Should new content be added ABOVE or BELOW the actual content?

Question

I was browsing a certain gaming forum when I noticed this:

What you can see is a heavy edited forum post - a thread opener one. The actual content is the very last line, but every edit and plus information were added above the matter.

I guess (but fix me if I'm wrong) this brings that additional info to the focus of reader since that's the first they bump into while reading; though it covers the matter of the post and people may even miss that.

What decides, which is the better choice? Should new info put above the original content, or below that?

Does it matter at all?

Answer 1

I think the other answers are misinterpreting the question as 'where should new posts be placed'. I believe the question is about editing the initial forum/blog post or article after new information came in to view.

Is it being updated live?

If you're covering an event realtime (ish), like a political debate, or CES presentations, people are likely to stay on your page and hit F5, or to check in occasionally. In this case, you don't want to make them scroll time and time again, so put the updates at the top.

Are you correcting or extending the content?

If you're extending the content, but not correcting any old content, put the new content at the bottom.

Original:

Pluto, discovered in 1930 is a dwarf planet in the Kuiper belt.

Correction:

Pluto, discovered in 1930 is a dwarf planet in the Kuiper belt. note: Pluto lost its status as planet in 2015.

If you're correcting, are you editing or amending??

If you're correcting the content, then a note at the bottom should suffice. If you want to keep the original content intact for transparency's sake, put any corrections up front, so people don't miss them if they stop reading halfway. Example:

Original:

Venus, discovered in 1930 is a dwarf planet in the Kuiper belt.

Editing:

Pluto, discovered in 1930 is a dwarf planet in the Kuiper belt.

note: We originally incorrectly listed Venus instead of Pluto

Amending:

note: We incorrectly listed Venus. The planet name should be Pluto, instead.

The planet Venus was discovered in 1930, but lost its status as planet in 2015.

Answer 2

We just had a similar discussion at the office today... the consensus is to do what users are familiar with... if you think about how Stack Exchange works, the threaded discussion is below. I feel that people know to scroll at this point... It makes more sense to have users get through the content they are commenting on vs making them easy for them to comment.

NOTE: there is a difference between threaded discussions and commenting...

Answer 3

In this particular case, it should be below original content. Users will start reading from top, so if you add corrections or additional info above original content, there will be no context to infer what the correction is for.

Further corrections should be added below previous ones as well. Like this:

Original Content

First comment made

Second comment made

...

Las comment made

Keep in mind that this approach doesn't apply to all cases. In your particular case, it's text and comments by users, so they need to be in "first to last" order. A different story would be if you were dealing with a new active version of a process or application, which is not your case

Answer 4

I looked in to this for a comments module I was designing for site I was working on. My research brought up the following:

Forums - Latest is at the bottom. It reads like a thread which people can follow a discussion.

Comments - Latest is at the top. But people can nest replies, chat etc.

I think this makes sense as they have different functions to the user. It looks like you are talking about the forum idea with your screenshot. If you want to have something which builds a discussion, then you should keep to the way that is familiar to a user.