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
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
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 »
Meta

Comments on Wish to have comment votes

Parent

Wish to have comment votes

+3
−0

Every time I visit Codicact I miss the comment voting feature. There is no way to know if some comment is rubbish or a gem because the opinions of others are hidden from future visitors. I wish there was a way to rate/vote on comments.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+5
−0

We've resisted adding voting to comments because, to be fair, you have to have votes in both directions and that starts to get cluttered, but I also recognize the need for an efficient "me too". Nobody wants to read a bunch of comments saying "I agree with so-and-so", after all, but people want to be able to signal that agreement.

I once proposed a more explicit "me too" feature for comments: rather than an anonymous upvote, a user would be able to "co-sign" a comment. Unlike the anonymous votes you see on Reddit, Hacker News, or SE, these would be signed ("posted by X; also supported by Y and Z" or the like). I don't remember now whether there was some problem with doing this or if it's still waiting in the to-do list; I'll try to check later and update this post.

We don't need the corresponding disagree/downvote option: if you disagree, you can leave a comment explaining why.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

2 comment threads

"Resisted adding votes to comments". Perhaps something less digital would work that is generated by ... (3 comments)
I do not like having to guess if a comment title is the complete comment like this one (4 comments)
I do not like having to guess if a comment title is the complete comment like this one
KalleMP‭ wrote over 2 years ago

I accept the motivation but it makes this site more sterile. A Q&A becomes the domain of the OP and any who answer and nobody else who has something else to contribute does not bother to weigh in. I expect I would learn to ignore the issues I bump into here if I spent regular time here. SE soured me to Q&A when they went all PC and I was hoping that Codidact was going to be run for the visitors. It looks like a lot of emphasis has been made to make it professional and polished and pander to the wishes of the answerers. The best way to get new people to answer questions is to make their contributions WELCOME rather than a nuisance. I hazard half of the visitors have met SE before the first time they find Codidact, the expectations that they have will be carried over.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 2 years ago

Our aim is to run Codidact for the communities that use them, both regulars and visitors. (Every regular was once a visitor; we need to draw people in.) I'm having trouble understanding how threaded comments make people feel unwelcome. And if people have answers to questions, we want to give them the extra visibility of actual answers, not have that answer be buried deep in comments like on Reddit or Quora. What am I missing? I feel like I'm not fully understanding your comment, sorry.

KalleMP‭ wrote over 2 years ago · edited over 2 years ago

I read all the answers and comments before I engage. I see no point in repeating something that may already be in an answer or previous comment that would be wasting everyone's time so I cannot leave comments unexpanded. So all top level comments may as well be expanded unless there are really lots and I would have nothing to add anyway.

I do not want to drill down into something that I came here for. If I want to read an encyclopaedia to broaden my interest I visit Wikipedia, if I search for an answer on a topic I read all the wisdom I can.

Threaded comments are fine if they expand easily without hiding other stuff. I almost only post answers on EE but am a visitor everywhere else. I want to enjoy my visits to everywhere not just when I have my answering hat on at EE.

....

KalleMP‭ wrote over 2 years ago

.... Random internet stranger came here for information as a result of text search, not for protocol or to make nice with the regulars. The more he finds ANY information, the more likely he may stay. The easier he can share even a tiny bit of information that he can the more likely he is going to come again. Until a visitor has voted, commented answered or asked a question Codidact is just a Google result behind a extra click. Make the engagement EASY and the number of regulars will grow faster.

The visitors are the only reason for this site, a mega ton of answers means nothing if people only occasionally visit due to a google result. You want community then be engaging instead of standoffish. Offer everything you have, hold no pearl of wisdom back and neither shun even a dirty pearl (poor comment) from a swine herder, it may be what you came here looking for.