Ways of handling comments/replies

[LBytes-32]

I briefly mentioned in discord about an interesting feature for making comments, specifically replies, but I'd like to elaborate. Suppose a user makes the following comment:

@ example_man \reject I don't believe this is right because ...

Here's a list of potential descriptors:

• support
• critique
• inform
• defend
• reject

Some descriptors could require extra details. For instance, "inform" defines a factual claim, and should require at least one source.

This system may need some thought, potentially on better descriptor names (I quickly created the list as an example). However, here are a few benefits this system could possibly solve:

• Limited misinformation (facts must require a source)
• Better contributions to a conversation or argument (people may feel more inclined to write about the subject they chose)
• Less illegal or unnecessary comments (There is no dedicated descriptor for that)

If our back-end is biased towards showing these "descriptor comments" over classic comments, people will be more willing to use the feature.

[klm127]

I like the idea broadly. Users can choose to categorize their comments as some type and users can also filter comments to only view specific types.

I disagree that a fact assertion should require a source; people can make factual assertions without citing specific sources.

Each category could rename the upvote system appropriately.

I think the categories should be:

• fact "informative"
• diatribe "interesting"
• opinion "respectable"
• general "interesting"
• joke "funny"

I don't think moderators should worry about miscategorized comments. It's just extra shine, not something that should be strictly enforced.