On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 11:17:17AM -0600, Steven Belknap wrote:
> There is information about the slashdot engine at
> http://slashcode.com/. This would appear to meet the requirements for a
> thread-oriented discussion engine.
[ I originally sent this to jboske, where Nick was wondering if it
would be better due to the insane volume there right now. I could
stand a usenet thing, but I think most of these 'permanence' arguments
are bogus. Mail is probably best---ya'll should just get better
clients if you don't have thread views. ]
Slashdot sucks. Both the site and the message board program.
I prefer mail. Having huge, extremely deep and nested slashdot-style
threads is not going to have any help on the amount of volume.
Things will still be repeated and such because whenever there's
this much volume no one realistically (except maybe AndR) is going
to be reading every single word.
If you want better organization I suggest that we use better Subject:
headings and that you get a mail client which can display things
in a threaded view (if you don't have one already). Of course, a
few of these jboskepre use shitty clients (please upgrade or don't
use web-based shit) which don't send In-reply-to headers so some
messages won't properly thread (you are one of these people Nick ;) ).
If you want more permanence I don't think a /. style thing will
really help either, because there'll be so many comments that the
amount of permanence is not going to matter (think the yahoogroups
archive, or (better) robin's indented-thread archive of the lojban-list
thing. No one *ever* looks there before spewing to the lists).
Furthermore, a /. thing will require using a webbrowser for this
stuff, which sucks ass.
Ok I'm done now. fa'o
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
pgpebHHRVJIBy.pgp
Description: PGP signature