LIKE button

[DJBob]

Is there a way to put a 'like' button similar to Facebook on the bottom bar of posts?

Just askin'

[Admin]

Yea, theres a package out there that can handle per post based "thanks" - I didn't install it back in the day because I had seen similar systems gamed on big-boards.

I'll give it another look in about an hour and see if there are any potential issues with vbulletin4.

[mixedgas]

Mixedgas dislikes this.

We have a such a nice culture here, why do we need it?

Steve

[Admin]

Reasons for it:

I agree - 15 characters.

Reasons against it:

My post count is inadequate, I also agree but don't need to add 15 characters.

---

I'm sure there are numerous other reasons for/against this but the simple examples I mentioned above were the first things to pop up.

It wouldn't be called "like" - It would be called "thanks" - Basically someone clicks a button on the post and their "Thanks-ism" fuel tanks get another hit.

I for one don't believe that this does anything *directly* to help the SNR here, it just moves the noise into a more condensed box.

[swamidog]

can we exchanges "likes" for "lattes" once we collect enough?

Reasons for it:

I agree - 15 characters.

Reasons against it:

My post count is inadequate, I also agree but don't need to add 15 characters.

---

I'm sure there are numerous other reasons for/against this but the simple examples I mentioned above were the first things to pop up.

It wouldn't be called "like" - It would be called "thanks" - Basically someone clicks a button on the post and their "Thanks-ism" fuel tanks get another hit.

I for one don't believe that this does anything *directly* to help the SNR here, it just moves the noise into a more condensed box.

[Laser Wizardry]

I do not like the idea of a "like" button in the least. This is not a popularity contest forum, a like button could make it into one.

my two cents is that this only serves to emulate the "rep power" that is utterly meaningless over on other forums.

If a lot of people "like" something, that does not mean the information is accurate, and a newbie could be misled based on a quick glance on how many "likes" a thread has.

[JohnYayas]

I like this thread.

[laserdj]

There's already the option to "rate this thread"... It doesn't get used a lot...

[laserdj]

------ deleted double post ---------

[sugeek]

I agree with Laserwizardry +1 But having discussed this earlier this afternoon I will stick with my original thoughts. A button that inserts "I agree - 15 characters." into the quick reply text box. For those with interest could pull all the data from PL and do a grouping of posts with "I agree - 15 characters." easy as pie! Cake on the other hand is a pain in the ass, well at least hand whipping butter cream frosting.

-Adam

[soforene]

AOL

More than 15 characters.

[Admin]

K, I have an idea: Think of multiple solutions that work while dismissing said system. I enforced this "rule" a number of years ago with pretty good results.

AOL

More than 15 characters.

Why am I not surprised to see you here trolling it up.

While it wasn't specifically enumerated in your excellently summarized manifesto it does strike at the primary issue that people are talking about: The SNR is "off" and ways to fix, or at least compartmentalize the noise. This would be tantamount to disincentivizing bad behavior.

Though I suppose the philosophical musings should be better left in more capable hands, such as yours Herbert.

There's already the option to "rate this thread"... It doesn't get used a lot...

Yea, the potential for gaming that system is low so it sits jolly well ignored and used primarily to shit on someones thread anonymously - it also has some fundamental quirks with how things are weighted but thats neither here nor there.

Speaking of gamed features: The thread tagging system that was supposed to be the ultimate fix for the curiously retarded search engine buried in vbulletin. That worked out so well I had to manually purge the database of it's entries only to find out that the things I actually removed were only placeholders for the actual content that altered the search output.

I like this thread.

Me too! 15 characters.

...This is not a popularity contest forum...

And yet it is all at the same time.

my two cents is that this only serves to emulate the "rep power" that is utterly meaningless over on other forums.

Hardly. I don't have to emulate said system. I could straight up enable it. I'd just need enough liquor to be able to talk myself into believing it's a totally awesome idea and that "the collective forum administrators society" reached a consensus that it was, in fact, awesome and not something that was just enabled by default.

I'm pretty sure this was first uttered back in rome: "I CRC Error therefor CRC Error." also "Lead waterpipes are totally awesome."

If a lot of people "like" something, that does not mean the information is accurate, and a newbie could be misled based on a quick glance on how many "likes" a thread has.

Exactly why it's not a facebook "like" system - It's a way to thank the person for their contribution without eating up a forum post. The accuracy of the post in question is left as an academic exercise of the reader. - I personally believe such a system might work *if* people hold people accountable to their content.

can we exchanges "likes" for "lattes" once we collect enough?

I will totally bring this up to the budget committee at my earliest convenience. Which happened in the time it took me to type out this sentence.

They disagree with a few things:

1) Me referring to myself as they.
2) This would defeat the purpose of the system having *no* intrinsic value and lead to abuse of the system
3) Theres simply no money in my wallet for it.

[DJBob]

It wouldn't be called "like" - It would be called "thanks" - Basically someone clicks a button on the post and their "Thanks-ism" fuel tanks get another hit.

I stand corrected, it is called a "thanks" button.
Nice discussion going on.

[JohnYayas]

Not that my opinion matter, but I am neither for nor against a like button. Ultimately, I think it would be a waste of time but I don't think it would do any harm, either. I've seen them on Facebook. "12 people like this", it says. Whoop de doo. Then again, it is helpful to see what people like and don't like -- ie it's good for the socially inept who don't know how to behave or what content is interesting/useful on an internet forum. If it costs even a penny to add as a feature I would suggest not to bother. If it's free and doesn't require extra time on your (Admin) part, then why not try it out. If it turns out to be good it could be kept, if not, it could be removed. I don't think the PL fanclub will come tumbling down whether it's added or not.

[colouredmirrorball]

All I can say is, if there is a like button, there should be a dislike button too.

I've once read that the theory about the lack of a dislike button to Facebook is that if people don't like something they will just ignore it. No likes is as bad as a lot of dislikes... But if a next Allen comes up, maybe it's not a bad idea to severely dislike a thread.

Though liking a thread is actually a pretty absurd idea. It should be rather on post basis. For example the Laserworld thread. One could imagine that this thread gets lots of dislikes, but actually everyone agrees with the posts made.

Agree button? Hmmm... (And disagree button too of course)

[Things]

Agree button? Hmmm... (And disagree button too of course)

Then I think a "Complete bullshit" and "On the verge of complete bullshit" button would suit as well

[masterpj]

Dont make a like button, for that we already have stuff like facebook.
If you like something, let someone know if you feel like it. I'm sure someone will apreciate it.
I'm pretty sure if you add a like button people will feel the need to post useless or harvest likes and stuff like that.
Lets keep it the way it is please it's working fine and as far as I know it has always been fine.