On Comments
Even the best intended comment stream is susceptible to becoming disjointed. Why? Everyone's talking to someone different: some people are trying to have a private conversation, others are trying to have a group conversation, weird people no one knows are saying strange things or apparently trying to start fights, and so on. It's like a stenographer's record of the conversation in a very large room with no note of who's talking to whom, and it seems to confuse and enrage everyone.
An obvious solution: streams of comments that create context.
Which begs the question: what are the contexts?
Private or one-off comments, opposites though they may be, come to mind first. Private comments reveal information that may be outside the scope of some viewers' knowledge. One-off comments are to no one in particular, and are more of an expressive "like" than anything.
Then there are running gags and direct responses. While running gags often emerge on their own and direct responses usually act according to the directive of the original poster, both are collective activities where comments build upon the momentum of the last.
Then you have your soapbox comments. Soapbox comments are opinions that aren't intended to be conversational. They can spur conversation, but they're generally an emphatic expression of a closely held belief.
Each of these comment types alone has its merit, but start to mix them and things naturally start to go wrong. Intentions get confused, expectations get turned on their head, and people feel misunderstood. Soapboxers are often booed away by crowds who are more interested in banter. Private commenters are mocked by gaggers. Direct responders are out of place among one-offs. Current comment structure seems to invite confusion and defeat.
Label the intention, group similar intentionality, flourish.
