Suppose I have several different points to make in response to a given comment. Do I write all of them in a single comment, or do I write each of them in a separate comment? There doesn’t seem to be an universally accepted norm about this—the former seems to be more common, but there’s at least one regular here who customarily does the latter and I can’t remember anyone complaining about that.
Advantages of writing separate comments:
I can retract each of them individually, in case I change my mind about one of them but still stand by the others (as here).
Each of them can be upvoted or downvoted separately, so I don’t have to guess what people are enjoying or objecting to.
If each comment gives rise to a discussion, and someone is only interested in one of them, they can collapse the other ones.
Disadvantages of writing separate comments:
It clutters the Recent Comments sidebar and page, my contribution history, and the mailbox of the author of the parent comment.
It increases the total number of comments in the thread, making it more likely for it to exceed the maximum number a reader has set and for other comments to get hidden.
It may come across as something unusual done in the attempt of getting more total karma that I could otherwise have.
Should we standardize on one possibility, or decide on a case-by-case basis?
Should we standardize on one possibility, or decide on a case-by-case basis?
As a more serious response, I personally try to make one response, unless the commenter is still actively part of the discussion and the discussion has clearly split into two topics. In practice, that tends to weigh very strongly against splitting.
One major disadvantage of splitting an active conversation is that interesting points may go into only one branch, and end up missed in the other branch. Especially if one’s main method of browsing is clicking the recent comments.
I’m just enjoying that this post is upvoted for asking a question, by the upvoter did not make any suggestion for the answer. My sense of humor is apparently quite degenerate.
Maybe the upvoter wants my comment to be more visible because they are also interested in other people’s opinion on this, but didn’t have anything to add to what I said themselves.
I think you took my comment more seriously than I intended. Anyway, I don’t sort by karma because I find it confusing to follow conversations when comments aren’t listed in the order made. But I’m not trained by Reddit (or where-ever the sort-by-karma norms are coming from).
Suppose I have several different points to make in response to a given comment. Do I write all of them in a single comment, or do I write each of them in a separate comment? There doesn’t seem to be an universally accepted norm about this—the former seems to be more common, but there’s at least one regular here who customarily does the latter and I can’t remember anyone complaining about that.
Advantages of writing separate comments:
I can retract each of them individually, in case I change my mind about one of them but still stand by the others (as here).
Each of them can be upvoted or downvoted separately, so I don’t have to guess what people are enjoying or objecting to.
If each comment gives rise to a discussion, and someone is only interested in one of them, they can collapse the other ones.
Disadvantages of writing separate comments:
It clutters the Recent Comments sidebar and page, my contribution history, and the mailbox of the author of the parent comment.
It increases the total number of comments in the thread, making it more likely for it to exceed the maximum number a reader has set and for other comments to get hidden.
It may come across as something unusual done in the attempt of getting more total karma that I could otherwise have.
Should we standardize on one possibility, or decide on a case-by-case basis?
As a more serious response, I personally try to make one response, unless the commenter is still actively part of the discussion and the discussion has clearly split into two topics. In practice, that tends to weigh very strongly against splitting.
One major disadvantage of splitting an active conversation is that interesting points may go into only one branch, and end up missed in the other branch. Especially if one’s main method of browsing is clicking the recent comments.
case by case seems fine.
I’m just enjoying that this post is upvoted for asking a question, by the upvoter did not make any suggestion for the answer. My sense of humor is apparently quite degenerate.
Maybe the upvoter wants my comment to be more visible because they are also interested in other people’s opinion on this, but didn’t have anything to add to what I said themselves.
I think you took my comment more seriously than I intended. Anyway, I don’t sort by karma because I find it confusing to follow conversations when comments aren’t listed in the order made. But I’m not trained by Reddit (or where-ever the sort-by-karma norms are coming from).