Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Verge)   Twitter turns off threaded replies because they were hard to read. Farkers: well, duh. Redditors: pffft, amateurs   (theverge.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Twitter, new look, beta app, new tests, future plans, Update December 3rd, Jack Dorsey, potential next steps  
•       •       •

372 clicks; posted to STEM » on 03 Dec 2020 at 8:25 PM (13 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



8 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-12-03 8:28:48 PM  
Threaded replies is one of the stupidest things ever conceived on the internet.
 
2020-12-03 8:39:23 PM  

Russ1642: Threaded replies is one of the stupidest things ever conceived on the internet.


No amount of application and removal of lipstick from a pig can make up for having a terrible UI in the first place.
 
2020-12-03 10:21:47 PM  
Farm's comment system is superior
 
2020-12-03 10:22:30 PM  

amyldoanitrite: Farm's comment system is superior


Except for lack of an EDIT function!
 
2020-12-04 8:46:10 AM  

Russ1642: Threaded replies is one of the stupidest things ever conceived on the internet.


Threading used to work fine on Usenet and mailing lists back in the day. Simply sort the threads by the oldest comment, and structure the threads by who replied to whom.

Reddit sucks because it mixes in the upvote/downvote stuff and doesn't just show threads chronologically.

amyldoanitrite: amyldoanitrite: Farm's comment system is superior

Except for lack of an EDIT function!


There's a preview button for that.

/Plus, can you imagine the chaos differing opinions posters could cause by use of such a function?
 
2020-12-04 10:25:46 AM  

iron de havilland: Threading used to work fine on Usenet and mailing lists back in the day. Simply sort the threads by the oldest comment, and structure the threads by who replied to whom.


No. It limits people to replying to one person and only that person. People don't see the general discussion. The timeline is distorted all to hell. And of course the primary reason that threaded conversations suck fat donkey balls is that after you refresh a page you have no idea what's new, and even if they highlight what's new it's scattered all over the place and is difficult to follow.
 
2020-12-04 11:43:45 AM  

Russ1642: iron de havilland: Threading used to work fine on Usenet and mailing lists back in the day. Simply sort the threads by the oldest comment, and structure the threads by who replied to whom.

No. It limits people to replying to one person and only that person. People don't see the general discussion.


On Usenet, subthreads could drift off into different topics, and you could change the subject line if it did. You follow up to the person to whom you're replying.

The timeline is distorted all to hell. And of course the primary reason that threaded conversations suck fat donkey balls is that after you refresh a page you have no idea what's new, and even if they highlight what's new it's scattered all over the place and is difficult to follow.

Did you never use Usenet back in the day? Newsreaders would generally sort by threads with the oldest comment first, new posts in a thread could be indicated by the number of new comments and the subject being bold, or whatever. If you're following a thread, a command would take you to the next new post in the thread.

I get what you're saying as it applies to Reddit, but that's down to the way it handles threads. If Fark were threaded, it would most likely suck too, because it's not how discussion on Fark works.

But newsreaders and mail clients figured out how to do threading properly decades ago.
 
2020-12-04 8:16:57 PM  

Russ1642: iron de havilland: Threading used to work fine on Usenet and mailing lists back in the day. Simply sort the threads by the oldest comment, and structure the threads by who replied to whom.

No. It limits people to replying to one person and only that person. People don't see the general discussion. The timeline is distorted all to hell. And of course the primary reason that threaded conversations suck fat donkey balls is that after you refresh a page you have no idea what's new, and even if they highlight what's new it's scattered all over the place and is difficult to follow.


Why do all of the phone apps have to take over my computer at work?

So now Teams has a chat area with simple chronological comments except they're indented randomly depending on my reply lenght.  assholes, but now there is a separate Teams area that does this stupid farking threaded conversations and every time I go to a chat and back to the teams, it collapses everything, and sometimes it takes more than one click to get back to where I just was.  Its farking unreadable, but that's the phone does it, and you know, its cool that way.


I feel like I'm working in Crayola land.
 
Displayed 8 of 8 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.