> You are framing your answer to not include the original case
That's your interpretation. I interpreted the original claim by erdojo that "User-generated commentary can be done right" as a general assertion that there are ways to achieve meaningful conversation, just like the one we're having now.
> In what we could call an open environment where people do not care about their reputation - such as Vice - what can you do?
Now you are framing the answer. If you want to know how to build a good comment system, my answer is "don't create an open environment where people do not care about their reputation".
If you find this to be a non-answer, maybe it's because I didn't reply to what you thought was the question - but that question had not been made explicit, so there was leeway in how to address it.
That's your interpretation. I interpreted the original claim by erdojo that "User-generated commentary can be done right" as a general assertion that there are ways to achieve meaningful conversation, just like the one we're having now.
> In what we could call an open environment where people do not care about their reputation - such as Vice - what can you do?
Now you are framing the answer. If you want to know how to build a good comment system, my answer is "don't create an open environment where people do not care about their reputation".
If you find this to be a non-answer, maybe it's because I didn't reply to what you thought was the question - but that question had not been made explicit, so there was leeway in how to address it.