![]() So 6 Dutch unions for producers and importers created (and control) a non-profit called Wecycle, which runs a recycling facility and which picks up the products from certain locations (in contrast to what I said earlier, this seems to be part of the tariff as well). If each would organize the disposal of products on their own, this would be very costly and you’d have issues deciding who pays for recycling the products. EU law requires them to take responsibility for recycling the products they sell and sold, collectively. ![]() There are ~1750 Dutch producers and importers of these products. Having most readers need to at least vaguely skim what others have already said before adding their 2 cents seems more likely to result in the comments section as a whole being productive. So yeah, I think latest-first ordering has a bad effect on Scott’s posts because it further encourages the tendency (I’m guilty of) of not even skimming what has already been said before posting one’s own opinion. And in any case, no one really discusses the old posts in the comments section for the old posts once they’re old instead, they reference them in an OT or relevant new post where others are looking. ![]() This doesn’t mess up much of anything in an OT, where one OP often has nothing to do with those that came before it. Latest-first ordering extends the shelf life of an OT, I think, by making it possible for new comments to get seen. My initial thought was maybe use latest-first comment ordering on Scott’s posts (on the theory they are more “evergreen,” and one wants to see if someone has added something new to them) and the old ordering on the OTs, but now I suspect the opposite is the way to go.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |