On 12 April 2020 22:43:31 BST, Ihor Antonov <ihor@antonovs.family> wrote: >On Sunday, April 12, 2020 1:15:23 PM PDT Russ Allbery wrote: > >> 1. A database-driven discussion system that supports updates lets you >go >> beyond the moderation that you're worried about (rejecting >messages) >> and do other forms of moderation that help improve the quality of >> discussion without removing messages. Examples include splitting >> threads that have digressed from the original topic to create more >> focused discussions, pinning important summaries so that people >see the >> current status of the discusison quickly, closing old threads so >that >> people properly open a new discussion instead of replying to some >> resolved discussion with a different problem, and even just >sorting, >> classifying, and tagging threads so that people can find the >> discussions they care about more easily. >> >> 2. You can indicate agreement with a proposal or message without >adding >> more words that everyone has to read. The +1 reply in email is >clunky >> and adds a lot of noise. Often it's useful to be able to get a >quick >> count of participants who agree with an idea but don't want to >write >> their own extended message about it. > >The usability concerns that you outlined are legitimate. And some >usability perks are >indeed nice to have. But the price is too high: > >1. I am now limited to Web Browser with JavaScript enabled. On mobile I >am limited to the >browser or centrally owned and developed app. > >Here is what is wrong with this: > >- You are making a God-like judgement call that everyone must have >graphical >environment running, with a hardware powerful enough to run a browser >with >JavaScript.
This is not true, and this email is proof of this
