So...those Chronological View fixes

Goldoak·May 27, 2015·3 votes·1,532 views

Are we any closer to the clearly necessary auto-quoting that will allow me to use chronological view all the time? Still hate the nested nonsense, but I'm pretty much stuck until I have a clear idea of who's talking to who.

Also, on a related note, the rioter rundown feature is really useful, but it's very frustrating that I have to move to discussion view to access it. Can we get that same functionality in chronological view? I imagine auto-quoting would make it easier to implement cleanly.

10 Comments

Hyrum GraffMay 27, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Also, on a related note, the rioter rundown feature is really useful, but it's very frustrating that I have to move to discussion view to access it. Can we get that same functionality in chronological view? I imagine auto-quoting would make it easier to implement cleanly.

If you're not quoting, chrono doesn't show who you're replying to, so I don't see how this would be any different than just skipping between rioter posts the way you can right now.

If the rioters are quoting, you can already see what they're replying to, so it's the same deal.

As to auto-quoting, I believe the reason they're not doing it is that, when player-created boards come out, the owner will choose either discussion or chrono -- not both.

GoldoakMay 27, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Hyrum Graff,realm=NA,application-id=bzRrPGQO,discussion-id=HwNEz34O,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-05-27T20:20:36.183+0000)

If you're not quoting, chrono doesn't show who you're replying to, so I don't see how this would be any different than just skipping between rioter posts the way you can right now.

The advantage is that I can cut out all non-riot content on thread, and get it all inside a singular window. Having to load another page every time I skip to the next post makes it substantially harder to view the thread.

As to auto-quoting, I believe the reason they're not doing it is that, when player-created boards come out, the owner will choose either discussion or chrono -- not both

I mean, that's great, except we have several official boards we're using now, and if that's the desire direction, we really should just cut off one mode or the other as appropriate for the board. Leaving a fundamental non-functional chronological view hanging on is kind of terrible. If it's going to be fully supported, some kind of auto-quoting is necessary. If not...well, there isn't much benefit to half-supporting it.

DaenMay 27, 20151 votes

I mean, that's great, except we have several official boards we're using now, and if that's the desire direction, we really should just cut off one mode or the other as appropriate for the board. Leaving a fundamental non-functional chronological view hanging on is kind of terrible. If it's going to be fully supported, some kind of auto-quoting is necessary. If not...well, there isn't much benefit to half-supporting it.

This. It seems like Riot is just kind of holding the pieces together until the platform is ready to be this fully-fledged user-created boards thing. I understand that it's a waste of resources to fix something you won't be using later, but what if someone wants their board to facilitate both methods of communication?

Personally, I prefer Discussion view for almost everything. The problem is that it's really hard to actually navigate large threads in Discussion view, so I occasionally switch to Chronological. Only allowing Discussion would, in my mind, be a complete mess.

Hyrum GraffMay 28, 20151 votes

{quoted}

what if someone wants their board to facilitate both methods of communication?

I rather agree with this. If I were a board owner, I'd choose both, if I could.

DaenMay 28, 20151 votes

I feel like I would kind of be forced to choose both if I want Discussion at all.

Have you ever seen a thread with 600 responses and ten new comments and been like "naaaahhh not worth it" because of how difficult it is to actually see those new comments and keep up with what's actually recent? Or just looked at the comments in their little isolated bubble (clicking New from the thread listings) then not bothering to look for context or being forced to open ten separate tabs just to get a better picture?

I know I certainly have, and quite frankly that stuff sucks from the perspective of a really involved user. Big threads should invite conversation, not discourage it...

GoldoakMay 28, 20151 votes

{quoted}

This. It seems like Riot is just kind of holding the pieces together until the platform is ready to be this fully-fledged user-created boards thing. I understand that it's a waste of resources to fix something you won't be using later, but what if someone wants their board to facilitate both methods of communication?

Personally, I prefer Discussion view for almost everything. The problem is that it's really hard to actually navigate large threads in Discussion view, so I occasionally switch to Chronological. Only allowing Discussion would, in my mind, be a complete mess.

Indeed! I would, of course, be up in arms if chronological view was removed, but it would at least be decisive. It's frustrating to be limping along.

I think the issues with long threads in discussion view ultimately stem from the "content over creator" view that went into the creation of these boards in the first place. It discourages trying to view threads as ongoing conversations and as complete documents both. If further emphasis was placed on the user themselves (more prominent names and images, removing the unique appearances of OPs and so forth) it would be easier to have conversations.

It seems to me that the boards were designed reactively, to respond to usage patterns on the old forums, but less thought was given to how the platform shapes behavior.

For example, using a non-threaded view requires quoting to maintain clarity and quoting like that leads to a conversational style of discussion. Moving to a threaded discussion view with a reply button makes those conversations potentially easier to follow, but removes the incentives that shaped them in the first place. Perhaps that could have been avoided if "discussion view" was a filter on how a thread was displayed, but didn't change the way comments were created through the reply button.

I guess that's just my bias. I'm turning the issue on it's head and proposing discussion view should be the red-headed stepchild instead of chronological. Ultimately, I think requiring active quoting from posters is the best possible outcome.

DaenMay 28, 20151 votes

The interesting thing about the Boards is that, at least from my perspective, the current implementaiton of Discussion View can't stand on its own and sustain itself over a long period of time. It requires Chronological to get any real focus, and past a certain point it's just not worth it to parse through the mountains of irrelevant content (things you have already read, low effort comments, etc.) you are forced to deal with in Discussion view.

Chronological, on the other hand, can function well as a stand-alone mode. This is very clearly shown in General Discussion; conversation flows relatively well there (shitposting aside) and Discussion view is entirely disabled.

My main three issues with Discussion View are as follows:

Can't sort by most recent
Can't have everything visible by default
Can't have everything hidden by default

More detailed explanation:

There is no possible way to sort by most recent posts, which is like the entire premise of a forum system.
You can only sort by upvotes or the newest initial root post of a branch, there's no way to sort by the most recent post in each branch.
There is no way to open everything in a thread by default, Show More is forced on us.
This would be acceptable, except that the functionality consistently either cuts out important content or is hiding nothing but still pretending like it is.
There is no way to hide everything in a thread by default then pick and choose which branches you'd like to involve yourself in.
In a huge thread, maybe I just want to look at all of the branches that have Rioter comments so that I can visualize them all simultaneously without extra comment noise; this is impossible in the current system unless a user goes through and checks every single branch for Rioter comments then minimizes all of the ones that don't have them.

Theoretically this isn't that difficult to fix (allow users to choose their own display and sort settings), but I've spoken with Pendragon about it and they want a single mode that's robust enough to support the majority of usage cases rather than providing the choice to the user.

GoldoakMay 28, 20151 votes

{quoted}

The interesting thing about the Boards is that, at least from my perspective, the current implementaiton of Discussion View can't stand on its own and sustain itself over a long period of time. It requires Chronological to get any real focus, and past a certain point it's just not worth it to parse through the mountains of irrelevant content (things you have already read, low effort comments, etc.) you are forced to deal with in Discussion view.

Chronological, on the other hand, can function well as a stand-alone mode. This is very clearly shown in General Discussion; conversation flows relatively well there (shitposting aside) and Discussion view is entirely disabled.

....

Theoretically this isn't that difficult to fix (allow users to choose their own display and sort settings), but I've spoken with Pendragon about it and they want a single mode that's robust enough to support the majority of usage cases rather than providing the choice to the user.

I mean, that sort of says it all right there. I've been arguing that chronological is a sensible default for internet forums since the beginning, but there's no reason that they can't, with some changes, make discussion work.

If we are going to see one mode or the other become the norm (even on a board-by-board basis) it would be best just to jump and get that over with. Discussion view needs some changes for long threads, and the sooner boards that are going to be strictly chronological are made that way, the sooner best practices in quoting and @ing and so forth can start.

Hyrum GraffMay 28, 20151 votes

{quoted}

The advantage is that I can cut out all non-riot content on thread, and get it all inside a singular window. Having to load another page every time I skip to the next post makes it substantially harder to view the thread.

Ah, that makes sense. Have an upvote!

I mean, that's great, except we have several official boards we're using now, and if that's the desire direction, we really should just cut off one mode or the other as appropriate for the board. Leaving a fundamental non-functional chronological view hanging on is kind of terrible. If it's going to be fully supported, some kind of auto-quoting is necessary. If not...well, there isn't much benefit to half-supporting it.

Yeah. Recently it seems Riot has changed their values from quantity (new champ every 2 weeks!) to quality (new champ whenever it's done!). I rather like this change, but I think they've gone a little too far, to the point where really easy fixes go ignored because there's something better coming in the long term. It makes sense not to do the little changes -- that's extra work that will eventually be useless -- until you remember that there are actual people using the platform, right now, who would benefit enormously from those little changes. See also: Death recap.

GoldoakMay 28, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Hyrum Graff,realm=NA,application-id=bzRrPGQO,discussion-id=HwNEz34O,comment-id=000000000001,timestamp=2015-05-28T14:30:05.658+0000)

Ah, that makes sense. Have an upvote!

On that note, it would also be useful to have that same "preview" box of Rioter comments in chronological view that's in discussion view, with the same functionality to skip between posts rapidly, before scrolling through the thread to find them.