This would be more impressive if it were backed by a Gist or something so you could actually clone your comments for use offline. As it is it's just using GitHub's proprietary storage backend through the issues system. So it's no different than just using Disqus or something.
The only difference is that I don't require users to log-in via OAuth, rather I point them to the issue page with the comments and they enter their comments there (which are then displayed on my blog). Less OAuth fuss (both for me and for users) with same functionality.
I would really rather just type my name in than give any random blog I want to comment on permission to "Update your public repositories (Commits, Issues, etc)."
That's more than a bit of a deal breaker. Can't believe how many people have just handed him the keys to their Github account. It's the ultimate hacker honey pot!
It asks for permission to update not just issues but my public repositories as well. Does that mean that I am giving him full rights to commit stuff to my repos by posting a comment?
For my podcast I did something similar using Github to be a wiki for user contributed shownotes. If users want to contribute to the shownotes, they just send me a pull request. When I merge, it shows up on the site.
I've been wondering recently if I can use Github's Inline Commit comments to allow inline commenting on articles/stories I write (while in draft mode). I did think the DjangoBook was onto something when they had theirs in 2006.
The kind of reviewers I have won't/can't use GitHub directly, so it needs an alternative UI.
The drawback with GitHub commit comments for this purpose is they don't persist between updates until the comment is marked as closed; something I understand BitBucket has sorted. Hmmmm...
