Difference between revisions of "Talk:1019: First Post"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Please sign your comments.)
Line 19: Line 19:
 
This is precisely why Digg failed and now Reddit will fail. The moment the owners think they can manipulate discussions is the moment any discussion has any real value. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.161|173.245.50.161]] 02:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 
This is precisely why Digg failed and now Reddit will fail. The moment the owners think they can manipulate discussions is the moment any discussion has any real value. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.161|173.245.50.161]] 02:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
  
I wonder if this cartoon was the inspiration for the Russian trolling operations targeted at the US 2016 Presidential elections and the subsequent European elections.
+
I wonder if this cartoon was the inspiration for the Russian trolling operations targeted at the US 2016 Presidential elections and the subsequent European elections. {{unsigned ip| 172.68.58.5}}

Revision as of 20:50, 10 January 2018

Consistent posting order . . . .

You know, I think you're right, Blaisepascal. That's a good point. SilverMagpie (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

With a Wiki, you can edit the posting order any way you want, there's no reason you have to add your comments to the bottom Blaisepascal (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

First!! (ok, bad joke...)--B. P. (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I personally prefer seeing comments in chronological order, especially if the respondents reply to each other. I find it very annoying to see the reply before I've had a chance to read the original. The current comment system on Slate (where not only do new comments appear first, the page defaults to auto-updating, so the comments move down the page as you are trying to read them) is especially horrible. Blaisepascal (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I prefer threaded discussions. Chronological is close enough for short discussions, but threaded makes it so much easier to find read all the replies a comment got. (Yes, I know I'm replying to a year-old post.) gijobarts (talk) 07:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is. Just some random derp 23:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

. . . . is overrated. 74.213.186.41 17:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


I have the same interpretation as the current explanation, yet the "Incomplete" text says there are other interpretations. What are they? Smperron (talk) 15:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

This is precisely why Digg failed and now Reddit will fail. The moment the owners think they can manipulate discussions is the moment any discussion has any real value. 173.245.50.161 02:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if this cartoon was the inspiration for the Russian trolling operations targeted at the US 2016 Presidential elections and the subsequent European elections. 172.68.58.5 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)