User blog comment:Dopp/Communicate Easily with Message Wall/@comment-2179868-20111007214605/@comment-10532749-20111008001613


 * 1) Piotr, look at how many normal users here just on Community revert spam on staff talk pages. Also, look at how often staff get to their talk pages to respond to messages left there. Could you imagine how much more work sannse would have if it wasn't for the 5-10 users that patrol her page removing spam messages or duplicate messages that have already been answered on another staff talk page?

This is something that can be addressed by, for example, allowing everyone to mark messages as spam. Making it an easier process is not a bad thing in my book. If reverting takes more time than marking comment as spam, but has the same effect, would you still consider the current way better? (limiting discussion to only this case, of course)


 * 1) "It it ain't broke..."
 * Sorry, but it isn't broken. Users themselves are broken in the fact that no one bothers to teach them how to properly edit a talk page. You saying it is broken is like saying a bicycle is broken because your 4-year-old can't ride it. There's nothing wrong with the bicycle; the child simply needs to be taught to use it properly.

Why use wikitext instead of editing HTML directly? MediaWiki was and is large, successful product that made content editing easier than it was before. It made it easier, but it haven't made it *easy*. There are always ways to improve. Maybe I read it wrong, but your above comment is like saying, that it's not bad, just because it's hard, even if we don't sacrifice anything by making it easier and better. Of course you *could* say that we do sacrifice something by making it easier, but the above comment does not imply that. It's just as if you want stuff to be harder than it has to be.


 * 1) Talk pages aren't responses only to the original topic. Talk pages can have responses on several key elements of a conversation. This Message Wall treats all comments on a section as if it is either a comment to the comment directly above it or a comment to the original comment. See [|this thread] for a perfect example.

How do you make new comment reference 2 other previous comments on the same user talk page? You have a 2d space. 1 dimension of indentation. Is there a way to make it clear on user talk page that you reference those 2 other messages that is impossible to do on Message Wall? I will argue that's the other way around. On message Wall you can LINK those 2 threads that you are referencing, when you create your own, 3rd thread.

You can't inter-link inside of User Talk page in a clear and meaningful way (that I know of, correct me if I'm wrong).