I like the idea of blog comments being threaded to enable replies to specific comments to be kept together, but a few times (not often) the comments do get quite numerous and it can be easy to miss someone’s latest contribution if it is nested in the middle of a long series of posts. The alternative is get rid of nesting altogether and have all comments listed in chronological sequence. I am in two minds about it, so am soliciting other views.
If interested do register an opinion in the poll I have set at the top of the left margin or here:
[polldaddy poll=4288732]
The following two tabs change content below.
Neil Godfrey
Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.
Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 2: Certainty and Uncertainty in History - 2024-11-18 01:15:24 GMT+0000
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 1: Historical Facts and Probability - 2024-11-16 01:05:37 GMT+0000
- Palestinians, written out of their rights to the land – compared with a new history - 2024-10-15 20:05:41 GMT+0000
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!
I don’t really have an opinion either way, but I prefer the normal wordpress comment system over DISQUIS since DISQUIS’ ability to email you when new comments are made does not appear to work right.
Would be interesting to see the votes broken down by those that are anonymous and do not have links back to a blog page vs those that are not anonymous and who’s nicks link back to actual blog/site pages. Is there anyway to do that? Even if it is by hand when the votes are done?
Cheers! RichGriese@gmail.com
Damn. I should have thought of that and structured the poll to try to allow for that distinction. One reason I’m not being quick to re-do the blog settings to remove nesting is my fear that it would rearrange existing comments so that many of them become unintelligible — most currently nested comments contain no cues within them to indicate who/what comment they are addressing. To rearrange those in an unnested chronological sequence will render some of them unintelligible.
Hello Neil, I love you so much cause you do think. It’s funny, in the original post I sent you recommending the change, I actually have a sentence in there talking about just that. the “i think the existing messages would be displayed in time order”, and even as I was writing it, I said “hrm… wonder if that is actually true.” I will look into that for you. Or… really for me… since I loved knowing about systems.
Then your point about people not addressing each other. That is funny. I have always hated that people don’t do that, it seems so easy and obvious. In fact, I was trained in 9th grade in a english class on how to write a letter for business, well before computers existed. the format always was “Dear Sirs (remember the NAME is actually in the address in the block above, so that is already handled), I am in receipt of your letter of august ninth, …. blah blah blah, thanking you in advance, Sincerely Rich Griese. It was like a little ritual, but it also served a purpose. So when computers came out, I just kind of used the formalized rituals in emails, and forum posts. And always noticed how almost everyone else didn’t. For a long time I tried to point out to people why they should. Then I just gave up. I love when events like a potential rearrangement of posts makes people go “you know, since nobody addresses each other, rearranging could be a problem” It’s the closet thing to anyone ever actually understanding why addressing is good. To me, “Dear Bob, blah blah blah, Your… Rich Griese” could almost sum up why I became an analyst. The beauty of including the meta data right inside the record. the idea that each thought is self contained and referencing shows a elegance, simplicity, and sense that appeals to me like the warth of the loving baby jesus appeals to some. Wow… what a wonderful day today is going to be. I have all my shopping done for Christmas. I have interesting Christian history throughts to follow up, that seem to be satisfying (you know how that is. Good to enjoy the day or so when an idea you have seems good, cause experience often hints to you your going to be saying “wow… how could I have been so stupid” in a week after you think it out), I just took my first sip of coffee, and aside from not having a clean pair of socks this morning, today may turn out to be a perfect day. I love you and your blog. I love text, I love… well… Let’s sing “I like life, life likes me, i am life fairly fully agree…” but why try to TEXT a song, or performance actually. Check it out yourself. Let’s sing together all around the world!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VkOBbt5gl8
Cheers! RichGriese@gmail.com
Now… if you want a REAL rant, check out Pat Condell. I can listen to the line “what are you hypnotized?” and still laugh. Now THAT’S a rant! Peace. You know you like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovg0eYjM64w
Cheers! RichGriese.NET
Rich,
I think a lot has been accomplished in biblical studies. Narrative criticism for example has nicely demonstrated the creativity of the Gospel authors. Textual criticism has also been useful in showing us the kinds of changes scribes made to the texts. I believe that some source critics have also increased our understanding of the literary relationships between the gospels, as it is becoming increasingly clear that Luke has used both Mark and Matthew (although most source critics are slow to catch on). NT scholars have also nicely demonstrated the pseudepigraphical nature of many of the early texts. Actually, come to think of it, a lot has been achieved in the field of NT scholarship.
I’ll give you a pole! If you REALLY want to take a pole… take a poll and have people vote if this guy says “data projector” or “scholar” more. LOL.. religion industry folks can be so funny. I particularly liked when he said “young scholars”. LOL… I think this is not really a rant about “data projectors”. I think it is a attempt to say “scholar” over and over again. So that people are misled into thinking that these clowns are actually “scholars”, I mean “young scholars”, and not complete idiots.
This shows just how crazy these mongiloids are. A academic is supposed to research and write articles. They don’t even NEED data projectors. The stupid mongiloids. Just write something and shut the fuck up. I mean seriously. You got 10,000 religion industry professionals working so fucking hard at apologetics and supporting traditional church dogma, but… pretty much nothing has happened in the industry since Schweitzer, Strauss, and Harnack.
I’m sorry, apparently there HAS been a major development. They discovered that without “data projectors” nothing can get done. Perhaps that is why they haven’t learned anything more about early Christianity since Schweitzer, Strauss, and Harnack. Some bastard had talken all their “data projectors”!
Cheers! RichGriese@gmail.com
Hey, Rich. I don’t want to be a damper on everyone’s jovial mood here, but I thought it might be appropriate to briefly comment on your derogatory use of the term, “Mongoloid”. This term can be offensive to not only people of Asian origin, but also to those people with Down Syndrome, who in the past were labeled “Mongoloid” or “Mongoloid idiots” because of facial features.
I know you didn’t mean it in this context, but perhaps you might reconsider future negative use of this term. Thanks. Peace. 🙂
Dear Pearl,
I reread your message after thinking, and it did not seem worded by a bleeding heart liberal. While I know of, and have seen a somebut many Down Syndrome kids in my life, I have never really actually thought about the topic. Other than perhaps, I can’t actually think of anything that I could think of that would be worse for a family, before I have pushed even thinking about it out of my mind.
I have used the term with an i in the past, and enjoyed it never actually giving thought to what I do. Even though I know of both references you mention.
The enjoyment I get out the humor I find in it, is so small in comparison to the pain it would cause when someone that actually faces down syndrome in their world, makes me embarrassed to the point that I cannot think of any more words to type other than, I am embarrassed for being so insensitive as I think about it now.
Sincerely, RichGriese@gmail.com
Thank you for that, Rich. We all do things without giving thought to what we do sometimes. There are certainly much worse things that can befall a family. People with Down syndrome I know personally generally have fulfilling lives, can be productive members of society, have loving families, including siblings who benefit from the opportunity to engage with these kind individuals on a day-to-day basis. They are just human beings like the rest of us and understand respect.
Again, your comment was much appreciated. No need to be embarrassed.
Can we have it both ways?
Keep the format as it, but have a temporal index and a blog heading index that we’un can access.
Have no opinion on this but just want to point out that something seems amiss with the latest post titled “Does Mark’s Primitive Language and Theology Really Argue for Markan Priority?”
That post should not have gone through. Intergalactic demons messed with my keyboard controls and when I tried to save a draft it ended up being prematurely posted.
Hey Vridar community,
I turn to you for help. I recently read a comment by a posted nicked “kilo papa” (that didn’t have a blog or email backlink, ie, an anonymous poster) on McDuff’s blog . They had made a comment; “But my point regarding ginomai/gennao was that within the New Testament whenever Paul refers to someones birth (Rom. 9:11,Gal. 4:23 and 4:29) he always uses gennano. But when he refers to Christs birth a few verses earlier in Galatians he changes to ginomai.(And in Romans 1:3)”
I tried to make a followup comment to this person, but McDuff deletes all the comments I make to that blog. So… I have no way of letting this person know that I am trying to get further information about their comment. If anyone knows this “kilo papa” person could you please pass along the information that I am trying to talk to him further about his comment. He can email me at RichGriese@gmail.com – and thank you so very much.
Cheers! RichGriese.NET