FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - "Like" Button?
Thread: "Like" Button?
View Single Post
Old Sep 17, 2013 | 7:09 am
  #45  
HansGolden
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ICT
Programs: AA ExP
Posts: 1,860
Originally Posted by SkiAdcock
I might buy into everything you've mentioned, except I disagree that whichever response has the most likes means it's a correct answer. It could be wrong & if you have folk who don't know any better they'd like it blindly. I actually saw that happen in MP a few times (people posting entirely wrong information & people liking the posts ), which is one reason I don't really pay much attention to like.

I'm not set in stone one way or the other on this issue. But I think like supporters are being naive if they think having like will eliminate plus +1s entirely.

Cheers.
Both of those arguments have the same underlying idea: because it won't fix every problem perfectly, therefore it shouldn't be done. That's not a line of thinking that's very persuasive with me.

Originally Posted by jackal
Or, on a more serious note, "like" means I think your comment adds value to the discussion, even if I don't necessarily agree with it. "+1" signifies agreement. They are different.
Well, if there's interest in this, we should definitely discuss the term we'd end up using, because different terms do mean different things to different people. If we wanted to get really sophisticated, we could do it BuzzFeed style:


Of course, given the keywords BuzzFeed uses, sophisticated is probably not the right term.

Obviously the keywords would have to be radically different and carefully thought through. However, things like: correct, incorrect, cool, funny, etc could work. (I took two seconds to think of those; obviously the community could do better.)

If we wanted to go even more free form, people could just type a single word tag into a box. It would then appear under the post. People could click on the word to add their vote to that word as descriptive of the post. I understand the potential for abuse, but I think the same ToS would simply apply. Just because it's one-word communication doesn't change the fact that it's words and the ToS governs.

I'm not proposing the latter two ideas, just throwing them out as brainstorms.
HansGolden is offline