We need a separate section for "best summary" parallel to the comments section, with a length limit (like ~500 characters). Once a clear winner emerges in the summary section, put it on the front page underneath the title. Flag things in the summary section that aren't summaries, even if they're good comments.
Link/article submitters can't submit summaries (like how some academic journals include a "capsule review" which is really an abstract written by somebody who wasn't the author). Use the existing voting-ring-detector to enforce this.
Seriously, the "title and link" format breeds clickbait.
for this kind of thing, the wiki model where anyone can edit, but the final product is mostly anonymous, seems likely to work much better than the karma whore model where your comments are signed and ranked, so commenters attack each other for being "disingenuous", "racist", "did you even read the article", etc., in an attempt to garner upboats
We need a separate section for "best summary" parallel to the comments section, with a length limit (like ~500 characters). Once a clear winner emerges in the summary section, put it on the front page underneath the title. Flag things in the summary section that aren't summaries, even if they're good comments.
Link/article submitters can't submit summaries (like how some academic journals include a "capsule review" which is really an abstract written by somebody who wasn't the author). Use the existing voting-ring-detector to enforce this.
Seriously, the "title and link" format breeds clickbait.