[Feedback] About the recent e-sports posts

Sir ArmaMalum·Mar 17, 2014·1 votes·104 views

So I don't mind being tossed the occasional relevant link, and I personally love e-sports news so I consider these (somewhat spammy) posts helpful. However, the fact that they do not have a listed poster and have literally nothing except the link kind of frustrates me, especially with them having a direct link within the title, which I personally don't feel should be a thing in CB, due to the ease of abuse that can cause from the front page if the average user can use it.

I respect and appreciate the content and I understand there are features (Favoriting, new sub-comm general headlines, news feed) that can fix the issue of spam and some are even currently being worked on, but at the very very least can we reveal who is posting them (I realize Rioters write the articles)? It worries me that anonymous posting is even possible, and would really like to know if I would be replying, upvoting and otherwise interacting with a person, a group, or an automated news feed.

Edit 1: I also notice the posts are coming in at 0 votes, which makes sense for not overwhelming the 'Hot' ordering, but I use the 'Recent' ordering most on the front page. Although I realize that this same issue will arrive with a large enough community size (ala GD), as the CB is now I prefer to use 'Recent' until there is a better way to track low-voted posts for an extended period of time.

Edit 2: Now that I think about it why are these all separate posts when they're all heading to the same EU site? Would it not make more sense to have a 'recent EU news [Date]' thread anytime these bursts come? Not angry or anything, just legitimately wondering.

Thank you for your time

5 Comments

RoaranorMar 17, 20141 votes

I noticed them and, at first, thought it was a bug. Glad I saw this thread before making a separate thread to report it.

The posts themselves have no text whatsoever, which does feel a bit sketch. Also, it feels unnecessary to add a second place for commenting on the way to a post of which you at the time have no information or details on other than the title. I can't speak for others, but I would be more likely to simply comment on the actual link page where the information to reference is just a scroll away once I get there rather than come back to a blank post (and possibly cycle between tabs to reference the actual content).

It's not obvious that the title text and button go to separate places (one to the post for commenting and another to the actual link), so someone could mistake it for an unnecessary step of having to click to go an empty post and again to the actual link. Maybe a vertical bar to separate them in the title. In reference to the above paragraph, maybe it would be better to make the entire title a link instead.

Not being able to see the poster until after the link is a bit worrying. For me, it's mainly because the origin of the post, in terms of CBF, is really vague. If I assume that all of the links posted are via a Rioter and that this is a special privilege they have, I have this "I guess that's okay" feeling. But not every Rioter actually uses "Riot" in their names. Now I'm left in a position where it could possibly be:

A) A Rioter anyway,

B) Someone who isn't a Rioter, but a Rioter is the source of the link's presence on CBF, which can in and of itself be seen as an approval, or

C) Someone who isn't a Rioter that can post anonymous links on CBF, which is worrying, especially with how spam-ish the posts have been.

This is, of course, at first glance. A little clarification would be nice.

EDIT: It looks as though the titles always match the title of the actual site post. A new automated social integration feature? That would account for the lack of information provided in the CBF posts.

Sir ArmaMalumMar 17, 20141 votes

I can easily see it being automated, especially since these posts come in very quick bursts of 5 or so, but if that's the case what would be the harm of listing the OP as "EU news" or "EU e-sports updates" in the author slot? I don't mind it being automated posting, just simply knowing the origin before I click a link that may or may not be an official site. I think that's the biggest issue but readability like differentiating between the link and title and others are also problems imho.

RoaranorMar 17, 20141 votes

Yeah, it still rubs me the wrong way for the above reasons too. I'm thinking they pushed it through before it was finished, or just wanted feedback about the implementation and/or idea in general. There's also the possibility that it was expected to be a simple and quick implementation. Who knows? It seems like it'll be nice with some tuning though.

I'd like to see them pull some of the text from the link to at least give the CBF post some meat. Like, a couple paragraphs or so. That way, people can decide if it's really what they're looking for. Those that know they do based on the title alone would simply use the link button on the main page of CB or the eSports sub-c. This helps the separation between the title and the direct-link button right next to it become more meaningful.

RiotKrylhosMar 17, 20141 votes

Hey guys,

We are exploring ways to bring the same conversations happening on our news articles into the "CB". You're right, it's not fully polished out. Like many things on this site, we wanted to get it working so we could get feedback on it, then make the right changes.

I agree, the anonymous poster feels a bit disconnected (and because it's anonymous, no votes are applied, making it not so "hot")

We're experimenting with esports first before we start bringing in the main website news articles. Your feedback helps every step of the way!

Sir ArmaMalumMar 17, 20142 votes

Completely understandable, thank you for clearing that up!

Just wondering, is there any reason this is wanted to be actual posts? I feel like these articles would be better placed in a "news feed" of sorts, possibly in a box with the sub-comm guidelines. Are you looking for posts or comments on them? It's slightly confusing as both the link posts and the article itself have comment capability, so I'm just confused on what would be gained by making individual discussions for each of them.