Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Community > TalkBoard Topics
Reload this Page >

"Like" Button?

View Poll Results: Q: What is your view on FlyerTalk implementing a "Helpful" button feature?
Support
433
59.72%
Oppose
275
37.93%
No opinion
17
2.34%
Voters: 725. You may not vote on this poll

"Like" Button?

    Hide Wikipost
Old Nov 21, 15, 7:56 pm   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: Prospero
Wiki Link
Signed in members with 90 days / 90 posts can edit this Wikipost; wiki contents may be printed by using the (lower right wiki corner)

Some FTers are supportive of like/helpful button. Some are not. Some on both sides of the issue have questions, concerns and/or need more info. This wiki attempts to highlight them in bullet format/"cliff notes" version from the 566 posts in this thread. More detailed information regarding the pros/cons/questions/concerns/info can be garnered by reading the entire thread, where FTers on both sides of the like/helpful button have been eloquent/provided valuable input.

Pros:
* Makes Flyertalk more modern; more like Facebook, LinkedIn, and other progressive internet bulletin boards
* A like/helpful button would minimize unnecessary replies such as +1.
* Streamlines posts
* Positive feedback incentivizes quality content/FTers will post more
* Some people won’t take time to write a thank you but will post a like
* Those with more likes/helpfuls are considered knowledgable

Cons:
* Makes it easier for airlines/companies to find mistake fares/glitches/underground tricks
* Makes Flyertalk more like Facebook/dumbs it down
* FT had rating system here years ago and it did not go well
* System can be gamed/cliques develop
* Clutters up posts/takes up valuable screen space
* Will not eliminate +1s/+1s also provide positive feedback
* Posts that have inaccurate info can also get likes/doesn't mean poster is knowledgable
* If FTers post info & it doesn't get likes/helpfuls, less incentive to post more
* Some who might have posted info in the past will now just post like, so less information provided to other FTers.
* Older posts will tend to have more likes/helpfuls on average than newer posts in the same thread, which can be misleading when the information is out-of-date. [added by MSPeconomist]

Questions, concerns about how it will work, and/or information based on brief internal trial already done
* If implemented, can FTers who prefer not to utilize the like/helpful button turn it off so that they don't see it?
* Is there a software way to separate likes of posts from posters? (Limited trial indicates no; don't know if software can be changed to do so)
* Can a post/day count be implemented before implementing for FTers, similar Omni/CC? (Yes)
* Can certain forums have it turned off such as Omni? (No, current software is it's either all forums or none)
* If a sitewide trial is created, what are the metrics for success or failure?
* What is the goal of this/how will the data be used?
* If customization of current software is required, will this take away from development on other projects such as a better mobile app?
* Will or can there be a dislike/unhelpful button?
* What happens if a post that is "liked" gets its content edited and ends up having a different meaning than it initially had at the time the post was "liked"?
* Can threads or individual posts deemed helpful be bookmarked/saved?
* Can users "opt out" and select to remove all trace of the system, as is currently possible with the ignore list and removing view of signatures?
Print Wikipost

 
Old Dec 11, 14, 8:26 pm
  #151  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SGF
Programs: AS, AA, UA, AGR (ex-75K, GLD, 1K, and S+), Choice Diamond, HZ PC, Costco Exec, NPS Passport
Posts: 22,931
A TalkBoard member can't even throw out some draft ideas without being accused of trying to force his agenda on the TalkBoard?

...and people wonder why there's a private TalkBoard forum. No wonder some TalkBoard members prefer to hash out the rough ideas in there and then come out here with something more cohesive. It's less painful.

It's one thing to hold your representatives accountable. It's another to pointlessly assail them with pointed arrows.
jackal is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 8:32 pm
  #152  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: BKK
Programs: AA Plat, HH Diamond, SPG Gold
Posts: 2,396
Even if TB decides that a trial would be worthwhile, i don't think IB has yet indicated whether such functionality can be practically provided, and whether development and implementation would divert resources from other higher priority projects, such as a new mobile app.
aBroadAbroad is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 8:43 pm
  #153  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Programs: HH Diamond, Priority Club Platinum
Posts: 45,199
Originally Posted by jackal View Post
A TalkBoard member can't even throw out some draft ideas without being accused of trying to force his agenda on the TalkBoard?

...and people wonder why there's a private TalkBoard forum. No wonder some TalkBoard members prefer to hash out the rough ideas in there and then come out here with something more cohesive. It's less painful.

It's one thing to hold your representatives accountable. It's another to pointlessly assail them with pointed arrows.
It seems the posts are split roughly 50-50, yet we've now seen a revised proposal, pushing this, even though there's not been a large clamoring for it.
kipper is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 8:48 pm
  #154  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 92,262
Originally Posted by aBroadAbroad View Post
Even if TB decides that a trial would be worthwhile, i don't think IB has yet indicated whether such functionality can be practically provided, and whether development and implementation would divert resources from other higher priority projects, such as a new mobile app.
I made a similar point--but less eloquently--in the private TalkBoard forum earlier today. It's also not obvious to me (as I said there) that even if the like button is easily feasible, it can be restricted to just a single forum easily.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 9:03 pm
  #155  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist Lite; United Club ex-Lifetime Member
Posts: 20,134
At this point I have to 'fess up that I have some inside information to indicate that I am not totally wasting your time here. That's about all I can say right now. In addition, I continue to believe that IB can implement almost anything we think up. That's why I don't want our discussion to be constrained to what features might be available off the shelf, as it were.
nsx is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 9:10 pm
  #156  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL PM, UA Gold, WN A-List, HH DIA, Hyatt Disc, IHG Spire/AMB, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 31,480
Originally Posted by kipper View Post
It seems the posts are split roughly 50-50, yet we've now seen a revised proposal, pushing this, even though there's not been a large clamoring for it.
Look, I'm not much interested in the button either but your stubbornness is surprising to me. What's the harm in trying it in one forum just to see what it's like? I see this as a situation where there's nothing to lose but maybe something to gain.
CMK10 is offline  
Old Dec 11, 14, 11:17 pm
  #157  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO, CDG, PBI
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,587
Originally Posted by nsx View Post
At this point I have to 'fess up that I have some inside information to indicate that I am not totally wasting your time here. That's about all I can say right now. In addition, I continue to believe that IB can implement almost anything we think up. That's why I don't want our discussion to be constrained to what features might be available off the shelf, as it were.
Well frankly, it takes a lot of stones to say that as that is imo, NOT in the "true spirit of Flyertalk" of sharing information. Either your at liberty to say it or you're not and in the interest of full disclosure and transparency, I think you should or not say anything at all as for me, based on your post, it appears that this whole push for a like/helpful/whatever you want to call it button is all about you and not Flyertalk as a whole.
goalie is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 2:56 am
  #158  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: MMX (CPH)
Programs: QR PC Platinum, AY+ Platinum, A3*G, SK EB silver, Nordic Choice Platinum, Liberokerho GOLD, SJ Black
Posts: 11,595
Originally Posted by nsx View Post

I understand that some people are certain the feature will have no value. What I have trouble understanding is some people also are so sure of their assessment that they oppose a trial to gather more information, information which could surprise all of us.
I find this persuasive. In fact, I think this (the trial) approach could be used even more often on FT.
I am against the button based on personal use of FT and experience of sites that has the button. But for me there is no logic in opposing the trial. I'm sure there are good arguments on where and how to conduct a trial, but I will not argument against a trial as such.



I'd like to ask something completely different. What need is meant to be satisfied with this function? I mean beyond making it easier for expressing "like".

I am asking to find out how far this idea goes. Is there any thoughts beyond the apparent change of the forum by adding this button? When you have gathered the likes of the community, what are your thoughts on how to use that data?

Is the result supposed to merely be subtle guide to certain posts?
Is the result meant to be used in another way? Sort comments by popularity, make top-lists of "most liked posts", diploma of "most liked poster of the year"? Or is it just intended as a instant gratification system to posters?

I mean no distrust in the idea makers, it is just that IRL I've seen too many ideas funded and launched without a clear plan for what they are supposed to do in the long run.
intuition is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 7:12 am
  #159  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Programs: HH Diamond, Priority Club Platinum
Posts: 45,199
Originally Posted by CMK10 View Post
Look, I'm not much interested in the button either but your stubbornness is surprising to me. What's the harm in trying it in one forum just to see what it's like? I see this as a situation where there's nothing to lose but maybe something to gain.
It seems like we're asking IB to do a lot of work for a trial, when there are other, more pressing wants/wishes, like a good mobile app.
kipper is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 8:13 am
  #160  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 92,262
Originally Posted by kipper View Post
How does one decide if the trial is successful or a failure? Who decides that?
Yesterday I posted the following in the private TalkBoard forum:

I'm not sure what we will be justified in inferring from the results of a single trial in a special handpicked forum that we don't think is very typical of FT forums. It sounds to me like the evidence would basically be a single data point that we wouldn't even believe is a representative case.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 9:17 am
  #161  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 68,538
Originally Posted by goalie View Post
Bolding mine: Agreed ^ and how does the like/helpful button stay honest? Or in other words, what's to stop someone from liking/helfulling a post "just because they wanted to (or even if the post content is flat out wrong and thus not helpful). What does that do for folks who see a post marked as liked/helpful where it's obviously not helpful?

Assuming members actually participate in the poll and read this (and the "informative button" threads" as opposed to posting "hey, I just noticed this button thingy! When did that happen"

Bolding mine: What I have trouble with is a proposal which folks are hellbent on pushing thru and then lo and behold, there's a lot of opposition to it so let's take the easy way out and try and sneak it in via a back/side or lower traffic door as imho, THAT is taking the easy way out. Now for sake of argument, let's say the trial gets moved, seconded voted on and passed-is there a time limit as to "the trial"*, how do you propose closing the trial because it didn't work, how do you prose to roll it out if the trial succeeds? I personally think that hoemwork should be done by the folks who want to see this happen and not put F/t'ers in as the beta testers**. And as I posed above, how does the like/helpful button stay honest? Or in other words, what's to stop someone from liking/helfulling a post "just because they wanted to (or even if the post content is flat out wrong and thus not helpful). What does that do for folks who see a post marked as liked/helpful where it's obviously not helpful?
Agree.

Originally Posted by nsx View Post
CMK10 I intend to poll TalkBoard members on each feature and put the most favored features together before voting on anything.

By the way regardless of whether anything happens on this idea I hope this thread serves as a good example of how to take our time developing the best available consensus. That's a large part of why I'm doing this on the public forum almost exclusively. What you see here is very nearly exactly what normally happens in the private forum.
I'm assuming the first poll would be, is this something we should even consider doing, since approximately 50% of the FTers posting are against it. Also it should be noted that those who frequent MP think the Like function no longer holds much value, so not sure that's something FT should be emulating.

Originally Posted by kipper View Post
So, you don't have an idea of what qualifies as a success or a failure, nor do you have a metric that will define either? Speaking for the entire TalkBoard about approving or vetoing expansion is a little far-reaching, isn't it?

Again, so you don't have a plan for any of this?
It does raise concerns, especially since it's not the norm for TB to close something down (which nsx knows).

Originally Posted by jackal View Post
A TalkBoard member can't even throw out some draft ideas without being accused of trying to force his agenda on the TalkBoard?

...and people wonder why there's a private TalkBoard forum. No wonder some TalkBoard members prefer to hash out the rough ideas in there and then come out here with something more cohesive. It's less painful.

It's one thing to hold your representatives accountable. It's another to pointlessly assail them with pointed arrows.
Oh puhleeze - as a former TB member, getting arrows slung goes with the territory. And even phrased a bit harshly, the points/questions are valid.

If this was to be a we'll do what we want without input, IB/CD wouldn't need a TB. So support & non-support of ideas is a valid thing for FTers to post when TB (or nsx as least ) asks for input. Berating FTers for providing input just because they don't agree with you isn't very cool.

It's also fair (and has been done) in the private forum to question whether something is a good idea/makes sense for all of FT vs. one TB member having something s/he really wanted to see implemented & other TB members saying, hey, wait a second.

Originally Posted by aBroadAbroad View Post
Even if TB decides that a trial would be worthwhile, i don't think IB has yet indicated whether such functionality can be practically provided, and whether development and implementation would divert resources from other higher priority projects, such as a new mobile app.
This.

When I contacted IB re: this before going off TB, the response was basically they can do anything, it's just a question of priority, if enough FTers want it (so far the answer is split 50/50, which they also noted), and then TB & the CD signing off on it & make it a higher priority and that it would be a major change to the site.

I didn't ask about trial runs because normally TB doesn't recommend trial runs. Images is, I believe, the only time & that was something that did not require a major change to the site.

As a former TB member & as a current FTer, I seriously question whether this is important enough/will make FT even better for FTers & is enough to justify making a major change to the site. I also wonder how happy IB would be about doing a major change to the site on a 'trial basis'.

And speaking for myself and some other FTers that I've discussed the topic with, we'd all much rather see IB development priority given to a good mobile app than a Like function.

Originally Posted by kipper View Post
It seems the posts are split roughly 50-50, yet we've now seen a revised proposal, pushing this, even though there's not been a large clamoring for it.
Agree. So the logical question is Why?

Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
I made a similar point--but less eloquently--in the private TalkBoard forum earlier today. It's also not obvious to me (as I said there) that even if the like button is easily feasible, it can be restricted to just a single forum easily.
Besides that, the bigger question is whether IB wants to do a major change for a "trial run".

Originally Posted by nsx View Post
At this point I have to 'fess up that I have some inside information to indicate that I am not totally wasting your time here. That's about all I can say right now. In addition, I continue to believe that IB can implement almost anything we think up. That's why I don't want our discussion to be constrained to what features might be available off the shelf, as it were.
IB can do anything (well, anything within the constraints of the software). It's whether it's a high enough priority & whether FTers are clamoring for it. I would say they're not, given the topic was raised a year ago (at which time FTers were 50/50 on it) & was dormant for a year until you decided to bump it up (& response is still 50/50).

Originally Posted by CMK10 View Post
Look, I'm not much interested in the button either but your stubbornness is surprising to me. What's the harm in trying it in one forum just to see what it's like? I see this as a situation where there's nothing to lose but maybe something to gain.
If it was something as easy as images, perhaps not. However, if it requires a major change to the site, do you make that change on a trial basis for one handpicked forum? Also, I think it's irresponsible to create a trial run without having criteria set in advance on what makes the trial a success or failure.

Originally Posted by [B
intuition[/B];]

I'd like to ask something completely different. What need is meant to be satisfied with this function? I mean beyond making it easier for expressing "like".

I am asking to find out how far this idea goes. Is there any thoughts beyond the apparent change of the forum by adding this button? When you have gathered the likes of the community, what are your thoughts on how to use that data?

Is the result supposed to merely be subtle guide to certain posts?
Is the result meant to be used in another way? Sort comments by popularity, make top-lists of "most liked posts", diploma of "most liked poster of the year"? Or is it just intended as a instant gratification system to posters?
Valid questions.

Originally Posted by kipper View Post
It seems like we're asking IB to do a lot of work for a trial, when there are other, more pressing wants/wishes, like a good mobile app.
Agree.

Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
Yesterday I posted the following in the private TalkBoard forum:

I'm not sure what we will be justified in inferring from the results of a single trial in a special handpicked forum that we don't think is very typical of FT forums. It sounds to me like the evidence would basically be a single data point that we wouldn't even believe is a representative case.
Agree.

Cheers.

Last edited by SkiAdcock; Dec 12, 14 at 9:25 am
SkiAdcock is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 9:37 am
  #162  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO, CDG, PBI
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,587
Originally Posted by nsx View Post
Either the community director or the TalkBoard of this year or next. Probably the CD since she has a more complete picture. However the TalkBoard isn't approving expansion until after hearing from the CD and voting on a new proposal.

As to goalie's request for a time limit on the test I don't object to that if the other TalkBoard members prefer it that way.

goalie would you prefer a two phase test or a single trial by fire? I don't mind that two phases will take longer but i suppose there is entertainment value in a quick and spectacular failure.
Bolding mine: Does this mean that TalkBoard has already decided how to vote on this/is ready to approved this?

Originally Posted by nsx View Post
CMK10 I intend to poll TalkBoard members on each feature and put the most favored features together before voting on anything....
Could a poll be implemented here so that member opinions would be more clearly visible?

Originally Posted by kipper View Post
So, you don't have an idea of what qualifies as a success or a failure, nor do you have a metric that will define either? Speaking for the entire TalkBoard about approving or vetoing expansion is a little far-reaching, isn't it?

Again, so you don't have a plan for any of this?
^ Agreed on all points! and bolding mine emphasis on the bolded part

Originally Posted by nsx View Post
No. Read the working draft. If approved in that form it puts TalkBoard on record as making no recommendation about wider use of reader feedback. In other words I am speaking of a proposal in which TalkBoard will speak for itself.
As to the the first part, TalkBoard SHOULD be on on record as to "what comes next" be it shut it down, extend the trial period or close it down-Time to take some responsibility!

Originally Posted by jackal View Post
A TalkBoard member can't even throw out some draft ideas without being accused of trying to force his agenda on the TalkBoard?

...and people wonder why there's a private TalkBoard forum. No wonder some TalkBoard members prefer to hash out the rough ideas in there and then come out here with something more cohesive. It's less painful.

It's one thing to hold your representatives accountable. It's another to pointlessly assail them with pointed arrows.
Don't forget the slings to go with those arrows . But seriously, and frankly, to me, it does come out that this agenda item is being forced. Draft ideas are one thing, but afaic, not having a plan (and afaic, there isn't one) to go with the draft and simply "winging it" by thinking, "well, this looks like it won't fly, so I've changed it to this and I think you'll like it*

*some of us have heard that one before

Originally Posted by aBroadAbroad View Post
Even if TB decides that a trial would be worthwhile, i don't think IB has yet indicated whether such functionality can be practically provided, and whether development and implementation would divert resources from other higher priority projects, such as a new mobile app.
Agreed ^ and if IB does say that this can be done, that needs to be shared here!

Originally Posted by kipper View Post
It seems the posts are split roughly 50-50, yet we've now seen a revised proposal, pushing this, even though there's not been a large clamoring for it.
^ Agreed!
goalie is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 9:39 am
  #163  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Programs: HH Diamond, Priority Club Platinum
Posts: 45,199
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
Yesterday I posted the following in the private TalkBoard forum:

I'm not sure what we will be justified in inferring from the results of a single trial in a special handpicked forum that we don't think is very typical of FT forums. It sounds to me like the evidence would basically be a single data point that we wouldn't even believe is a representative case.
I agree with you.
kipper is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 9:50 am
  #164  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist Lite; United Club ex-Lifetime Member
Posts: 20,134
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
I'm not sure what we will be justified in inferring from the results of a single trial in a special handpicked forum that we don't think is very typical of FT forums. It sounds to me like the evidence would basically be a single data point that we wouldn't even believe is a representative case.
That's why the next logical step would be the most challenging forum we can think of. If you and other TalkBoard members would prefer a one-step approach, running the initial trial in the most challenging forum, we can do that.

I think we might learn slightly more with the two-step approach. MSP, do you think the working draft should include a forum selection for the possible second step?
nsx is offline  
Old Dec 12, 14, 10:03 am
  #165  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 92,262
Originally Posted by nsx View Post
That's why the next logical step would be the most challenging forum we can think of. If you and other TalkBoard members would prefer a one-step approach, running the initial trial in the most challenging forum, we can do that.

I think we might learn slightly more with the two-step approach. MSP, do you think the working draft should include a forum selection for the possible second step?
From a scientific point of view, if we don't need to commit on the second forum at this time, it could be better to let the results of the first trial inform the selection of the second forum. I'm assuming that it wouldn't matter to the IB developers.
MSPeconomist is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: