This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
We should increase the character limit for comments.
Many of the topics that are brought up and discussed on this site are complex, or subtle , or intricate. The questions posed do not always have a simple answer. So in order to answer the question or post the comment you may be faced with a choice: sacrifice the content of the idea you wish to express, or clutter up the thread with multiple replies.
A lot can be said in 2,000 characters. Sometimes you don't need to say a lot. But sometimes you do. For instance, lets say you want to open a debate on an issue. 2,000 characters is awfully short to explain the premise, and to supply both pro and con arguments. A lot of social issues can't be summed up in 2,000 characters with out disregarding important subtleties. Technological questions can sometimes require an extended explanation not easily fitted into the current comment size.
So I propose that TED double the length of comments to 4,000 characters. This keeps the comments relatively short and focused, and allows for more expansive replies. At the very least we should expand the OP. There may not be much need for this expansion to answer a question, but certainly proposing an idea and opening a debate could be helped by more room to explain the idea.
The comments on this site are thoughtful and cogent. I rarely see bickering, name calling, or spite. I mostly see people who want to work together to improve our world. We do not need to worry about trolls or flame posters. We are not myspace, we are not facebook. We are TED. We use our voice wisely.
Vasil Rangelov 50+
I don't mind the current character limit, but I wouldn't mind its extension to 3000 or 4000 either.
Vincine Fallica
Tim Colgan 50+
Daniel - I think you'll be surprised at how few people even bother to read those postings.
Daniel Beringer
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Daniel Beringer
Krisztián Pintér 200+
btw how about increasing the time limit of ted talks to 36 minutes? want that too?
Colleen Steen 500+
Daniel Beringer
btw supposition does not make a persuasive argument.
Colleen Steen 500+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Colleen Steen 500+
NO! PLEASE do not increase the character limit.
Daniel Beringer
I agree though, it can be a little tough to scroll through page after page of needless exposition. Heck, it can be tough to scroll through necessary exposition sometimes. I'll admit, 4,000 characters may be excessive, but is there really no room for expansive comments?
Colleen Steen 500+
*I believe most very long comments are needlessly repetitive.
*Of course we can write long and short comments...it's a choice.
*I don't think it necessarily means people are trying to "avoid the issue". My perception of long
repetitive comments, is that the author is trying to prove to us that he/she is right.
*You are the only one to decide if you did yourself a disservice had you stopped reading your favorite book halfway through. Are we writing/reading books on TED? Or are we participating in a comment blog?
"Of course there is room for expansive comments. A few people are writing multiple comments,
and will use as much space as allowed. On one site recently, a person wrote 3 long coments with
the maximum characters in each, then complained because the system didn't allow another
comment? In my perception, they were all very repetitive.
We all make choices regarding how we spend our time and energy. My choice is to NOT spend time reading long repetitive comments, and you're right, even if we don't read them, we need to "scroll through page after page of needless exposition" to try to find comments relevant to the talk.
Daniel Beringer
I used the example of my favorite book in an attempt to show that length does not inherently effect the quality or impact of the words. I also don't believe that most of the people on TED would abuse the privilege. Some would, to be sure, but I've seen other sites, like Hypography, which are quite self regulating with regards to that sort of stuff. I see no reason why TED can't do the same.
There are also times when part of the point of a conversation is to argue for your position. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't be willing to change your position in the face of strong evidence and sound logic. But a debate isn't about winning or losing, it's about critically examining an issue. So long as you can claim progress in understanding the issue than the debate was a success.
I understand that a lot of internet comments are often tedious and unrewarding, but I do not feel that I have been so, and I know that others here do not do so. I think that we can create a forum here where there are both long and short comments, each in their own measure.
Colleen Steen 500+
I agree that most people do not abuse the privilege. I do not believe repeating the same information over and over again changes anyone's position, nor does it create progress in understanding the issue. It seems that debate IS about winning for some people. We HAVE created a forum here where there are both long and short comments. The topic is "we should increase the character limit for comments". Seems that most people who responded on this thread do not agree. I agree with all those who do not agree:>)
Daniel Beringer
However, I still think some elongation may be useful, maybe a 3,000 character limit. But even if that gets shot down, I still believe that the first post at least should be allowed more room. A comment is written in response to something else, while the OP has to create something from nothing.
Some one can repeat themselves endlessly is small comments almost as easily as they can in large ones. And endless repetition does not foster progress. But so long as most people aren't doing such things, then they aren't an issue. As you pointed out, not a lot of people think long comments are anything special. So even given the opportunity, they won't write long comments. You also don't think that people would abuse the privilege. So if TED did have longer comment boxes, then the occasional lengthy reply would not likely be pointless.
Colleen Steen 500+
I agree Daniel..."multiple posts will get messy and confusing".
I agree Daniel, that you have "presented your idea and been given the opportunity to argue for it"
I agree Daniel, that "endless repetition does not foster progress".
I do not agree with your last statement Daniel, which is:"So if TED did have longer comment boxes, then the occasional lengthy reply would not likely be pointless". You stated: "It can be tough to scroll through page and page of needless exposition".So, many of us are forced to "scroll through page and page of needless exposition" so that a few have the opportunity to produce "excessive", "multiple posts", which are "messy and confusing"?Daniel, I'm just reflecting back to you what you have written. And what is your argument as to why we would be in favor of increasing the character limit?
Daniel Beringer
But my argument is almost the same as it has been: That the topics discussed on this site can at times require a longer response than the current system allows. So I am proposing an increase to 3k characters, amended from 4k. I also argue that, regardless of the comment length, the OP should be given more room, due to the fact that it must start from scratch. The main arguments against so far seem to be that longer comments are wasteful, or that shorter comments are better, and that allowing longer comments will result in endless pages of text. I do not see how length effects quality. I do not feel that most of the people on this site would misuse the option, so we are unlikely to be faced with mindless drivel. And given the vehemence against the idea, it seems unlikely that many people would post longer comments, thus saving us from endless scrolling.
I am not the only one who has voiced agreement with the idea of expanding the comments. I do not see why a minority shouldn't be allowed to express themselves, especially when doing so will not cause appreciable harm or difficulty to you. I believe that if there is anywhere on the internet where large, complex ideas can be discussed rationally, TED is the place for that to happen.
Colleen Steen 500+
Daniel Beringer
Vincine Fallica
Maxus Gosus
I think that the main issue here is accepting a different approach for ones way of expressing himself. One may use a more lengthy style of expression, but that does not necessarily means he's verbose.
It was Einstein who said: "It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.", but does that principle have to project to the whole art of expression?
I don't think so.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
M.A. Lucas-Green
Daniel Beringer
M.A. Lucas-Green
Your question is understandable. Long statements most frequently equate to sophistry.
Daniel Beringer
Vincine Fallica
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
Debra Smith 200+
Daniel Beringer
Debra Smith 200+
I think it is more stimulating and more thought provoking to keep posts fairly short and punchy. If you engage people in a dialogue you will get the opportunity to make further points. This venue is not for essays but rather more like conversations you would have with friends. It is the exchange that is most likely to generate new perspectives and gain new inputs. Remember you could always use points if you need to make more ideas available in the space provided.
Daniel Beringer
I'm puzzled why everything has to be short and punchy. Some of the most engaging conversations I've had included what some might call long winded speeches. But by being so comprehensive, there response reduced the need to ask clarifying questions and gave me the opportunity to ask the questions that let me understand the other persons point of view. I've also had conversations that were short on words but full of meaning, and everything in between. Each conversation has it's own flavor, and each can be full of insight and perspectives. So I don't see why everything has to be short and punchy, or how it's only those conversations that generate new perspectives and gain new inputs.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Tim Colgan 50+
True dialog needs back and forth. Keep it short.
Daniel Beringer
Tim Colgan 50+
Colleen Steen 500+
Do you want to expand on that a bit? You have 1997 characters left:>)
Tim Colgan 50+
Colleen Steen 500+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
in short: tl;dr :)
Revett Eldred 10+
Daniel Beringer
But the first post is different, especially for debates. To properly present a debate may require a rather lengthy introduction, even if every response is less than 200 char.'s A comment is already 'framed' by what came before. The first post has to build from the ground up, sometimes requiring the person to set the context, or support their position, in addition to making the actual statement.
I think that we're responsible enough to handle 4,000 char. comments. I think that we're wise enough to know when we need the extra length. The original post, and sometimes the final posts, can require extra space to hold together as a complete idea. I'm all for being concise, but not at the expense of content.
Harald Jezek 50+
If an idea, for some reason requires more than 2000 (which I think would be a rare exception), then you could just write 2 posts.
I think good thoughts can be formulated in few words. If there are follow up questions then the audience will ask questions, which then leads to a conversation, rather than a monologue.
People in general prefer to read shorter posts.
gale kooser 20+