It's nice to have filtered links with a brief summary, but this is not my thing because your comments are too verbose. The issue is about 500 words/18 links, HN's http://news.ycombinator.com/best is 250/30. HN has little context, but the sweet spot for me is between the two. Here are a few relevant articles:
> Doug Crockford gave a talk on his book "JavaScript: The Good Parts". This article explains what he likes, what he doesn't, and why: Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit)
This implies that the content is an interpretation by someone else of Crockford, and that his talk was about his book, which it wasn't (it had the same subject). Besides that, it's verbose (in my opinion), and doesn't put the most relevant info at the front of the sentence. I would have edited it to read:
> Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit) - Author of "JavaScript: The Good Parts" on what's good and bad about Javascript.
or better yet:
> Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit) - Javascript pro/cons from author of "JavaScript: The Good Parts" (transcript).
I'm still looking for the sweet spot; I hope that the link titles themselves give enough context to decide if it's interesting when the topic is one you know, and the blurb just enough to decide if it's one you don't. Next week I'm going to try inverting the link and the description and see if that's more helpful.
2 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 13.1 ms ] threadhttp://www.useit.com/alertbox/headlines-bbc.html http://www.useit.com/papers/webwriting/rewriting.html http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9703b.html
Here's an example:
> Doug Crockford gave a talk on his book "JavaScript: The Good Parts". This article explains what he likes, what he doesn't, and why: Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit)
This implies that the content is an interpretation by someone else of Crockford, and that his talk was about his book, which it wasn't (it had the same subject). Besides that, it's verbose (in my opinion), and doesn't put the most relevant info at the front of the sentence. I would have edited it to read:
> Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit) - Author of "JavaScript: The Good Parts" on what's good and bad about Javascript.
or better yet:
> Doug Crockford Talk on JavaScript (news.yc, reddit) - Javascript pro/cons from author of "JavaScript: The Good Parts" (transcript).
I hope this criticism is helpful.
It is, thank you.
I'm still looking for the sweet spot; I hope that the link titles themselves give enough context to decide if it's interesting when the topic is one you know, and the blurb just enough to decide if it's one you don't. Next week I'm going to try inverting the link and the description and see if that's more helpful.