Graham, I've considered how to 'enhance the user experience' and think options for modifying user preferences should be considered.

From a set of defaults a user might select how they interface with the site: font style, size, auto resizing, most discussed/recent/last posted/viewed/etc presentation, comment threads open with first/last/last viewed/from last 'X' hours/page #.

As regards posting comments I would suggest revisiting the options below the user/date stamp.

Sometimes I would like to indicate quiet approval of a particular comment or a thank you without the need to post a comment to do so. A button for each of these could log a, for example, 'WmTrevor liked' or 'WmTrevor said thanks' as a simple msg to a poster when they were next online or visited that thread. A couple of available courtesies without distracting a thread or everyone else.

I wouldn't add any negative options... the 'recommend for deletion' serves its purpose.

However, on occasions I would like to 'enhance my on line experience' of threads by opting to filter out some commenters. So maybe a thread-specific toggle button to 'hide this user's comments'. A personal Filter Out or FO button.

This would serve as a private selection choice and is only censorship in the sense of its being self censorship of who I wish to bother having on my screen or reading.

A more difficult task would be to help encourage 'newbies' or 'lurkers' to post comments with less fear of being mauled by the more robust debaters (asserters might be a more accurate noun form) here.

Dual or side-by-side article threads, maybe? I could elect to post to either the commentary (same as now, which permits discussion and response) or the one-off comment thread (which, being limited to a single opinion, wouldn't). Then I could view one, the other or both interleaved.

win..makes some great points
but importantly..raises the issue of people..wanting to comment
plus the..issue..of experience and silly fears re posting[that is important]

i think..the facebook/tweeter log in..will cover that
but active participation..that frightens some..its a useless fear,,but*

jesus covered that..in the acimurtexts
people need to be fearless..re speaking-up
[the image of..the horse shoe nail..that lost the war]

if only..i had ...tried.

Dear Graham,

There are many tempting features possible, but the risk is that they clutter the page. I like the clean, pure text format of this site, even if the price is to have less features. Let us continue to concentrate on content rather than fancy looks.

...Arrhum...(Sound of clearing throat)!

...A website change with aesthetics the major motivator, is unnecessary IMO.

...I agree though (along with OUG), with extending the comment limit as being in order: But to cover the downside of such a change,a "walled off" facility for posters to discourse endlessly with another fellow poster away from the article, is a necessity to limit the effect of a "take-over" by comment; a facility currently available to posters wishing to blanket opinion on any particular topic, by combining forces for the direct purpose of smothering opposing opinion.

PS:

And can we improve the post-time imprint to include ADST for the majority of the population not housed in Queensland!

i.would love a topic..like ask..a theist
[or ask an athiest..[or ask a muslim..or ask a jew..
even ask a mother ..or ask a lawyer..or ask the mod..or ask an elder..or ask a pope..or a polly

or what..questions
we would ask of god?

can we get the questions asked..of god..made..into a topic?

ok..lets try?