Thread: [Under consideration] catching up with long tmo threads
View Single Post
edgar2's Avatar
edgar2 is offline edgar2
2009-12-11 , 08:42
Moderator | Posts: 199 | Thanked: 264 times | Joined on May 2009 @ turku, finland
#5
Originally Posted by RevdKathy View Post
I fear the problem with flitering by thanks (or 'no thanks' if we used it) would be that people will thank or not thank opinions they agree/disagree with. Threads could thereby become very one-sided.
like at digg.com, to name one? although meta-commenting comments worksforsome imho, like at slashdot.org. maybe the emphasis on thanking for usefulness and filtering by usefulness could put a treshold to popularity thanking?

Originally Posted by RevdKathy View Post
The idea of 'summary' posts which are marked and findable is brilliant except for the question of whose job that is, and when they're made. Would it fall to the OP? The mod? The first person to think the thread is getting a bit long? (and could the summary also be subject to biased interpretation?)
i was thinking summary posts could be posted by anyone who felt like writing one at any given point, simply by checking a box at post composition.

another option could be to have one specific summary post in the beginning or end of the thread, editable by the thread starter and anyone he/she decides to add as a summary editor.