Originally Posted by
SkiAdcock
FWIW - prior to the thread getting bumped by nsx, the like thread had been dormant for a year. When it was active a year ago, FTers were pretty evenly split 50/50 on whether they wanted like. After the thread was bumped, the input was still pretty evenly split 50/50. After the poll was created, the no's were leading the yes's until recently. But even now the two aren't that far apart. Basically there's not a clear or clamoring mandate by FTers for such a feature.
Cheers.
The above is still valid. Not seeing a huge clamoring of FTers asking for this, which is usually one of the more important criteria when TB considers something.
Originally Posted by
kipper
I'm sad that there's been very little thought given to this by those pushing for it, yet when people bring up concerns, their concerns are minimized, and there's been no plan presented. I also think this will cause many, many issues in some forums, but some are unwilling to consider, or even listen to those concerns.
Agree, and it's a concern of mine (pardon the pun).
Originally Posted by
Bouncer
My take, fwiw,
In OMNI/PR land, I guarantee you it'd be gamed within hours if not minutes!
If it is decided that it will be implemented, it I would recommend OMNI/PR be left out.Otherwise you're going to end up with a team of people with 5000 "likes" inside of a week.
Why should Omni be left out? Both Omnis are valid, functioning forums on FT that also get post counts. The only Omni that doesn't get post counts is Omni games.
FWIW - I also think if there's going to be a helpful button, there needs to be an unhelpful button. That's one way of identifying incorrect information.
Originally Posted by
84fiero
It shouldn't have to, and maybe it doesn't...no idea what IB has planned with its resources. But given the slowness sometimes seen, the point was merely that if there were a prioritization, one is more important, that's all. If they can walk and chew gum simultaneously, great. Though I still am not in favor of the feature.
Agree. Having a good mobile app is & should be a much higher priority. For those saying IB can do both, let's just remember how long it's taking to get a decent mobile app & how long it's taking for a decent chat function. If IB needs to splinter resources to add a customized like function, even when there's not a large clamoring for it, it's not unreasonable to assume that some things will be further delayed. That's not a strawman, but based on IB development to date.
Originally Posted by
GUWonder
Is IB working on modification of the "plug-in" for FT even before TB has voted on whatever it is that TB may end up voting on with regard to this entertaining popularity contest feature for FT? Is TB voting or going to be voting on specific plug-in modifications which it wants IB to make? Will that be part of the same motion or an after-thought motion?
Who knows the answers to the above questions? I would think that having some of these questions answered would make for more informed voting opportunities if these answers came well before a TB vote related to this topic hits.
If this is about a trial to get the most knowledge about how this may work, then what is wrong with maximizing data points and letting the trial be site-wide? Why should any forum on FT be excluded from the feature being enabled even post-re-trial, if the feature is so liked/helpful?
Agree with the above - and whether liked or not, those are valid questions.
Originally Posted by
anabolism
Thanks very much for the recap and the details, Flyertall!
This is especially helpful because it describes an algorithm for a partially-safeguarded reputation mechanism. I suppose that the underlying idea is that those new to FT or new to a forum would pay more attention to posts by members with higher reputation scores.
I was hoping for a somewhat different mechanism that would be focused on posts and not posters. The idea being that a few posts in a thread are good information while many are questions, speculation, incorrect information, etc. Obviously this concept is only meaningful in a forum largely dedicated to providing information. It has no meaning in a social or conversational forum.
From my own experience in various platforms, I'm skeptical that a mechanism for per-poster reputation would be helpful to FT, but I have no objection if the TB wishes to implement it. It's possible that it would end up being a good thing.
Independently of a per-poster reputation mechanism, I urge the TB and IB to consider a per-post helpfulness score system. While no such mechanism could ever be foolproof or perfect, I believe it could be useful as a tool in managing and finding information buried within large threads.
FT tried a reputation feature years ago. It failed badly. Having anything that rates a poster would probably result in the same if implemented now. Whether it can be broken out in terms of rating a post without rating the poster is a valid question.
Originally Posted by
RatherBeOnATrain
I oppose the idea of a "Like" button.
Over the years, FT's mature and thoughtful discussions have frequently helped me make sense of awful and tragic events. (For current examples of this, see the threads about MH370 and QZ8501.) I don't see how a "like" button would improve the quality of that type of thread.
I have also been here when the community reacted to truly awful events involving community members-- such as the untimely demise of a young FT member (who was a frequent poster in the Delta forum). Do we really want to have "like" buttons under posts about the passing of a member?
What about the times when active FT members suddenly are exposed as public figures -- what possible good could come out of having "like" buttons under posts about a FT member's highly-publicized dispute over a trivial matter?
Hate-filled comments also appear on FT -- whenever a TSA employee is arrested for something, there are bound to be several hate-filled posts about the employee, their alleged crime and/or their employer. The annual devaluations of FF programs also cause angry hate-filled posts. Do we really need "like" buttons under those?
What about threads that are complaints about IB and/or the site sponsors? Imagine someone posts an awful thread about a site sponsor, e.g. a "[Site Sponsor] eats children" thread -- does IB really want "like" buttons under those threads?
Hadn't even thought of all that, but valid points/questions.
Originally Posted by
intuition
But seriously, I think we have listed many of the issues, doubts and problems with a like feature. I don't think we can be more constructive with what is known. I'm not sure what bubble gum we are even supposed to be chewing on anymore.
So I think (again IMHO) we soon have reached the point where nsx and TB either comes forward with a more substantial proposition we can give new feedback on, motions/seconds/votes for whatever exists right now or calls it a day for now.
Agree with the above. Your first sentence gets back to concerns many have posted that haven't yet been addressed which would need to be if the latter paragraph happens (given there isn't a huge clamoring for this by FTers, I'm more supportive of the calling it a day but that's just me).
BTW - I was chatting with some FTers re: the like topic & they're opposed. One of the things they said was that if this did get approved, they want the ability not to see likes
at all. They didn't just mean in their profiles, but similar to putting someone on ignore. They don't want to see in posts if it was liked or not and that's across all forums. They don't want their view of FT cluttered, they don't want to participate in likes, they don't care if their posts are liked, they have no intention of giving them. So just as you can turn signatures on/off, put someone on ignore & it/they disappear they want that option so that their viewing/participation in FT continues as it has & is not disrupted. So that's a valid request & whether it can be done or not certainly needs to be answered (along with other items).
Cheers.