Does the code automatically put an article to the top when it’s edited after saving? Might want to fix that.
(I’d expect something like: set its date in the timeline at the moment it goes from “draft” to “published”. Not sure what would be a senslble way to handle putting it back from “published” to “draft”; possibly just ignore that case, and allow the social process to deal appropriately per case with posts that have been bumped. I’m assuming lsparrish was just intending to add a note to the top of the article, not specifically to bump it to the top.)
I think there’s the reverse problem with comments: occasionally, I will reply to my own comments instead of editing them because I’m afraid that, since edited comment aren’t moved back to the top of New Comments, no-one will read the edit.
There should be a “minor edit” checkbox (for both articles and comments), so that if I’m just tweaking the grammar I can check it and the post stays where it is, and if I’m adding new content I can uncheck it and the post goes back to the top.
Good point. I am thinking the problem stems from Discussion becoming oversaturated—they move out of New Comments too quickly. Splitting into multiple groups focused on a general topic-area could perhaps alleviate the pressure to make sure that first comment counts / make more comments than needed.
Currently the code puts a post back to the top when it is moved from “draft” to “published”. AFAICT there is no way to republish a post that has been moved to draft without bumping it to the top.
The bump was semi-intentional (there were substantial edits for clarity and brevity which the draft stage let me preview, but also I wanted to see more discussion), and happened a total of two times over the past week. “Constantly on top” is a slight exaggeration on Kawoomba’s part, as it was not on the recent posts lists for a while yesterday and also was in my drafts for some time thereafter while I made changes. As a long time member, I’m used to seeing posts be visible in discussion for this amount of time. This post is intended to eventually end up in Main, if I work up the confidence for it.
Right. It’s getting obnoxious, please don’t do that.
Is there some particular harm in bumping posts with substantial edits? Or are you trying to criticize my particular edits as not worthy of the bump?
Edit: Regardless of he reason, sincere apologies to anyone who was annoyed. I do understand the need to keep obnoxious behaviors low because this interferes with the participation fun level for the whole community.
Is there some particular harm in bumping posts with substantial edits?
A rule like “don’t exploit a bug to bump your own posts, period” is much easier to enforce than if you allow exceptions for a fuzzy category of posts with “substantial edits”—posters might be tempted to use that to attract extra attention, or suspect others of doing that.
More specifically, the “landscape” is already moving enough with back-and-forths between main and discussion, and people renaming their posts; if people start bumping their posts up keeping track of what I read and where there is interesting conversation will be even more of a hassle.
That makes sense, and also matches my prior intuitions as to what it might be. Thank you.
I think part of the problem is that I was operating on a mindset of a smaller / lower traffic group where this kind of promotion is has a relatively minor effect and less power to annoy others (as opposed to drawing them into a conversation that they might actually like).
In a larger userbase like we’re currently seeing for Discussion, ensuring fun for all participants is more dependent on these kinds of self-filtering rules/norms being followed more strictly. I’ve commented in open thread expressing a desire for more subreddits, and will be more careful in Discussion.
Why is this topic constantly on top?
Does the code automatically put an article to the top when it’s edited after saving? Might want to fix that.
(I’d expect something like: set its date in the timeline at the moment it goes from “draft” to “published”. Not sure what would be a senslble way to handle putting it back from “published” to “draft”; possibly just ignore that case, and allow the social process to deal appropriately per case with posts that have been bumped. I’m assuming lsparrish was just intending to add a note to the top of the article, not specifically to bump it to the top.)
I think there’s the reverse problem with comments: occasionally, I will reply to my own comments instead of editing them because I’m afraid that, since edited comment aren’t moved back to the top of New Comments, no-one will read the edit.
There should be a “minor edit” checkbox (for both articles and comments), so that if I’m just tweaking the grammar I can check it and the post stays where it is, and if I’m adding new content I can uncheck it and the post goes back to the top.
Good point. I am thinking the problem stems from Discussion becoming oversaturated—they move out of New Comments too quickly. Splitting into multiple groups focused on a general topic-area could perhaps alleviate the pressure to make sure that first comment counts / make more comments than needed.
Currently the code puts a post back to the top when it is moved from “draft” to “published”. AFAICT there is no way to republish a post that has been moved to draft without bumping it to the top.
The bump was semi-intentional (there were substantial edits for clarity and brevity which the draft stage let me preview, but also I wanted to see more discussion), and happened a total of two times over the past week. “Constantly on top” is a slight exaggeration on Kawoomba’s part, as it was not on the recent posts lists for a while yesterday and also was in my drafts for some time thereafter while I made changes. As a long time member, I’m used to seeing posts be visible in discussion for this amount of time. This post is intended to eventually end up in Main, if I work up the confidence for it.
Right. It’s getting obnoxious, please don’t do that.
Is there some particular harm in bumping posts with substantial edits? Or are you trying to criticize my particular edits as not worthy of the bump?
Edit: Regardless of he reason, sincere apologies to anyone who was annoyed. I do understand the need to keep obnoxious behaviors low because this interferes with the participation fun level for the whole community.
A rule like “don’t exploit a bug to bump your own posts, period” is much easier to enforce than if you allow exceptions for a fuzzy category of posts with “substantial edits”—posters might be tempted to use that to attract extra attention, or suspect others of doing that.
More specifically, the “landscape” is already moving enough with back-and-forths between main and discussion, and people renaming their posts; if people start bumping their posts up keeping track of what I read and where there is interesting conversation will be even more of a hassle.
That makes sense, and also matches my prior intuitions as to what it might be. Thank you.
I think part of the problem is that I was operating on a mindset of a smaller / lower traffic group where this kind of promotion is has a relatively minor effect and less power to annoy others (as opposed to drawing them into a conversation that they might actually like).
In a larger userbase like we’re currently seeing for Discussion, ensuring fun for all participants is more dependent on these kinds of self-filtering rules/norms being followed more strictly. I’ve commented in open thread expressing a desire for more subreddits, and will be more careful in Discussion.
The post’s submission date now say today (April 14th). Maybe the author has been editing the post that increased the post’s rank.