User demand is lacking

[koganbot]

Has anyone ever asked the livejournal people why they don't have a "new comments"/"updated thread" feature? Nested threads and the lack of an update/new comments feature are the two problems that make lj a worse format than ilX for ongoing discussion.

Of course, if people want a discussion they'll have one, and I'm here basically because discussion falters and founders on ilX. But it falters and founders everywhere, to some extent (and the average comment thread on ilX is vastly better than the average comment thread on the Web as a whole). Back to my original question, an answer might well be, "Because there isn't enough user demand for such feature."

Speaking of discussion, yesterday the convo about Rihanna lyrics migrated here ("Fire Bomb") and here ("Te Amo") (EDIT: and over to Dave's Tumblr, and somehow I missed Erika a few days ago here, with pre-revisionist Dave on the comment thread). And Chuck and I added lotsa new content to poptimists' artist shoutouts thread (with Chuck grumbling about how the convos there are already over before he gets a chance to contribute to them).

Meanwhile over on Tumblr, Maura writes (in regard to chillwave/beach-pop/wavegaze, a music genre, apparently, though if everything runs true to form I'll not hear any of it until no one's making it anymore, but anyway I'm linking Maura's post not for the music wave but for its relevance to dropped discussions):

Maybe this is another thing about the appeal of this particular music to people who write online — it's in some ways a reflection? People on all sides are trying to muddle through their creative impulses with tools that allow for instant publishing/dissemination, and by extension the impulse to get something out overtakes the impulse to make something "right" in whatever abstract sense.

And Tom adds:

I think that's very likely it. (talking about "chillwave"). "Perfect is the enemy of done" and all that - a big current in internet thought.

And I'll add that "news" is the enemy of discussion, which is a different point. "Perfect is the enemy of done" can encourage discussion, if the attitude is "let's throw our ideas forth for the general convo to modify and elaborate on rather than trying to perfect 'em first, alone." Whereas "let's jump to what's new and what's hot" only encourages discussion if there are already good ongoing convos that can add in the new topic. If not, the jumping is just more reason to avoid follow through. --In old media, rock journalism, and journalism in general, always veered towards news superseding follow-through, so why should the Web be different? Not a rhetorical question, since maybe the Web will evolve to something different, but journalism was the way it was at least partly owing to customer demand (customers being advertisers as well as readers, of course).

EDIT: Kuhnian content on comment thread.

Comments

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Even excluding the rappers, I think I'd be hard pressed to name an artist who DIDN'T mention other artists at least a few times over their discography! And even after that you get obvious references without the name being mentioned (eg on Rihanna's "Wait Your Turn", "I'm such a fucking lady" is a Remy Ma reference even if Rihanna doesn't mention Remy Ma by name).

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Without wanting to repeat myself too much, the thread was basically me wondering how often other artists got randomly mentioned (as per Miley Cyrus hearing a Jay-Z song on the radio - that could have been ANY popular artist or even a song title, but her songwriter happened to pick Jay-Z) as opposed to eg a song being entirely dedicated to an artist (eg Kanye's 'Big Brother'), or a long list of artists, or a shout-out to an artist closely linked to themselves.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

And also whether this was more prevalent in eg country and hiphop than pop and rock (which it seems it is!) - what I didn't get round to asking is whether this possibly reflects anything about the level of egotism in these genres.