Ask HN: Can we add collapsing boxes to comments?
The top of this thread devolved into an off-topic discussion of the Month Hall problem [1]. I'm often on my phone and don't have the ability to use the browser extension that adds collapsing boxes on a desktop. Plus I think this would be a feature that could allow everyone to more easily locate interesting discussion.
My favorite discussions on HN are the ones where comments are primarily on topic and substantive. How can we get more of this?
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11389370
47 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 115 ms ] threadIf HN declines to add it, maybe someone can make an `HNES'?
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hn-special-an-addi...
You have to disable their hideous theme, but it adds collapsible comments and infinite scroll on the home page which is pretty neat.
http://i.imgur.com/XJOS9oz.png
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hackernew/lgoghlnd...
[1] http://insin.github.io/react-hn
However, I put a low bet on it actually happening.
How about putting a lower score weighting on comments with lots of replies?
[1] This thread from yesterday illustrates this perfectly, in my opinion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11374839
Right. But we can't control what people say without making changes to HN policy on moderation.
What I'm suggesting requires no policy change and would allow you to skip over that entire conversation quite easily with one click.
I was originally going to suggest some alternatives, but thinking about this made me conclude that this is an unsolved UX problem and I don't know the answer.
Color code the indentation space of comments and make them click able to collapse them. Then as you're reading, you just remember in your head you are reading about "red" right now, and "blue" is sort of interesting but at some point you decide to collapse the current blue in order to skip to the next comment at the blue level. No scrolling required. Make sense?
I just tried it. The collapsing is great and easy to use. Clicking anywhere in a comment to collapse makes sense. Then again, that removes your ability to copy/paste, quote someone, etc.
Also, everyone will not use this or the browser extensions. We all need access to the same basic tools in order for the overall quality of discussion to go up.
Thanks again though, I didn't know about this one. I'd consider using it if it were not so slow and didn't just crash on my N4, doh! =)
Although, adding this feature doesn't really make it better or worse for that goal.
Traditionally, HN staff have been very reluctant to make changes to the UI for fear it may hurt quality of discussion or promote the number of deep comments where people are talking past each other.
I think there is a strong argument to be made that collapsing boxes will increase quality of discussion by allowing everyone to navigate topics more quickly.
https://hckrnews.com/about.html
The point stands that everyone should have access to the same basic tools. If some people do not use an extension, they will not be able to browse topics as quickly. This hurts discussion quality.
I use w3m under emacs, and that does not work with Javascript. So HN would break if it required it. Using a Javascript-aware browser would also expose me to a host of Javascript vulnerabilities.
Anyway, I'd be much more interested in comments and articles getting tags, rather than collapsing comments.
Even better would be ditching primitive web browsers for a return to Usenet, which would allow the use of sophisticated news clients with features like kill files, properly threaded and sorted conversations, advanced filtering, and, yes, collapsible comments.
Why would it require it? If JS is turned off, the arrows don't get removed when you vote on an item. If comment thread collapsing were implemented, then thread collapsing just wouldn't work with JS off.
Just because so many "web applications" don't work with JS disabled doesn't mean that one can't make a site that works pretty much just as well with JS off as it does on. :)
Thanks for the discussion! I guess we won't see this feature in the near term.
I wouldn't call this topic meta. I'd call it a critique of HN itself.
This thread contains many interesting comments. The topic was up voted quickly by the HN community. If the thread really was manually removed, I'd like to hear directly from the mods about why. Where in the HN guidelines does it state you cannot critique HN? It doesn't. The only thing it says that is similar is this,
> Please don't post on HN to ask or tell us something (e.g. to ask us questions about Y Combinator, or to ask or complain about moderation). If you want to say something to us, please send it to hn@ycombinator.com.
However, this post was a question to the community asking for ideas on how to improve comment navigation and thus discussion quality.
So I think maybe something else happened and I'm just curious what triggered the topic's removal.
Why would people do that? I suspect because for many people talking about Hacker News is not the reason that they come to Hacker News. I suspect that many people, like me, classify talking about Hacker News rather than hacker news to fall into the category of meta-discussion much in the same way that talking about StackOverflow is considered meta-discussion and lives on a separate site...if site management seems like an interesting topic, listening to Spolsky and Atwood discusss the building of StackOverflow is a good listen, they made podcasts all the way back to the first weeks of building it.
Don't get me wrong, I think a critique of HN could be interesting. I just think a blog post or essay would probably be more intellectually interesting than a quickly written call to arms...in that vein I suppose an actual implementation would be still more intellectually interesting particularly one of those proposals based on pure CSS. Given the organization of Hacker News markup, pure CSS recursing on .athing would probably be a duct tape (in the highest sense of duct tape) grade hack.
That leaves the question of why some meaningful fraction of the Hacker News community didn't find the question particularly interesting. There I think it bumps up against a bit of tEndless September. Here's a more popular and but no more interesting thread from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11355038 Though in fairness proposing turning HN into Reddit probably gets some extra points for turning the "HN is turning into Reddit" meme on its head.
Anyway, people who follow all this stuff are aware that the moderator, dang, has said that collapsible comments are on the feature backlog. My take is that the feature backlog is filled with items that make the site better but that users don't see [e.g. don't see spammers].
The other problem with meta discussions besides dullness is that trying to be polite and thoughtful and helpful sucks up an asymmetric amount of effort, as this post demonstrates.
I didn't realize the topic was a dupe, oops! Anyway now we know.
I was told they're considering the feature and will probably implement something. Fingers crossed!
> trying to be polite and thoughtful and helpful sucks up an asymmetric amount of effort, as this post demonstrates.
Not sure what you mean here. Whose time, commenter or HN staff? Either can choose to ignore the topic, whether by closing the tab or through modding. As you said, meta discussions are modded off, but allowed from time to time because, according to the response I got in email, "they get people's juices flowing". I'm fine with that though I do think it'd be more clear if that were noted in the guidelines.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11355038
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/hn-collapse/