Search Ideas
791 ideas match your query.:
Reactions can be ambiguous. It wouldn’t always be clear which part of an idea someone is reacting to.
That limits the scope of the problem but doesn’t eliminate it. A single recipient could still react in a distracting way.
Revisions are complicated. Too many options (superseding a previous version, ‘Is criticism?’, unchecking comments). It might help to have a more guided processes over multiple screens.
Revisions are complicated. Too many options (superseding a previous version, ‘Is criticism?’, unchecking comments). It might help to have a more guided processes with multiple screens.
Reactions could be limited to the recipient of a comment.
People could wrongly think they have epistemological relevance. For example, they might adopt an idea that has pending criticism just because it got positive reactions.
Maybe somebody just forgot to reply or doesn’t know what to say.
If there’s no criticism, that implies agreement.
Veritula should have some way to indicate agreement.
By the time someone receives an email notification, they will probably have forgotten whatever they wrote originally that prompted someone to reply to them.
Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.
An explanation could accompany the n / m display, like a title on hover.
That way, there should never be any confusion as to a mismatch between the total vs rendered number of pending criticisms.
In addition, when looking at a deeply nested idea on ideas#show and submitting a criticism on a parent, I need to make sure the updated badges take into account that newly submitted criticism, even though the new criticism would not show after refreshing the page.
Any filtered idea should always display only the count of shown criticisms.
Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.
An explanation could accompany the n / m display, like a title on hover.
That way, there should never be any confusion as to a mismatch between the total vs rendered number of pending criticisms.
Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.
That way, there should never be any confusion as to a mismatch between the total vs rendered number of pending criticisms.
That could mislead people into thinking a revision has no pending criticisms, which would be bad for error correction.
See #1999: “People could easily miss or forget that.”
People could easily miss or forget that.
Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.
That way, there’s never any confusion as to 1) whether a filtered idea has any pending criticisms, 2) a filtered idea having more criticisms than are being rendered.
See #1992: “The instructions at the top of the page are clear that not all ideas are being rendered.”
If no criticisms are being displayed, yet the label says an idea has n pending criticisms, that might confuse people. More generally, any mismatch between rendered vs counted criticisms could confuse people.
If no criticisms are being displayed, yet the label says an idea has n pending criticisms, that might confuse people.
For all ideas, the total number of pending criticisms (if any) should always be shown, even if they are not all being rendered.
The instructions at the top of the page are clear that not all ideas are being rendered.