[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Discussion tooling (was: Bits from the DPL (August 2019))

Samuel Henrique <samueloph@debian.org> writes:

> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 10:48, Mathias Behrle <mbehrle@debian.org> wrote:
>> ...BTW no discussion tool can help in automating
>> separate discussion threads when the topic changes.
> They can, I think reddit and hackernews are good at this.
> That's the "tree-like" structure that I mentioned in my email.

Are there any good reddit or hackernews-style front-ends to mail
archives with a reply view similar to github's, including preview view?
(IIRC the email-paradigm example web-thing project mentioned earlier in
the thread didn't mention anything on this topic) Extra points if the
user can hold <ctrl>, highlight the passages from multiple messages, hit
reply, and get a markdown-style reply interface that enforces in-line
quoting style with no top posting or unnecessarily CCing.  And would
that be approachable enough for new members?  Are we ok with receiving
emails in markdown?  Emails sent to the list magically appear in the
right place on the web-interface, so long as the In-Reply-To header
is kept intact.

Honestly I wonder if anything with a "tree-like structure" will
intimidate users...maybe if one could bookmark one's position in the
thread it would be ok, but frankly when I look at the tree structure for
long complex threads I usually think "I don't have time for this" or
"making sense of this is too much work".

And if there's a stigma against repeating arguments/sentiments/info,
then there's also an implicit requirement to read the whole thread
before replying.  IMHO that's the biggest barrier to participation, but
on the other hand notice how many near-identical replies are found in
different branches of a sub-reddit...

BTW, would there be any value in a web-thing poll that sends out a
once-daily results to the thread?  The idea being it's a "me too" reply
option without the stigma.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: