top | item 6933806

Ask HN: We are looking to rethink discussion platforms. Your suggestions?

20 points| rrpadhy | 12 years ago | reply

We are working to re-think discussion platform.<p>What are the improvements you would like in Hacker News or Reddit, etc? What is your fav discussion platform? Why?

46 comments

order
[+] zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC|12 years ago|reply
Don't use the Web, don't build a "platform", build a peer to peer system, support threading, use local storage of both postings and read status information, use a native interface for fast and efficient navigation.

Or in other words: Re-invent NNTP.

Yes, NNTP has its problems, too, and could possibly use some additional features, but it's silly when you look at how easily you could/can follow huge discussions using slrn, and how badly current online discussion technology stacks up against that. It's all shinier now, but the usability is absolute crap for the most part.

[+] zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC|12 years ago|reply
I guess I should spell this out explicitly: Don't integrate data model and UI. That's the most silly thing about the web nowadays: Every instance of the same kind of content comes with a different UI, but without an API, even though it is all computer-readable data in principle. That is completely braindead, as far as the possibilities of information technology go. Wherever there is a discussion offered, I should be able to add it to the discussion software of my choice, so that (a) I have all the discussions in one place and with a consistent UI, which then can reasonably be powerful, as it's reasonable to, say, learn key bindings, for your one discussion client, as opposed to learning keybindings for every web forum out there, and (b) if you don't like the UI I am using, you can use a different UI that you like, and still participate in the same discussion. And in any case, native software is just so much more responsive than any of this web stuff.
[+] dasmoth|12 years ago|reply
This.

Every time I see attempts to use Twitter et al. as a "platform", I end up thinking how much better something NNTP-like would fill the role, if only it still had significant penetration.

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
I am not a big fan of peer to peer system, but will give it a look.
[+] basch|12 years ago|reply
Reinvent Slashdot's meta-moderation. http://slashdot.org/faq/metamod.shtml

Don't treat users like their contributions are equal. Some users make better decisions than others. Reward them.

I think the Slashdot FAQ should be required reading before developing a comment system. There are a lot of lessons they learned ahead of the rest of the internet, problems others still have not solved. Something history, doomed to repeat.

http://slashdot.org/faq/

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
Thanks.

Community moderation is quite a nice concept. Slashdot has indeed implemented it quite intelligently.

[+] bakli|12 years ago|reply
You should take a look at discourse: https://github.com/discourse/discourse.

They have rethought it and implemented it quite well.

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
Yes, we like discourse to a great extent ...

however, one problem which we always face is following thru the comments on HN or reddit .. once the comments cross 100 ... or even 50

Discourse does not solve that either ... Is that a problem for others?

[+] nexttimer|12 years ago|reply
What's wrong with http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/ ?

It's encrypted, distributed, open-source. It has chat, messaging, file sharing, forums, etc.

What more do you want? If anything, why not just write a plug-in for it or otherwise contribute?

[+] petervandijck|12 years ago|reply
My favorite discussion platform must involve food. Something special happens when people gather around food. And some type of structured moderation that becomes culture.
[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
Food is an absolute must. Unfortunately, HN does not have that. :(

BTW, what do you generally like in food discussions? Is it good pics of food dishes, or recipes or something else?

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
How important is meeting new people on a discussion platform?

How often do you like to follow/friend/private message interesting people you may find on a particular discussion?

[+] balakrishnan|12 years ago|reply
My favorite discussion forum is WordPress, Tumbr. Effective UI, easy to navigate buttons, Accessibility options, ease of app use on mobiles are the features I look at.
[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
While going through this discussion, I realized HN does not have any form of notification system.

How important is notification for an effective discussion platform?

[+] zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC|12 years ago|reply
The need for notifications is just a symptom of an idiotic system overall.

When was the last time that a company offered you to notify you by (snail) mail when there was a letter available for you to pick up at their headquarters?

It's a workaround for having to poll multiple event (posting) sources. Which only arises because we have multiple event sources. Which is completely unnecessary, technically. (I am talking about the user interface here, of course - it's perfectly fine to have the software poll multiple sources, or, even better, to have some protocol-level notification/push mechanism, of course, but the user should not ever have to deal with it.)

That also does not mean that integrating with email, say, is necessarily a bad idea - but not in order to tell a human that they should poll some event source, but as an interface medium for the actual discussion (that is, essentially as a mailing list). e-mail supports much of the necessary basic functionality, and it's also an existing infrastructure that give the user one UI of their choice for all communication partners.

[+] xerophtye|12 years ago|reply
HN notify is kind of an external plugin... But considering that i did apply to means that yes, notification is important. But over-bombardment of notifications can be annoying
[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
What do you feel about anonymous user handle? Is it a must? Or discussion platform should not have anonymous users, as it leads to trolling.
[+] xerophtye|12 years ago|reply
I like how HN handles that problem. Users are associated with an "account" so their posts etc on THIS site are linked together. And it helps identify trolls and throwaway accounts easy.

But it also gives you a sense of optional anonymity as your HN account doesn't have to necessarily link with the rest of your web presence. No one can find you in the real world just from you HN account if you don't want them too. And still, the option to provide further information gives you the OPTION to present your credentials and connect "who you are" with the HN account.

I find it really interesting how sometimes VERY simple features are solving relatively complex problems

[+] zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC|12 years ago|reply
I for one don't take part in discussions where real names are required, as the requirement discourages people with (non-trolling) strongly opposing views from taking part in the discussion, so it's pretty much guaranteed to be an echo chamber (or at least biased towards reaffirming the consensus) - that is, it is worthless for me to learn from, and it carries the risk of making me think I have validated my own opinions against opposing points of view.
[+] zby|12 years ago|reply
An idea:

A dialectic platform - when two users disagree someone should write a third post that both agree with.

[+] xerophtye|12 years ago|reply
This seems like a good usecase for that "replies to multiple posts" feature i was telling you about in my other comment (would't it be nice if a mention of my other post was a click away? Unfortunately, the process for that is comparatively cumbersome in HN and i am not gonna post the link just to annoy you and make you realize the feature's importance)

4chan maybe a ton of bad things, but what it truly nails, is a simple-to-use and effective UI.

(Legend has it that whenever you speak of 4chan, moot makes an appearance. Wonder if it'll happen this time)

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
That is an interesting point.

It remains to be seen if two users are actually agreeing to the third person, or still continue to argue with their points

[+] nambuj|12 years ago|reply
LinkedIn and Facebook Groups can re-think about having a better way of engaging people!
[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
Absolutely.

The original idea for a better discussion platform came after using fb group for 2.5 years and feeling the pain. We had started the Bangalore Startups group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/blrstartups/)...

Although we keep getting new users fairly well, control and structuring discussions is completely missing..

[+] michaelochurch|12 years ago|reply
End to the passive-aggressive hellbans and service degradations (e.g. slowban, rankban) for obviously non-spamming users.

Re-show comment karma in order to restore trust, in the wake of awareness of rankbanning, since that will provide transparency in comment placement.

Hacker News still has a community advantage. (I'll take HN's irritating-- but at least book-smart-- libertarian naifs over the actual idiots of most forums any day). The moderation could use some work, though.

[+] rrpadhy|12 years ago|reply
Effective moderation is always a pain. The biggest curse of moderation is the inability to keep everyone happy. However, it is a necessary evil, which can not be avoided as well.

This point does give me an idea on how to handle the moderation a bit better though. Let me polish the idea, before telling more about it.