I think it’s quite important that I can at least see the number of responses to a comment before I have to click on the comment icon. Currently it only shows me a generic comment icon if there are any replies.
Can you share why you think it’s quite important (for a work communication tool)? For a forum, I think it would make sense—many people prefer reading the most active threads. For a work communication tool, I can’t think of any reason why it would matter how many comments a thread has.
I think one of the core use-cases of a comment UI is reading back and forth between two users. This UI currently makes that a quite disjointed operation. I think it’s fine to prioritize a different UI experience, but it does feel like a big loss to me.
I thought about this for quite a while and have started to realise that the “posts” UI could be too complicated. I’m going to try out the “chat” and “DMs” UI for posts and see how it goes. Thanks!
Although “Chat” and “DMs”′ UI allows easily followable back and forth between people, I would like to point out that CQ2 advocates for topic-wise discussions, not person-wise. Here’s an example comment from LessWrong. In that comment, it’s almost impossible to figure out where the quotes are from—i.e., what’s the context. And what happened next is another person replied to that comment with more quotes. This example was a bit extreme with many quotes but I think my point applies to every comment with quotes. One needs to scroll person-wise through so many topics, instead of topic-wise. I (and CQ2) prefer exploring what are people’s thoughts topic-by-topic, not what are the thoughts on all topics simultaneously, person-by-person.
Again, not saying my design is good for LessWrong; I understand forums have their own place. But I think for a tool for work, people would prefer topic-wise over person-wise.
My sense, regarding the read the most active thread desire, is that the most active thread might well be amongst either the team working on some project under discussion or across teams that are envolved in or impacted by some project. In such a case I would think knowing where the real discussion is taking place regarding some “corporate discussions” might be helpful and wanted.
I suppose the big question there is what about all the other high volume exchanges, are they more personality driven rather than subject/substance driven. Does the comment count just be a really noisy signal to try keying off?
Thanks for the feedback!
Can you share why you think it’s quite important (for a work communication tool)? For a forum, I think it would make sense—many people prefer reading the most active threads. For a work communication tool, I can’t think of any reason why it would matter how many comments a thread has.
I thought about this for quite a while and have started to realise that the “posts” UI could be too complicated. I’m going to try out the “chat” and “DMs” UI for posts and see how it goes. Thanks!
Although “Chat” and “DMs”′ UI allows easily followable back and forth between people, I would like to point out that CQ2 advocates for topic-wise discussions, not person-wise. Here’s an example comment from LessWrong. In that comment, it’s almost impossible to figure out where the quotes are from—i.e., what’s the context. And what happened next is another person replied to that comment with more quotes. This example was a bit extreme with many quotes but I think my point applies to every comment with quotes. One needs to scroll person-wise through so many topics, instead of topic-wise. I (and CQ2) prefer exploring what are people’s thoughts topic-by-topic, not what are the thoughts on all topics simultaneously, person-by-person.
Again, not saying my design is good for LessWrong; I understand forums have their own place. But I think for a tool for work, people would prefer topic-wise over person-wise.
My sense, regarding the read the most active thread desire, is that the most active thread might well be amongst either the team working on some project under discussion or across teams that are envolved in or impacted by some project. In such a case I would think knowing where the real discussion is taking place regarding some “corporate discussions” might be helpful and wanted.
I suppose the big question there is what about all the other high volume exchanges, are they more personality driven rather than subject/substance driven. Does the comment count just be a really noisy signal to try keying off?
P.S. I’m open to ideas on building this in collaboration with LessWrong!