On Thursday, 13 March 2014 at 18:36:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> I would also like a voting system, much like what reddit has. The downside is such a system can easily be gamed. I know reddit has stuff in place to blunt gaming, and such may be beyond our resources to do (it requires constant attention).

I personally don't like Reddit's voting system because it ends up being controlled by a hivemind. I prefer the imageboard approach of everyone being on equal ground myself, but then again that requires anonymity and probably isn't appropriate here.

The Hacker News voting system seems to be pretty good, however. New things tend to go to the top, and then you can filter by points with say /over?points=x Inside comment threads, voting doesn't appear to be a factor. I still find the tree structure hard to read.

I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own ways of getting at the threads.

On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
> ways of getting at the threads.

I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP). I don't understand how others don't care for that.

Andrei

On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>> ways of getting at the threads.
>
> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP). I don't understand how others don't care for that.
>
> Andrei

The "basic" view mode has that. I don't regularly use it, but testing now, it also looks like the "threaded" view mode has it, so I guess you want a way to filter out already read posts from the threaded view?

On 3/14/14, 1:16 AM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
>>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>>> ways of getting at the threads.
>>
>> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since
>> last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP). I don't
>> understand how others don't care for that.
>>
>> Andrei
>
> The "basic" view mode has that.

No. The basic view mode lists threads, not posts.

Andrei

On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>> ways of getting at the threads.
>
> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP).

You read all the posts posted here?

Can you elaborate on the problem? My current understanding of your request was that it was just a layout preference, as opposed to something enabling a specific workflow.

On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:19:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/14/14, 1:16 AM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
>> On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>>>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
>>>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>>>> ways of getting at the threads.
>>>
>>> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since
>>> last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP). I don't
>>> understand how others don't care for that.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>> The "basic" view mode has that.
>
> No. The basic view mode lists threads, not posts.
>
> Andrei

Yes, and if you look to the right, you can click the "N new" link to take you to the oldest post in the thread that you haven't read. Since in the basic view, posts are listed chronologically, this is essentially exactly the feature you are asking for, AFAICS.

On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 07:54:47 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> Every time a reply uses +1 on its own line somewhere in the post (fuzzy match), add the replier's email address to a list of "likes" (or whatever) to the parent post. In the web interface, we could have an expandable drop-down box showing all the email addresses (and/or their display names?) who "liked" the post, probably in chronological order. Duplicate "likes" are not recorded. At a glance you would be able to see how many "likes" a post has, and if you want to see exactly who "liked" it, you could expand the list. Meanwhile, NNTP users are not deprived of this information (because it's gleaned from NNTP reply bodies) although it's harder for them to see the tally at a glance. The number of "likes" is limited to the number of replies a post has, so it's extremely unlikely to grow out of hand, and it's not subject to falsified information without overtly spamming the NNTP server.
>
> This still doesn't let you vote without replying, but I don't see how that would work without effectively leaving NNTP users in the dark.

This approach would mean that mailing list users would get an email every time someone upvotes something.

I don't think this will work very well in practice.

On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:23:39 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> This approach would mean that mailing list users would get an email every time someone upvotes something.
>
> I don't think this will work very well in practice.

I'm not suggesting an upvote button. Hopefully it would work just like now, where people usually leave explanatory comments with their +1's.

On 3/14/14, 1:19 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I find it
>>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>>> ways of getting at the threads.
>>
>> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since
>> last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP).
>
> You read all the posts posted here?

Yes.

> Can you elaborate on the problem? My current understanding of your
> request was that it was just a layout preference, as opposed to
> something enabling a specific workflow.

As of this very moment, my NNTP client (Thunderbird) shows there are 5 messages unread in the left treeview (http://imgur.com/KHnjcnU), and displays in a simple list all 223871 messages ever posted in digitalmars.D with the most recent 5 messages at the top and in bold text (http://imgur.com/uJ2UdzA). As I select each of those unread messages, their bold disappears (they become read). If I get bored and want to mark all news as read, there's a button that does that (or I could select some and mark as read etc).

I use threaded views for e.g. github discussions because once a pull is merged, I archive them all in one shot. But a flat view is a very simple and effective way of staying abreast of what's going on in the forum. Again, I feel I'm missing something given that I'm the only one asking for such.


Andrei

On 3/14/14, 1:21 AM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:19:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/14/14, 1:16 AM, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
>>> On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 08:13:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> On 3/14/14, 1:09 AM, w0rp wrote:
>>>>> I actually use the D forums for all of my posting these days. I
>>>>> find it
>>>>> easier to comprehend the order of threads. I think we all have our own
>>>>> ways of getting at the threads.
>>>>
>>>> I don't. There's no way on the http forum of seeing new posts since
>>>> last time I've read them all (something trivial with NNTP). I don't
>>>> understand how others don't care for that.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>
>>> The "basic" view mode has that.
>>
>> No. The basic view mode lists threads, not posts.
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Yes, and if you look to the right, you can click the "N new" link to
> take you to the oldest post in the thread that you haven't read. Since
> in the basic view, posts are listed chronologically, this is essentially
> exactly the feature you are asking for, AFAICS.

No. It's a poor workaround.

Andrei