all 15 comments

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'd much rather have a "posts of the day" subreddit.

The top ten most upmodded and most downmodded comments over a 24hr period, with context links.

potd.reddit.com FTW

I asked for it a long time ago too and it seems like other people thought that it was a good idea.

http://reddit.com/info/2xwy7/comments/c2xxhq

http://reddit.com/info/2jyyv/comments

[–]Jimmy 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Tomorrow on reddit:

"Signews: The social news site with 100% fresh content, 100% of the time [PICs]! 67849 points posted 2 minutes ago"

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 5 points6 points ago

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    I think the idea is that it would apply to duplication of comments, not duplication of content. And it's a good idea. Stupid.

    [–][deleted] ago

    sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      I think you just answered your own question

      [–]shii 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Is there something wrong with saying "why" just because someone has said it before? Didn't you ever listen to that Beatles song?

      [–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      It would effectively provide instant downmods for short, stupid posts. The only downside I see is that it would also block comments like the one I'm responding to... "Why?" is a perfectly valid comment. I'm not sure it would be worth the tradeoff, since the stupid comments usually get downmodded pretty quickly anyway. But it's an interesting idea, anyway.

      [–]bobbyi 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Isn't "instant downmods for stupid posts" the exact same concept as the slashdot lameness filter? Having we learned from that how much things like this suck?

      I would rather read a comment that says "Why?" than one that says "Why? (this text is just here to avoid the short comment filter)".

      [–]yellowking 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      I'm sorry, somebody has already asked why on reddit, the rest of us will just have to assume and move on with our lives.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Because posts like "Why?" wouldn't be allowed. You'd need to think a tiny bit harder before hitting comment. Anyways it isn't as big a deal as it is on IRC, where the same guy might have 20 lines that all say "heh" over the course of a few days.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago*

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Duplicates are not detected, only identical URLs. A working system would compare the content. And anyways he is talking about discussion, as in comments.
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/65hc0/there_should_be_a_signalredditcom_that_acts_like
www.reddit.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2013-48
76029
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:HMLBW5TQ63LEZIQPYV72Z75GLTSTDBQ4
<urn:uuid:05844337-14f6-4d6a-85e9-1ac0601af928>
2013-12-10T03:33:10Z
165.254.127.226
sha1:CG7F2EPKLVIL4JRMSFFBPAGQBXAMY6L7
<urn:uuid:592bd953-a9dd-4c07-bdce-3772e1249afa>
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/65hc0/there_should_be_a_signalredditcom_that_acts_like
response
<urn:uuid:5d366ebf-80e3-4b79-a640-d60077b549ba>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-33-133-15.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2013-48
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for Winter 2013
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf