Submitted by MactionSnack t3_z7zbrc in dataisbeautiful
uatme t1_iy968mx wrote
I scrolled until my finger got tired.
It was only March 2020
czarchastic t1_iy9gu7p wrote
Kinda wish there was some way to zoom in and out. Like start with per year and drill inward. Otherwise its an endless scrolling of death.
FeckingShite t1_iy9uvv2 wrote
That is the point dude
melance t1_iy9rxpi wrote
If you're on a PC, you can use Ctrl+Mouse Wheel to zoom in and out of the webpage. It's not great but it's something.
authorPGAusten t1_iy9vrqd wrote
Or to filter. Maybe filter by number killed, etc. would make it a more useful graphic.
DevonLuck24 t1_iydb7m0 wrote
pretty sure the purpose is to make you see everyone on there…filtering would be an ignorant feature to add
authorPGAusten t1_iydof47 wrote
Filtering would not preclude people from doing that, and would encourage people to actually see more than they do.
DevonLuck24 t1_iydp9fn wrote
more? that a stretch i could filter for what i was looking for and never look outside of my search results, thus limiting the amount of the list i actually see
filtering does the exact opposite of encouraging people to fully view the list in its entirety..if that was the given point to begin with
authorPGAusten t1_iydv3o2 wrote
disagree. The list is so long that most people don't look at the list. They just start scrolling and realize it is huge. Now if they were able to start with it that way, the same thing would happen, but then they would say, hmm, maybe let me look at the mass shootings with at least one death, and they would go "wow, look at that" then they would be like what about more than 1, what about 3, etc. and in general interact with it more than just dang, too long of list.
DevonLuck24 t1_iydzrae wrote
as someone who definitely just scrolled that entire list because i wanted to see how long it actually was, my opinion is biased because i literally just did what you said most people won’t..as there is no way for either of us to definitively know, let’s just agree to disagree.
also as i’ve said, the point of the data is important..if the point is to just show the sheer scale, filtering would do the opposite but i don’t know what the purpose was. It’s worth consideration.
have a good one bud
authorPGAusten t1_iye50w7 wrote
Just fyi, adding filtering would not preclude you doing exactly what you did. Complete enhancement with nothing lost.
Have a good one as well
[deleted] t1_iy9agmi wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments