Veritula – Meta
#4827·Tyler Mills, 7 months agoReiterating/refining #3904: I think the yellow "Criticism of" bubbles can and should be replaced by a graphical indication that is much easier on the eyes. The dropdown line can be made red if the comment it leads to is a criticism, and the bubble on the criticism can be eliminated. Reading the yellow bubble to get the idea # it is referring to, then searching the ideas above for the matching # is inelegant (even if it is usually the one right above).
The quote
indentation bar
is red, which would cause visual confusion.
#4828·Tyler Mills, 7 months agoThe yellow bubbles link to the ideas they are criticizing, which can be handy.
Is it handy? I have yet to want to open the criticized idea in a new tab. I have only ever wanted to scroll up to see it, which is slightly irksome with the current yellow bubble hashtag-matching method. And when the criticized idea is clearly immediately above, the yellow bubbles serve no real purpose, only add visual clutter.
#4827·Tyler Mills, 7 months agoReiterating/refining #3904: I think the yellow "Criticism of" bubbles can and should be replaced by a graphical indication that is much easier on the eyes. The dropdown line can be made red if the comment it leads to is a criticism, and the bubble on the criticism can be eliminated. Reading the yellow bubble to get the idea # it is referring to, then searching the ideas above for the matching # is inelegant (even if it is usually the one right above).
The yellow bubbles link to the ideas they are criticizing, which can be handy.
Reiterating/refining #3904: I think the yellow "Criticism of" bubbles can and should be replaced by a graphical indication that is much easier on the eyes. The dropdown line can be made red if the comment it leads to is a criticism, and the bubble on the criticism can be eliminated. Reading the yellow bubble to get the idea # it is referring to, then searching the ideas above for the matching # is inelegant (even if it is usually the one right above).
#4616·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 months agoNot sure this is a good idea. You say you wouldn’t mind horizontal scrolling, but users generally dislike horizontal scroll.
Could be optional, as I said. Rearrange top-level ideas as toggled. Maybe not worth the trouble. Just spitballing. See #4825.
Not understanding this criticism. Maybe my idea is unclear. I'm picturing the existing "column" of a discussion, repeated column-wise for each top-level idea. Current discussion content takes up only the left ~third of my screen, while the right two thirds of my screen is totally unused. The cost of using that real estate is more content (clutter) on screen, the benefit is less time scrolling up and down in one dimension, looking for given ideas and getting bearings, which I sometimes find tiring. A second dimension helps get bearings (e.g. "Oh yeah, this relates to that one over here near the middle of the third column." Rather than: "That one was ... 77% of the way down the page, hmm, what were some words from it that I can use to ctrl+f, grrrrr.").
Thoughts on an optional "implies" relation for ideas? I find myself commenting on one idea something which it implies, then criticizing that, but the original idea is not marked criticized. Being able to chain or bundle ideas avoids the bookkeeping issue of having to make new criticisms for each step in the chain, if one is criticized.
Need time indicators again, for when an idea was posted, like we used to have. But shorter: something like ‘1h’
Need time indicators again, for when an idea was posted, like we used to have. But shorter: something like ‘1h’
Need time indicators again, for when an idea was posted, like we used to have. But shorter: something like ‘1h’
Not if the criticism is clear and concise. That should be incentivized somehow.
Not if the criticism is clear and concise. That should be incentivized somehow.
#4730·Moritz Wallawitsch, 7 months agoNot if the criticism is clear and concise. That should be incentivized somehow.
A discussion can get long even if each criticism is concise.
Someone who recently joined made a bunch of low-quality posts in a short amount of time.
#4614·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months agoNeed rate limiting for new users to prevent excessive posting.
why?
#4727·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 months agoNeed summaries at top of discussions. Could be AI generated.
Not if the criticism is clear and concise. That should be incentivized somehow.
A discussion needs to be more skimmable via one or both of these:
1. hide long posts behind "read more" button
2. collapse critique chains/threads behind a "reply more" button
The UI needs to be more minimalistic. Too many buttons to click on. Needs clear primary action on every screen.
Need summaries at top of discussions. Could be AI generated.
Idea: communities.
Communities group or maybe even replace discussions.
Could live at /v/community-name.
There could be a community around nutrition, another for software engineering, a meta community for Veritula, etc.
@davies could have his own community to build his Wikipedia competitor.
#3905·Dennis HackethalOP, 9 months ago@tyler-mills says:
… I’m finding the threads a bit cumbersome to keep track of. Would love an option to have each top level idea in a column, and horizontal scrolling would be fine with me if there are many of them.
Unclear how comments would be rendered.
#3905·Dennis HackethalOP, 9 months ago@tyler-mills says:
… I’m finding the threads a bit cumbersome to keep track of. Would love an option to have each top level idea in a column, and horizontal scrolling would be fine with me if there are many of them.
Not sure this is a good idea. You say you wouldn’t mind horizontal scrolling, but users generally dislike horizontal scroll.
Need rate limiting for new users to prevent excessive posting.
Fix typo
A ‘supercession’ isn’t some special flag in the system – it’s just another criticism that can be countercriticized. So I hesitate to implement special functionality for ‘special’ criticisms.
A ‘supersession’ isn’t some special flag in the system – it’s just another criticism that can be countercriticized. So I hesitate to implement special functionality for ‘special’ criticisms.
#4504·Benjamin Davies, 8 months agoI would prefer to find out I was reading an outdated version of something before I started reading it, not at the end, and not in the comments.
Outdated is different from superseded. The versions show at the top of the idea. That signals at least potential ‘supersession’ before you start reading.
#4504·Benjamin Davies, 8 months agoI would prefer to find out I was reading an outdated version of something before I started reading it, not at the end, and not in the comments.
A ‘supercession’ isn’t some special flag in the system – it’s just another criticism that can be countercriticized. So I hesitate to implement special functionality for ‘special’ criticisms.