plenty of room for commenting if someone is THAT negative about a post.
Considering some of the discussions that have happened on here, I hardly think that showing down voting will tear us apart or cause much friction. I think that the down voters should just show in the "Who voted for this" section. A down vote is still a vote, right?
Brad, can you make arrows a different color, not grey? That would draw the eye to them more. And bold the points count or make them the same non-grey color as the arrows. Unlike life, there's too much grey and white here where the comment voting is.
Brad, I like the new arrows. They're really "out there" and very visible.
I agree that the arrows need to be more "in your face" than they are now.
Removing the photos has actually made it harder to read I think and to follow along with who is saying what. The pictures broke it up nicely into smaller bits of text. Now it seems like one giant piece to me, not so much people interacting and talking with each other.
Agreed on the picture removal. Picture removal would be fine if there were some kind of dividing line between comments.
I like the pictures on WC in general. Good way to recognize each person, and to keep up to date on things like Nelson getting a faux-hawk.
I think the icons were helpful, too. Perhaps the arrows just need to be a little bigger? It might help to color them, as well: Up arrow green, down arrow red. Then change the color once someone has voted, the way the article arrows change now; it's kind of hard to see the differentiation on comment arrows now if you come back to a thread and don't remember if you've voted or not.
Slightly larger arrows would help a lot. Even now they are almost small enough that it is a little hard to click on. I think making them look more like the story voting arrows but shrunk would be good.
I agree. Since the pics are gone, commenter usernames need to stand out some how - bold maybe?
I'd have to agree as well, it's a little harder to read the comments without the photos. It not only helps to distinguish the different personalities on the board, but it also helps to ease the strain of all of the text on the page. I think making the arrows bigger would help to make them more noticeable and profound, but I don't like the idea of dismissing the icons.
Roman Coliseum?
Upvotes for all those who participate, make a compelling argument (even if contrary to my own viewpoint) & share an valued Internet attribution or sourced embedded link.
Brad, just one thing -- it took me forever to realize that the substance of this change was down in the comments because it had dropped below other comments. Perhaps you might edit to put the actual change information in the description?
Didn't think of that. D'oh! Will do.
Bar's open! Upvotes all around!
My posts sometimes go up and down like a yo-yo. That's how it is. At least if they're taking the trouble to vote it down, they're noticing it's there!
I can't help looking to see who's voting me up, and I'm pleased that I seem to have a few fans. But that makes me feel a little awkward, too. I also find myself wondering why somebody or other whom I know personally didn't vote a post up. And I really, really don't want to know who's voting me down.
Making such information public would encourage retaliation and bad feeling toward the people who vote honestly and discourage others from voting altogether.
Upvoted for well-reasoned comment.
Post new comment