Timeline for Hide trivial comments
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 18, 2021 at 12:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://data.stackexchange.com/ with https://data.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 12:10 | comment | added | G-Man Says 'Reinstate Monica' | @Father: +1 for "Don't hide just one comment". Was this implemented? I believe I still see "Show 1 more comment" links, which don't save much space. (2) I'm concerned about what happens to low-visibility questions. If a question gets only five views in ten days, it seems unfair to penalize all the comments for not getting a lot of votes. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 13:52 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Dec 13, 2013 at 10:46 | comment | added | J.R. means 'Just Reinstate' | RE: If you look at a post with an insane number of comments... Two thoughts on that: (1) It stands to reason that a post with an insane number of upvotes might also have an insane number of comments; (2) Why rely on some algorithm here? Why not just have a moderator clean it up? It seems like a human can figure out which comments are extraneous, and which should endure as part of the conversation. (Take Single most informative answer ever made on stackoverflow and Best. Answer. Ever!, e.g. – if the comments are becoming "too much", just pick one and delete the other.) | |
| Nov 7, 2013 at 22:06 | comment | added | voretaq7 |
(Replying to my own comment, the major concern I have are the "insightful" comments that may not cross the weight threshold - "On FooOS 11 the command is frotz, not blorple" - +2 for length, and +5 for hypothetical upvotes gives it a long-term weight of 7, so it will age out even though it's got useful information)
|
|
| Nov 7, 2013 at 21:58 | comment | added | voretaq7 |
I would expand Don't hide just one comment to Don't hide just N comments -- basically always show the Top N. The weighting algorithm is certainly not perfect at picking out the "most interesting" comments, but in all the cases I've looked at (even low-traffic) it's pretty darn good. (In my poking on SF 5 seems to be a good value for N -- Reducing N often loses signal, increasing it almost always adds noise.) This doesn't "declutter" (which is a big benefit to hiding even the Top N), but it does vastly improve what we've got now.
|
|
| Nov 7, 2013 at 16:56 | history | answered | Jon EricsonStaff | CC BY-SA 3.0 |