copy proliferation

[Bruce]

This solution doesn't feel right, because it promotes multiple first-
class comment threads for a single (aggregated) item. How about
having a single canonical comment thread, preferably on the site
hosting the original item, and all the aggregators view and post back
to that thread?

Then this scenario works better:

I go to Flickr and add a comment to a picture
I go to FriendFeed and add another comment to the same picture
I go to another aggregator site and add yet another comment to the
picture

With a single canonical comment thread, I can now go back to any of
those locations and see all the comments for the picture.

[Mic]

Welcome Bruce!

On Jun 16, 10:58 pm, Bruce <doman...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> How about
> having a single canonical comment thread, preferably on the site
> hosting the original item, and all the aggregators view and post back
> to that thread?

I think your approach could be problematic. Consider that comments are
valuables for blogs, but also for social sites.
Given that, I think it's not so realistic that a big service (like
digg? friendfeed?) could use a third party server for comments (think
about a not-pro blogger that keeps his blog on a 6$-a-month shared
hosting).

> Then this scenario works better:
>
> I go to Flickr and add a comment to a picture
> I go to FriendFeed and add another comment to the same picture
> I go to another aggregator site and add yet another comment to the
> picture
>
> With a single canonical comment thread, I can now go back to any of
> those locations and see all the comments for the picture.

That could be useful.
In the implementation described at the moment in the specification
draft, your example will work this way: every service will notify
Flickr of every comment received and Flickr will publish it in the
picture's page (with the permalink to every remote comment).
So everyone, from a given social site will know about the original
Flickr picture URL and everyone from the Flickr picture's page will
know about any remote comment written about that picture on any social
site implementing the CommentBack protocol.

Regards,
Mic

[Bruce Williams]

yeah, I had some other discussions with folks here at work, and its clearer
that this solution isn't always the best thing for the user or for the site.
I still believe it must be possible to do better than what we have now,
though. I'm glad you're working on the problem.

-Bruce

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mic" <m...@micz.it>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:48 PM
To: "CommentBack" <comme...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [CommentBack] Re: copy proliferation