Comments on: A better option for tracking post activity?

A better option for tracking post activity?

iamkimiam — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:20:01 -0800

Bookmarks, placeholders, whatever you want to call them...is there a possibility for a better way, built into the site, super please?

Let's say I want to catch up on recent comments in a thread. Currently, I have two options: 1. I can favorite the thread and then wade through my favorites using the "My favorites" under the "Recent Activity" heading. This comes with a few drawbacks: including not being able to collapse any thread, necessitating lots of scrolling, as ALL comments from ALL favorited threads are shown; not being able to 'jump in' where you want; multiple steps (clicks) getting to the activity you want to catch up on, etc. 2. Leaving a comment in the thread. This is great when you have something to contribute; noise when you don't. I personally don't mind the blatant "placeholder" or "bookmark" comment, and I am not here to complain about that at all. It's that the frequency of placeholder comments (including ones I've made myself), especially as posts are getting longer, suggests that maybe a greasemonkey script or an activity-tracking solution could be really helpful for MeFites. Any ideas?

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:25:09 -0800

Is MetaFilter Scroll Tag not acceptable for some reason?

By: mathowie

mathowie — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:25:36 -0800

Try an RSS reader and just subscribe to the threads you want?

By: DU

DU — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:45:57 -0800

Boy, word to this. But actually, I only want to follow certain threads of the discussion. Which requires threading. Which is objected to for some reason, even though threads really do exist conceptually, they are just crippled by a lack of tools to handle them.

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:46:37 -0800

Plutor, that script is perfect! I was looking for a solution that didn't necessitate me leaving the site or doing a bunch of thread maintenance (subscribing, tagging, unsubscribing, etc.)

By: skynxnex

skynxnex — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:51:53 -0800

Also, browser bookmarks might work fine. Click on the time stamp and then make a bookmark. Or, at least in Firefox 3, right click on the time stamp and select "Bookmark This Link". And then you have a bookmark to the comment in the thread you want. Browser bookmarks seem to respect anchors. But, this may not do exactly what you want.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:52:01 -0800

fuck threading.

By: zpousman

zpousman — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:55:57 -0800

A good threading UI (and its attendant but utterly sucky *software process patent*) is a $100,000,000 idea. It's like 1-click ordering. But a lot harder.

By: never used baby shoes

never used baby shoes — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:57:59 -0800

thread fucking!

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:58:28 -0800

fuck threading.

What he said.

By: dawson

dawson — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:02:09 -0800

What he said.

That's what she said.

By: ORthey

ORthey — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:08:06 -0800

That's what she said.

But she was talking about what he was talking about, which was actually about sewing.

By: cillit bang

cillit bang — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:10:26 -0800

I'd love to see Matt's suggestion integrated into the site. The Recent Activity view would work way better if it was more like an RSS reader - ie a list of subscribed threads (ie. commented or favorited) and the number of unread comments since you last clicked them. Doing it in an external reader is too much work.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:17:44 -0800

Why not just use recent comments? Is there something I'm missing?

By: cimbrog

cimbrog — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:28:59 -0800

Why not just use recent comments? Is there something I'm missing?

The problem is getting back to the proper place within the big-ass threads we've been having lately. The ability to bookmark within a thread is what is being requested.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:34:58 -0800

Is MetaFilter Scroll Tag not acceptable for some reason?

I had no idea this existed! I just installed it, and it is awesome. Thank you, Plutor.

By: jeffburdges

jeffburdges — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:21:45 -0800

I just want it to say how many people have favorited each front page post on the front page itself.

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:31:57 -0800

I like things just the way they are, now remove yourselves from my lawn at once, you darn meddling kids!

/Scooby Doo villain & Grumpy Old Guy mashup

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:32:46 -0800

Which is objected to for some reason, even though threads really do exist conceptually, they are just crippled by a lack of tools to handle them.

The natural threading of conversation is a much more elegant thing than any extant forum-threading model can account for; it is largely effortless and liquid, leveraged as it is not on software but on the cognitive powers of the reader. Conversation can bifurcate and meld via quotations and references in a way that makes Mefi at it's best a joy to read.

To complain that the conversation is crippled by a lack of a formal threading mechanism is to complain that the art of fencing is crippled by a lack of mechanical stabbing machines.

By: Damn That Television

Damn That Television — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:39:07 -0800

To complain that the conversation is crippled by a lack of a formal threading mechanism is to complain that the art of fencing is crippled by a lack of mechanical stabbing machines.

To say that mechanical stabbing machines would make fencing less of an art is to say that the Lord God created pizza to be flat and cumbersome, and that pizza should never be on a bagel, for then man might have pizza any time.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:39:34 -0800

Must. Fuck. Threads. At. All. Costs.

By: waraw

waraw — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:39:44 -0800

Metafilter: crippled by a lack of mechanical stabbing machines.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:01:35 -0800

Mechanical stabbing machine.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:02:56 -0800

Heh. Da Shiv's brother was just talking about working in this factory in Taiwan where they have these robots that use prongs to lift glass sheets, and about how sometimes they get disoriented and turn outward, with the prongs still thrusting again and again—essentially stabbing robots.

It was kind of perversely hilarious how frere Shiv seemed totally blasé about folks being stabbed, or falling into pits to their deaths ("It was the contractor's responsibility to place warnings around the pit. Our factory was not liable.") or any other number of industrial manglings.

So we've been joking about stabbing robots all week.

By: Godbert

Godbert — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:03:54 -0800

The entire Internet is crippled by a lack of mechanical stabbing machines.

By: rtha

rtha — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:14:56 -0800

The entire Internet is crippled by a lack of mechanical ~~stabbing~~ dickpunching machines.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:24:50 -0800

DU: Boy, word to this. But actually, I only want to follow certain threads of the discussion. Which requires threading. Which is objected to for some reason, even though threads really do exist conceptually, they are just crippled by a lack of tools to handle them.

Threads are already provided on the only level that makes sense.

Anybody who loves the old BBSes (yeah, I've been there) is going to work great with threading. Any other normal, sane, rational human being will find threading to be ridiculous and counter-intuitive, at least in the form in which it existed then and exists to this day. A ridiculous tree with little pointless branches all over it pointing out in all directions, none of which have anything to do with each other, almost always results.

Do you have any idea what it would be like to read such a stupid slop of crap? Never mind that. Do you have any idea what it would be like to try to moderate that shit? It wouldn't make sense. It's already apparently too much, we've seen recently, to expect people to have read the question in an AskMe thread or to have read the post itself, much less the comments that came before in a simple top-to-bottom page. How in the hell are you going to induce people to click through all kinds of silly threads? How are you going to convince people they need to read the thread about y when they're only interested in the thread about z, even if the thread about y mentions and maybe even discusses at length z?

I don't understand why anybody thinks threading would be a good idea. I'd like to see an example of even one conversational web site where threading works well and intuitively functional for a large user base like we have here. Just one. I've never seen one.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:30:05 -0800

I'd like to see an example of even one conversational web site where threading works well and intuitively functional for a large user base like we have here. Just one. I've never seen one
Nor me.

I go further: if it's not plain text, all in one big-ass page (optional: will also accept just "last 50 posts" if you can view the whole thread with a click), I'm not using it.

I've never stayed more than a day on any of those "page 1 of 17" forums. See also: signatures, avatars.

By: xbonesgt

xbonesgt — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:32:18 -0800

Whatever generates the main page knows how many comments are in a given thread, right? And it also knows how many new comments have been posted to that thread since the last time I visited, right? So, in addition to the globally unique anchor tag surrounding each comment's timestamp, why can't we also have an anchor tag for each comment on a per-thread basis, numbered #comment1, #comment2, etc.? If we did, there could be a link for every FPP saying "click here to go to the newest comment" or something, where the "newest comment" is found by just subtracting the number of new comments from the number of total comments.

It solves the recent-activity problem without requiring any additional steps on the user's part. I know installing a Greasemonkey script isn't exactly challenging, but the UX/UI developer in me cringes at any solution that doesn't pass the Grandma test.

Also, while we're at it, I'd like to request a new link at the bottom of every comment that would allow me to sic a mechanical stabbing machine on whoever posted it.

By: These Premises Are Alarmed

These Premises Are Alarmed — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:39:35 -0800

Also, while we're at it, I'd like to request a new link at the bottom of every comment that would allow me to sic a mechanical stabbing machine on whoever posted it.

There's something behind which we all can get!

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:42:03 -0800

And it also knows how many new comments have been posted to that thread since the last time I visited, right?

That's the problematic axiom. The site doesn't make any such effort to know exactly when every user last visited the site period, let alone each specific thread.

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:46:00 -0800

Sooo, do we get our mechanical stabbing machine?

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:54:53 -0800

Must. Make. Senseless. Analogy. Then. Argue. From. Incredulity.

By: xbonesgt

xbonesgt — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:55:19 -0800

> The site doesn't make any such effort to know exactly when every user last visited the site period, let alone each specific thread.

ohh, ok... so then when I look at the mainpage and see something like:

posted by flapjax at midnite at 7:43 AM - 49 comments (36 new) +

underneath a FPP, where do the 49 and the 36 come from?

By: loquacious

loquacious — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:01:23 -0800

Anybody who loves the old BBSes (yeah, I've been there) is going to work great with threading.

I don't know what kind of godless mutant BBSes you dialed into, but none of the BBSes (or related pre-consumer-internet fora) that I used ever displayed such a obvious mockery of clean mental hygiene and proper thinking.

Like gopher infestations nested threads are an abomination and a communicable social disease which is best addressed through the copious application of fire. From geniune flame throwers.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:05:22 -0800

underneath a FPP, where do the 49 and the 36 come from?
from the assumption that nobody would visit more often than every 20 minutes. Oh gods, how I wish that were true of me.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:08:45 -0800

underneath a FPP, where do the 49 and the 36 come from?

From a less-than-exact activity-tracking cookie; see a whole bunch of previous metatalk threads about how inexact the (x new) counts are because of the fuzzy lack of granularity of that system. It works well for coming back to the site after being away for a while, but it's far from exact.

And again, even at that you have no recourse for thread-specific tracking; if someone comes to the site and wants to catch up where they left off in more than one thread based on their previous-visit cookie, they'll need to open all those threads simulatenously, since further activity (i.e. reading and commenting in threads) will reset the "when were you last here" marker.

By: middleclasstool

middleclasstool — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:19:25 -0800

I know installing a Greasemonkey script isn't exactly challenging, but the UX/UI developer in me cringes at any solution that doesn't pass the Grandma test.

Your Grandma doesn't read Metafilter, even if she does, then she's only a casual reader of the site and doesn't really have a need for obsessively tracking comment updates the way you and I do, and if she did, then she'd almost certainly have heard of Greasemonkey and would probably be reading this thread right now.

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:31:16 -0800

Someday the entire internet will be replaced by a small ~~shell~~ greasemonkey script. And that will be one greasy monkey!

Also, all this talk about electro-threading-conversation machines is moot. Any site that accepts me as a member is not a site that deserves enhanced conversationability.

By: stet

stet — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:31:37 -0800

So, migrate to phpBB then?

By: xbonesgt

xbonesgt — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:34:03 -0800

> from the assumption that nobody would visit more often than every 20 minutes. Oh gods, how I wish that were true of me.

> From a less-than-exact activity-tracking cookie; see a whole bunch of previous metatalk threads about how inexact the (x new) counts are because of the fuzzy lack of granularity of that system.

Got it. Thanks.

By: Elmore

Elmore — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:34:14 -0800

This has been a super week, what with super deletions and super pleases. It's just been fucking super. You're all fucking super.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:00:20 -0800

The site doesn't make any such effort to know exactly when every user last visited the site period, let alone each specific thread.

Well that's the problem isn't? It's self absorbed and doesn't care about us, not really.

even though it said "I love you"

By: quin

quin — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:22:56 -0800

The entire Internet is crippled by a lack of mechanical stabbing machines.

Not for my lack of trying.

fuck threading.

Agreed. I like the way a single comment can collapse several different "threads" in a post by connecting distantly related points. Actual threading would make this difficult and ruin the conversation.

By: kittens for breakfast

kittens for breakfast — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:00:16 -0800

I'm sure there's some very good reason why, if a thread were to get above (let's say) 500 responses, we couldn't fix it so that an easily-loadable second page of comments (beginning with response #501) would appear, but I don't know what it is.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:05:28 -0800

Because we really, really don't want to. Giant threads are the freaks (if an unusually populous gang of freaks in the third act of this insane election) and not what the site is intended to encourage let alone cater to.

By: potch

potch — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:27:44 -0800

Aren't sewing machines mechanical stabbing machines? And don't they provide threading?

By: pjern

pjern — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:34:12 -0800

What cortex said: I generally find that much of what I care to read happens in the first hundred comments or so, its rare that I want to soak and get all wrinkly and pruney in a thread much past that point.

By: barnacles

barnacles — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:34:47 -0800

1) That greasemonkey script is perfect perfect awesome awesome perfect. Thanks, Plutor.

2) Can we please learn more about stabrobots and deathpits please, klangklangston.

By: philip-random

philip-random — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:37:30 -0800

Regarding those insanely long threads, I kind of like it that continued pursuit of whatever discussions/conflicts/mud-slingings are going down grows gradually slower, clunkier, more frustrating. "Time to move a long, folks," whispers the ghost in the machine, "There's a whole world wide web out there."

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:57:48 -0800

Plutor, your script is really cool. Thanks.

By: sciurus

sciurus — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:07:24 -0800

I haven't read this whole thread, but I'd like to suggest putting the "456 comments (261 new)" next to the link in the favorites. That way y'all don't have to code anything new.

By: lukemeister

lukemeister — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:37:40 -0800

Metafilter: All in one big-ass page

By: pjern

pjern — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:04:47 -0800

Maybe there should be a mechanism to make posting progressively more difficult as the thread length grows past a certain point.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:42:03 -0800

I can favorite the thread and then wade through my favorites using the "My favorites"

I thought you favorited my stuff because you liked me. You're just using me as a bookmark! I feel so dirty....

*weeps*

By: turgid dahlia

turgid dahlia — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:05:34 -0800

Maybe there should be a mechanism to make posting progressively more difficult as the thread length grows past a certain point.

Great idea! Something like a mini-quiz about the previous 600 comments, to make sure you've read the damn thing before running your mouth. That way, people would be all "I've totally got an opinion, but, man, I can't even be bothered."

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:46:40 -0800

Looks like it's time to convert Metafilter to one big wiki.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:53:15 -0800

Looks like it's time to convert Metafilter to one big wiki.

We did that for April Fools once.

By: middleclasstool

middleclasstool — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:55:17 -0800

Maybe there should be a mechanism to make posting progressively more difficult as the thread length grows past a certain point.

Obviously, you did not closely follow or attempt to comment in the original Palin thread once it reached critical mass. The browser limitations alone took care of that one, my friend.

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:45:38 -0800

Your Grandma doesn't read Metafilter

Ohhhh!

You know how in "urban" culture, where someone "disses" someone else and bystanders go "Ohhhh!" and cover their mouths with one hand while raising the other and shaking it as though they literally felt the "burn"? That's what I was trying to convey.

But since I don't know if that posture/reaction has some any sort of formal name (A "diss-take" would be my guess), the above photo was the best I and GIS could come up with.

By: garlic

garlic — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:57:49 -0800

no threading and no pagination because the people in charge want to discourage comments. Not all comments exactly, but they don't want everyone who's on the site now to have their say in any particular thread. They don't want it to be easy for you to comment on the Palin thread, and they don't want you to be able to go into your own nested thread corner to discuss one aspect of the link while some other corner's discussing some other aspect. They really don't want 2 different corners talking about the same thing.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 07:03:48 -0800

yeah the Man wants to KEEP US DOWN amirite?

GOOGLE RON PAUL

By: cortex

cortex — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 07:06:14 -0800

SILENCED ALL YOUR LIFE

By: billyfleetwood

billyfleetwood — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:48:24 -0800

but the UX/UI developer in me cringes at any solution that doesn't pass the Grandma test.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here,and I think your overall point is valid. However...

When I worked as a UI/UX designer, the "Grandma test" was a good way to get soundly mocked and have all of your ideas ignored. Grandma's aren't dumb. Know why your grandma can't program the clock on her vcr? Because vcr's didn't need clocks. If there was a "make bundt cake" feature on the vcr, your grandma would have figured it out, no matter how complicated.

Then again, I showed a less than tech-savvy friend of mine the other day how I could use my iphone to "scan" money and pay bills. It took him about 5 seconds to run it through his head and call bullshit....but for those 5 seconds while I was rubbing the 20 dollar bill on the phone and it was making beepy noises, he was with me 100%

So maybe the stabbing machines are a good idea.

By: graventy

graventy — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 11:10:20 -0800

Just use Plutor's script (which is awesome, by the way) or bookmark it. Once the Palin megathreads dip off the front page, I bookmark the last comment read and check it every day or so, updating the bokmark.

Cumbersome, maybe, but it works better than a "NOTE TO SELF READ HERE" comment, which is just noise.

By: ghost of a past number

ghost of a past number — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:16:05 -0800

If anyone cares for collapsing threads in recent activity on Opera via user javascript ( and doesn't mind a half-arsed implementation by an idiot ), give me a MeMail.

Yes, I'm spending Saturday night at home - why do you ask?

By: popechunk

popechunk — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:09:35 -0800

HEY PLUTOR!!: you rock!