I've just had a rather surprising discussion with Eli in the comments section of the recent article published by Carter Dotson regarding the current state of Apple TV. The discussion has prompted me to post this thread. For me, a comments section IS important. It allows readers on TA to post their thoughts on articles and it serves as an immediate sounding panel. Also, the topics raised in articles don't always find there way into the forums so that they can be debated and discussed within the TA community forums, so a comments section is sometimes the only way for the TA community to cast an opinion. Eli, however, suggested that the comments don't matter and that the people who participate in the comments section are not even considered part of the community. As shocked as I was at Eli's response (I didn't expect him to dismiss all the readers who have taken the time to post comments), I realise that we are just two people with differing opinions and since, at least in Eli's opinion, the forums are the only place where the real community exist, I thought I'd gather your thoughts on whether the comments are relevant/important or whether the TA staff are right to ignore and dismiss all though who participate in comments. (Note: I'm aware some comments threads can devolve into abusive drivel. I'm questioning whether the constructive - positive and negative- civilised comments should be at least acknowledged).
I rarely look at the comments sections. I'll post there occasionally. The "meat" of TA for me is the threads.
Yeah, I get that. And if I'm honest, I understand Eli's point that the forum is where the community is really AT. it's just that's not how he put it (I'm giving him the benefit of doubt and reading into his comments - he must be stressed because he was far more dismissive). I guess I'm more asking whether the comments are important though (as opposed to 'where is the community'). Do article topics really get discussed in the threads? Threads seem to mostly be about specific games rather than wider reaching topics. You do get threads about people's 'best' choices and user experiences of certain types of games... but I've hardly ever seen threads posted in direct response to a TA article. Without the comments section on an article you'd have to create a forum thread for every article if you wanted to discuss it (and for TA staff to take said comments seriously).
That may be his point. If the comments/ article has legs a thread will get created. There isn't too much involved in creating at head if it's sparked your passion. Most of what I see in comments is forgettable. Just my thoughts. I do see what your saying, also see Eli's point, I think.
Active front commenters represent less than 0.001% of our unique visitors. They're ruined by a collection of people who just want to spray shit in our direction, demonstrate how much more intelligent they are than us, or otherwise just belittle what we do. There's always exceptions, like anything, but that seems to be the primary use of comments for the most vocal people who engage in them. The forums are exponentially better as that kind of behavior just isn't tolerated by the community, and if you want to have any kind of good reputation around here, you actually have to contribute beyond snide quips and other witty one-liners. We've talked a lot about straight up removing comments, but, like most things we want to do to improve the site we're hamstrung by needing to supporting the app as long as we can which has a ton of Disqus integration... So, they'll remain, for now, we just don't really pay attention to them as it's a really good way to just totally ruin your day. I actually run shutup.css and only even see our comments when I log in to the Disqus admin to fix something. edit: To clarify further, it's not like the concept of comments is bad, per say, it's just the type of person they collect has sort of become notorious on the internet. There's rarely any kind of discussion, as people who get really into long-winded front page comment debates are often just the worst people to have any kind of discussion with as even if you see what they're saying it's often framed in this horrifyingly toxic know-it-all way which makes any kind of actual discussion incredibly grating to participate in. Again, of course, this isn't everyone, but bad eggs certainly spoil the bunch and none of us really have the time/desire to get into pedantic internet arguments over most things commenters want to "Well, actually," us on... Particularly when it comes to things we know a ton about, but people just insist we're wrong because reasons, hilariously enough, even attempting to debate concrete statistics. Comparatively, the forums rock, and I can spend all day reading them and having a good time instead of hating my life. Anyway, this phenomenon isn't exclusive to TouchArcade.
You know, I'll concede that my own naivety may have got in the way. I guess, because I only read the articles that interest me, I don't see ALL the comments that are purely toxic and intentionally so. I can see how that would be damaging. I think it's difficult though, people with busy lives leaving a quick comment below the article is a quick way to 'get involved', rather than the few extra clicks (and waits on loading) it takes to set up a thread. Personally, that's what I'm after when I leave comments. They may not always agree with the core topic, and that MIGHT be WHY I'm leaving a comment. And I'll be honest, I found it a little jarring to see you (Eli) instantly dismiss not only myself but all the other commenters in such an open fashion, and that's why I thought I'd create this thread - to see if it's just me (I'm aware that my own views, no matter how strongly I believe them, are only mine and that I may be completely off base). But as ashmike has said, I suppose if it's something people care about 'enough' it will work its way into the forums. As for the debate started in the comments section of Carter's article, I suppose that would belong in a different thread (I still maintain that commenters under the article had valid points - mostly, it wasn't the stats or data being debated but the interpretation of the information).
I don't think most users see all the comments. Mods likely delete a lot . Eli's seen a lot of hate man...a lot of hate
Yep, I'll have it. That's totally not what I wanted to portray, I was honestly after an open and polite debate. I see Eli's point about wanting avoid comments sections themselves though. I just hope that Eli doesn't think I'm part of the toxic element just because my opinion differs to that of a TA staff member. I'm not toxic, I'm just different.
Well to be honest I only rarely check the main site if I'm honest but I did recently take engadget of my bookmarks altogether when they changed the comment section again. I did initially try to make a new account there but just got error after error when trying to log in with them. So I gave up on it and found I didn't enjoy the site at all when I couldn't throw in my opinion and it actually annoyed me a bit to see it in my bookmarks so it's now gone. So I think commenting on articles can mean a lot to people but I wouldn't really mind myself as I tend to go for the forums here more.
Teknikal - that's kind of spot on. The comments section CAN be important, and I guess I just didn't think it was fair to instantly dismiss everyone using a comments thread as their chosen means of interaction and exclude them from what is perceived as 'the community'.
The reason comments are detrimental to small sites is because they add an air of instant negativity to everything that gets published. I know you guys value getting your opinions in or whatever, but the opinion of "all these games look like shit" which some flavor of occurs legit every week we post new games. Moderating these comments are a nightmare as whenever you delete one it triggers something inside of the commenter brain that they've been censored, and since American government classes apparently aren't taking the extra step to teach children that your first amendment rights do not extent to internet comments, it just makes a huge mess. Honestly though, we're just not into the idea of debating with people whether all games are shit, whether or not our opinion in a game review is wrong, or whatever else. Engaging in that sort of thing just makes us a punching bag for people who always need to be right on the internet, and it can suck up your entire day. ...Which is why we've sort of been ignoring comments as I'd rather spend that time just writing another review instead of discussing how incorrect my opinion is with someone who otherwise has absolutely no bearing on my life on any level whatsoever.
That much I totally get Eli. I know when I've posted comments on articles, I haven't necessarily expected to get a response from the author or any other TA staffer, but I've maybe just wanted to discuss the matter with fellow readers. I only really use one other gaming website (Eurogamer), and when I've discussed things in the comments sections there, the conversation has generally remained between readers. Mods and EG staff occasionally do get involved, but it is very rare and I'd imagine it's for the reasons you've pointed out. But comments don't necessarily need to be responded to by TA staff. In fact, for the reasons you've pointed out, maybe it's best if it was a TA policy that TA staff DON'T comment? Just a suggestion, I'm not trying to say I know best (although, I also understand that if someone does leave a comment contradicting or calling out the author, they'd want to defend it - but then that would be the point of it being a policy to not get involved). That way debates and discussions could still take place, but they would remain with your readers. I'm sure there are readers that do just want to kick up dust, but there are people like me that just want to discuss how our views differ. There are a number of readers in the originating article that expressed their views and how they interpret the situation to be different to the way that Carter does, and they did so in a polite manner without acting all 'I know best'. And the comments section is the most direct and convieniant way to discuss the issues at hand. Coming to the forums to set up a specific thread in relation to discuss every article that you have an opinion on just seems unecessary. But, I understand where you're coming from... Just please know that I personally have never meant to cause any offence and I'm simply an avid gamer who wants to be part of the discussion.
You interjected yourself into a conversation that didn't involve you when you commented on Shaun's post, pointing out how WRONG he was or whatever. Shaun was basically called a liar by someone else, and he came in to defend himself, then made it known he didn't give a shit about the conversation at hand but just wanted to clarify that he wasn't a liar. Then you just "Well, actually'd" him to death despite that. I'm sorry but there is no way you don't come off as a douchebag in that scenario, and you'll have to excuse if people aren't jumping at the chance to engage in a toxic conversation with you. A conversation they plainly stated they didn't want to have. But according to you he "entered the ring" so it's perfectly OK to come at him with your overbearing tone. To top that all off, you're the WORST kind of "that person" because you do all this, then you turn around and are like "GOSH I just wanted to have a civilized discussion, JEEZ, I didn't know you guys were opposed to that sort of thing!" You don't want to have civilized discussions. You want to be the "gotcha!" guy. You even commented so fast and furiously on that article you triggered the spam filter on yourself, and OF COURSE the first thing out of your mouth when that happened is "TA censorship!" What a joke.
Firstly, I was invited into the conversation. That's what the big comment button at the bottom of the article is- an invitation to comment. Of course I wasn't involved in the conversation until I replied, but that's generally how conversations work. Secondly, Shaun didn't state at that point that he didn't want to be engaged in the conversation. Thirdly, what's wrong with turning around and saying 'Well, actually...' in a debated conversation? I know Eli doesn't seem to like it, and clearly you don't, but it isn't an offensive way to start a sentence when offering a counter point of argument. And to be fair I was only pointing out that he was comparing units shipped to units sold and that it skews the data. Again, I know Eli has said in this thread that it's not nice when people only enter the comments section to poo-poo on other people's work, but that's not the only reason I posted a comment - see my other comments under the article, but please correct me if I am wrong to point out that comparing units shipped to units sold is the equivalent of apples to oranges. As for coming across as a douhebag? Why? That initial reply was only a few words long. It was simply put. How is it over bearing? Could I have used simpler language? It's all good and well calling someone toxic, but when the only thing they've done is disagree and done so in a polite manner, and they get called 'douchebag' for it? I have to question your perception of what's toxic... If you have a problem with people having opposing views then fair enough, but that's an issue for yourself. I've been nothin but polite, but get called names. If the crux of this thread is to be 'Agree with TA or go home', then I guess I know where I stand. It's just a shame.
Lets boil this down. You said this: "My point was that you're skewing your data by comparing units shipped to units sold." Which is wrong. Either you were intentionally belligerent or unintentionally stupid. Shaun was comparing units shipped to units shipped. Shaun even gave you an explanation as to why, the shipping numbers were what he had access to, so those are the numbers that were used. The primary commenter was wrong, and you were trying to support that wrong claim by clumsily trying to bring Shaun under scrutiny. Coming here trying to paint yourself as the victim is wrong and trying to say that TA expects everyone to agree is also wrong(I know you spend enough time in the comments to see people disagreeing like actual adults and not getting attention from TA, positive or negative) and again either belligerent or completely uninformed(especially with how much you lurk in the comments). Either way, it's incendiary and immature. Own up to being wrong or dont, but dont expect people to take pity on you or consider you some sort of aristocratic conversationalist who is innocently seeking intellectual exchange. If you want to nit-pick and inaccurately accuse people of improper comparisons, prepare to be told you are wrong when you are wrong.
Seriously???? Before you called me belligerent or stupid did you actually do any of your own research, or have you read any other news about the PS4 sales figures. Because I had. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-11-25-ps4-sales-shoot-through-30m-mark http://www.polygon.com/2015/11/25/9797984/playstation-4-sales-reach-30-million-units-worldwide http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/25/9797964/ps4-sales-worldwide-30-million Notice they all refer to units 'sold-through'. Not shipped. They all cite quotes from Sony stating that it puts it ahead of PS2 at the same point in its life cycle. Just do a Google search yourself, you only need to look for 'PS4 sells 30.2' and you will have dozens of game website results with the same info. TA is the only place that I've read information that is different. I'm not belligerent or stupid, I'm informed. But do I get to call you ignorant? Besides, you're derailing the thread. It's not about whether my comments on Carter's article have any grounding (which, clearly, they do), it's about whether TA users in the comments section should be disregarded as unimportant.
This thread is about you being wrong and getting mad that you were told you were wrong. Nothing you say can make your previous statement any less wrong. Lets look at it again. "My point was that you're skewing your data by comparing units shipped to units sold." and that's not what Shaun did. Shaun never compared units shipped to units sold. It never happened.
Oh my word... Seriously. Go and read Shaun's comments again. No in fact, I'll repeat it word for word for you here: "The PS2 was at 49.59 million SHIPPED worldwide as of December 31st, 2002. On November 22nd of this year, Sony had announced the PS4 had SHIPPED 30.2 units to date" Now, go and either read the links I posted above or do your own search. 'PS4 sells 30.2'. Shaun may have thought he was comparing units shipped to units shipped, but what Sony actually announced on 22/11 was that the PS4 had SOLD 30.2 million units, putting it ahead of the PS2 at the same point in its lifecycle. THAT'S what Sony announced. That's what every other gaming news website published. Completely different stats to those that Shaun used. Either the rest of the Internet is wrong and Shaun was right, or Shaun (and whoever else at TA) doesn't seem to want to admit that the data they published wasn't presented correctly. I got poo-poo'ed for pointing out this, understandably easy to make, mistake and was labelled toxic and pedantic. I don't think it's pedantic to point out that part of Carter's basis of his article is formed on incorrect data. I know Eli says that the comments are filled with people saying that they think they can argue with hard statistics, but I'm not, I'm pointing out that PS4 SOLD (SOLD !!!!) 30.2 million units, not shipped. It's an incredibly important distinction. Because of the way Eli justified himself to me in the comments of that article, I set this thread to establish if people think comments to articles are important. THAT IS the point of this thread. Not about who is right or wrong.
