Show HN: Readsure – Pass a quiz that shows you read an article before commenting

by nealrs • 10 years ago

104 61 10 years ago

throwanem• 10 years ago

Brilliant, but it'll never be widespread enough to make a meaningful difference.

Besides, nobody comments on websites directly any more. Now it all goes to Twitter or Facebook, and they'll never implement anything like this because it'd be directly inimical to their business model.

nealrs8• 10 years ago

yeah, instant articles / amp kind of kill that -- also, native browser share buttons -- but a man can dream!!

lettergram• 10 years ago

I may however, add it to my blog: http://austingwalters.com/

I get a fair number of commenters, so it doesn't seem unreasonable.

In either case, I think this would be better for Github issues. It'll force people to actually know what the hell is going on before they comment.

masukomi• 10 years ago

I disagree. I mean, yes, it won't spread, but for anyone who cares about not having a blog filed with hate spam / bs from people who didn't actually read the article this is a great idea. It may not fix the internet, but there are some blogs where this could make a huge impact on the mental state of their owners.

rco8786• 10 years ago

He says, in a comment directly on a website

ghostly_s• 10 years ago

Not on the site of the article being discussed, you'll note...

jsnk• 10 years ago

Cool idea, but I feel like people will use it to make their comment section an echo chamber. For example, if your article is pro-hilary, you are asking Trump fans to acknowledge certain things you said about pro-hilary to be correct before they get to comment. And they mostly likely will not want to do this.

nealrs8• 10 years ago

Perhaps. I think the "prevent people from sharing until they know what they are sharing" is the most important part to me. Had a fun time hacking on it today though. Just a little Friday joke.

spiderfarmer2• 10 years ago

I don't know. Before you dismiss an opinion, you should at least acknowledge that you understand what they are trying to say. I think it's essential for a healthy discussion.

oneeyedpigeon• 10 years ago

For crying out loud, please use labels for radio buttons - it makes them SO much less painful to select. I wish browsers would start flagging errors for this sort of thing.

spiderfarmer2• 10 years ago

If they do, I hope they use a more subtle message.

nealrs8• 10 years ago

I'll refactor if people are seriously interested in this :)

whamlastxmas• 10 years ago

We are

lucideer• 10 years ago

I actually assumed the site was broken and the radios didn't work at all before reading this comment.

vortico• 10 years ago

It could be used to stop bots if nothing else, assuming there's no technical way to post a comment having just the HTML of the page.

oblio• 10 years ago

No you didn't.

Social engineering: some guy reads it and then posts the answer to your question in the comments.

nealrs8• 10 years ago

i _was_ thinking about taking a browser fingerprint and using that to prevent people from reloading the article / trying a second time. So basically, either you read /grok it or you just don't get to share it -- but that felt like a little much.

logicallee• 10 years ago

To say nothing of: "I don't know how but I made it past the quiz - thank God! Could someone summarize the article?"

matt_wulfeck• 10 years ago

I'm honestly more interested in the discussion then I am with the article in almost all occasions. Even if I don't have any interest in the link I'll still peruse the comments.

If you ask me, the whole point of an article is to spark a good discussion.

vitd• 10 years ago

It's 50/50 for me. Here on Hacker News there are many articles where the discussion is worthwhile. On many other sites, it's almost never a good idea to read the comments. And I'm not just talking YouTube.

randall• 10 years ago

You need informed top comments, at bare minimum.

gravypod• 10 years ago

The title and previous experience should convey enough information to understand comments.

MOARDONGZPLZ• 10 years ago

I'm the same way. Often I will see a link that looks interesting with no comments because it just recently landed on the front page. Rather than click the link, I check back in a few hours to read the comments.

mazlix• 10 years ago

I think it may be a good idea for the top-level comments to have this, but then allow replies to comments not.

mwcmitchell2• 10 years ago

THE WORLD IS A VAMPIRE SENT TO DRAAAIAAIAIAAANNNN

mwcmitchell2• 10 years ago

:( the name of the article

paulddraper2• 10 years ago

The internet is broken because of off-topic comments?

dopeboy• 10 years ago

Case in point.

(I kid I kid)

paulddraper2• 10 years ago

Well played.

sctb• 10 years ago

We changed the title from “I fixed the Internet”. If anyone can suggest a better one, we can change it again.

dskloet• 10 years ago

I think something like this is needed for elections. If you want to vote for someone, you have to pass a simple quiz to prove you know what they stand for.

smaddox• 10 years ago

Stated platform != Voting record

Of course even if you required people to know a politician's voting record before voting for them, politicians would find some way to game the system.

personjerry4• 10 years ago

I think you're missing the point, which is that voters should at least read about their options in some way or another, rather than blindly (or nearly blindly) choosing the one who will "save our country".

ElHacker2• 10 years ago

You're proposing aristocracy, that would be a big step backwards. I think there are far better ways to inform people about their choices and give them the power to decide who they want to be represented by. In any case, we should make voting easier for people, not harder.

personjerry4• 10 years ago

Since when does informed voters equal aristocracy?!

clock_tower2• 10 years ago

Saying "this is aristocracy" is kind of like saying that FDR was a fascist; it adds nothing to the conversation except emotional associations. If the idea will give rise to harmful consequences, say what those consequences are, instead of trying to associate it with a name you don't like.

(See also Orwell's Politics and the English Language, if memory serves.)

justinlardinois• 10 years ago

You know, here in the US we used to have tests you had to pass before you were allowed to vote. There were a lot of problems with that...

clock_tower2• 10 years ago

Not a bad idea at all. Perhaps the questions could derive from the citizenship test?

Of course, there would be risks of partial administration and regulatory capture, as mentioned in other responses to you; but I think it's a good idea, and it might be possible to make it work.

krylon• 10 years ago

First of all: This is cool!

Can this be automated? That would be really sweet.

There is an xkcd[1] comic where instead of captchas, users have to supply valuable insights, thus solving the problem of trolls once and for all.

This might be first step towards such a solution.

[1] https://xkcd.com/810/

nealrs8• 10 years ago

haha - hadn't seen that one, but it's totally what I was going for!

MichaelBurge• 10 years ago

It seems like you'd just increase the volume of spam and tell your spambots to always vote "Constructive". If you release more spam than legitimate users send messages, you'll break through regardless of how they vote. You could even have your spambots downvote the real users, since they'd be displacing your precious viagra ads.

dpcx• 10 years ago

Meta-moderation is a thing. Slashdot has been doing it for years. Not everyone gets to vote, and systems would need to be in place to check for gaming.

wckronholm• 10 years ago

I was reminded of this one, instead. https://xkcd.com/481/

samch• 10 years ago

Didn't want to waste my time reading this, but this kind of project should be considered harmful. /s

adium• 10 years ago

The correct answer is fixed on the last option. I don't see how this proves anything.

if (ans == 4){ document.getElementById("question_right").style.display = "block"; } else { document.getElementById("question_wrong").style.display = "block"; }

nealrs8• 10 years ago

because it's a demo (and also a joke!) :)

ErikAugust2• 10 years ago

I have had this idea - but my solution is different. The solution is that the time on site has to approximate the estimated reading time. Extra measure could be taking by tracking the scroll rate.

Agathos• 10 years ago

Y.T.’s mom pulls up the new memo, checks the time, and starts reading it. The estimated reading time is 15.62 minutes. Later, when Marietta [her boss] does her end-of-day statistical roundup, sitting in her private office at 9:00 P.M., she will see the name of each employee and next to it, the amount of time spent reading this memo, and her reaction, based on the time spent, will go something like this:

• Less than 10 min.: Time for an employee conference and possible attitude counseling.

• 10-14 min.: Keep an eye on this employee; may be developing slipshod attitude.

• 14-15.61 min.: Employee is an efficient worker, may sometimes miss important details.

• Exactly 15.62 min.: Smartass. Needs attitude counseling.

• 15.63-16 min.: Asswipe. Not to be trusted.

• 16-18 min.: Employee is a methodical worker, may sometimes get hung up on minor details.

• More than 18 min.: Check the security videotape, see just what this employee was up to (e.g., possible unauthorized restroom break).

Y.T.’s mom decides to spend between fourteen and fifteen minutes reading the memo. It’s better for younger workers to spend too long, to show that they’re careful, not cocky. It’s better for older workers to go a little fast, to show good management potential. She’s pushing forty. She scans through the memo, hitting the Page Down button at reasonably regular intervals, occasionally paging back up to pretend to reread some earlier section. The computer is going to notice all this. It approves of rereading. It’s a small thing, but over a decade or so this stuff really shows up on your work-habits summary.

ErikAugust2• 10 years ago

It will happen. I'm sure of it.

nealrs8• 10 years ago

gotta love a Snowcrash reference!!

pmiller2• 10 years ago

I think if you wanted to truly implement some type of functionality like this, time on site could be a component. It would definitely filter out the case of someone like me, who clicks through to the comments and then clicks the story link in the comments.

I do this so my browser history points back to the comments when I'm done with the article. I have no idea how many other people do this.

mrwnmonm• 10 years ago

i tried until i got the right answer without reading anything :)

rollinDyno• 10 years ago

This is not directly related to Readsure, but I've been thinking about comments becoming the main content. It'd be interested to see which percentage of people go directly to the comments in aggregators like reddit or hacker news. Even more interesting to me would be to see how many people would pass the quiz by reading only the comments. Sometimes the comment section is rich enough and can provide more information than the source itself if one has good inferring skills.

callmekatootie• 10 years ago

I think this has a flaw. Considering that you will be presenting the end user with multiple options and the choice to only select one, the user can simply spend 4-5 seconds to select each option one by one until they get it right - Does not really verify that the end user indeed read the article

Show HN: Readsure – Pass a quiz that shows you read an article before commenting

Related Stories