This is amazing, thanks team Discourse!!
I’m wondering if this could be combined with / replace the Post Voting Plugin.
Edit: Also, is “Top” sorted by likes, or how does this work?
2 Likes
One of the options we explored for nesting like this was enhancing the Post Voting plugin, but we decided not to go that route. This is much easier to maintain, the experience is better. I think absolutely it could replace Post Voting one day – or already does in some cases.
7 Likes
I know this isn’t the best solution, but you can still use CSS.
You only need to add a rule for each language, using the correct selector:
/* Instead of using this selector ... */
nav.post-controls .actions button.reply pan.d-button-label:after {
}
/* ... start the selector with the language */
html[lang=pt-BR] nav.post-controls .actions button.reply pan.d-button-label:after {
content: " text in Portuguese";
}
i alread posted a better solution: Discourse Reply Button Labels and it includes portuguese and other translations
3 Likes
Adding a nested view surely doesn’t eliminate this challenge?
In fact I would say nested views cause users more baseline cognitive load? (But what do I know I’m not a seasoned Redditor)
But I love choices, so as you were!
3 Likes
I just started piloting this in my forum and everyone hates it so far.
I don’t really hate it but it is very different and hard to parse at times.
Update: I was forced to revert because the /t endpoint changed to /n and caused SO many issues including error 500s.
Reverting fixed.
Another update: This feature is not ready for production. We have a number of broken links to threads in notifications. Thankfully this seems to have resolved for new notifications but the links that are there result in 404s (where they were 500s previously)
In addition to this, the mobile interface is really bad (OP has useless whitespace under the avatar), the desktop interface has it’s own problems, and because of the radical UI changes it’s completely incompatible with many theme components (table of contents comes to mind).
TL;DR - This was highly over engineered and nearly caused permanent damage to my forum. This should have a warning before enabling and needs more work to make it stable.
4 Likes
Why does nested view remove the title? Having every tab have only the site name when multiple tabs are open makes navigation among tabs hard.
1 Like
I’m not sure I understand how each of the default sort options will behave (top, new, old)
Also I don’t see the best way to test this. I don’t see any option to make a topic nested.
Search “Nested” in admin/site settings search
1 Like
I was hoping to test myself without enabling it for everyone else. Is that not possible?
If you don’t make it default you can just enable it then use the topic wrench menu to make a specific topic nested.
3 Likes
I’m not sure that this is working, at least not when using the Fakebook Theme. I opened a test topic, made the topic nested, then tried replies to the topic and to the post.
All the replies look the same. Also (maybe minor), my avatar rendering is a bit weird.
1 Like
Yeah don’t assume plugins or themes will have been adjusted to work with this.
4 Likes
This is a fantastic feature and something we have waited for a long time!!!
What our community is still waiting for, is a proper journal/log feature where only topic author can do root level posts and all others users can only reply to individual root level posts.
Currently we are using very hacky CSS and JS to enable such a via by using per-user filter views and the collapsible replies below each post.
See
3 Likes
So .. it is pretty cool.. We have a small group. I was wondering why we don’t get a chance to choose this in the personal interface choices?
1 Like
Mark addresses this already a bit with:
And I’ll add to it:
The core problem: shared content, divergent mental models. The moment two users see the same topic structured differently, you break the shared reference that conversation depends on.
Reply-to works different: When User A (nested) writes “as the previous comment noted…”, User B (linear) sees no previous because it’s post that’s three positions up, or fifteen, depending on which branch collapsed. Which also means an author can no longer be sure of how their post is seen by others.
Permalinks and post numbers diverge: If post ordering depends on view mode, then /t/topic/123/47 either means different posts to different users, or means the same post but appears in wildly different positions. (Not sure how it’s implemented right now - either way, not ideal)
And I’m sure there are more issues.
it comes down to: a conversation is shared space, and to foster good communication should therefore be structured the same for everyone
6 Likes
I wonder what will happen when we revert. We are trying it out for one week. Hopefully this won’t crash the system and it is revertable.
I’d still say that it would be good if there could be a different interface based on the individual experience. Engagement trumps a unified experience. So if engagement is better, then it should be allowed. Perhaps there is a way to solve the linking. It seems like a programming issue more than a social issue.
Does engagement trump good communication?
It’s what Discourse has always stood for, there are other platforms that optimise for engagement at the expense of everything else.
2 Likes
You can flip back and forwards as you see fit in my experience. I moved a few topics to the new layout then the whole site.
Its a gamechanger for my users.
The only thing they have mentioned is the super scroll bar is no more. I can understand why as the posts are perhaps not in a chronological order any longer
1 Like
Great to see “better mobile experience” already on the roadmap — really looking forward to reddit-style indented threads landing on mobile.
Quick SEO question about nested replies: I noticed nested topics use a /n/ URL, and when I fetch one without JS it returns an empty shell, plus the canonical points to the /n/ URL itself rather than the regular /t/ topic URL. Do crawlers still get the full server-rendered post content on /n/ routes, or should canonical resolve back to /t/? Just want to make sure enabling nested won’t hurt indexing. Thanks!
upd
Tested on 2026.5.0 + Horizon: flipped a topic to nested and checked with a Googlebot UA. Crawlers still get the full flat HTML on /n/ (all posts, microdata intact, canonical → /t/, no noindex), and /n/ stays out of the sitemap. The only redirect is /t/ → /n/
as a 302, and that’s just for JS users — bots never get redirected. So for SEO it’s a non-issue, indexing-wise nothing changes.
2 Likes