Who is talking conspiracy? IB doing things to its own properties that may help it make more money is no conspiracy. It would sound like a business doing what is right for its business and having its destiny in its own hands.

You've defined no metrics for how you will judge if this will help or not though.

I've no horse in this race, but find the discussions interesting (and agree our previous attempts at reputation didn't work; our CD has said we are "much larger and less personal" than in those days, so FT is a somewhat different environment).

Here's Mark Zuckerberg on why a "Like" (but not other) button is available on Facebook:
YouTube video, and his prefatory comment.

FT is not Facebook, but I agree with his sentiment... If TB is going to do this, they need to find a way to do it to be a force for good. :D

That said, I still don't think it is a good idea.

It's a good question and I am thinking about it. I'm not sure there is a way to measure it. Sometimes only a disaster is apparent.

Airlines have to guess whether RR redemptions displace or substitute for cash ticket sales. There is no good way to know, except if cash sales drop precipitously.

We might be limited to running a member opinion survey after the test.

So, if it isn't a disaster, it sounds like you at least will declare it a success, and even with about 50% of the people not wanting it, will proceed?

What good is the member opinion survey if the results are split the same, or if people don't participate in that?

I really think this is a solution in search of a problem.

This.

A survey with mixed results would be disappointing. That is one possibility.

As to "solution in search of a problem": Why do we we need to wait for complaints before we try to improve the member experience?

Any business that doesn't constantly seek out improvements becomes an ex-business. We are running this site on the oldest active version of vBulletin, which is itself the oldest major supplier of forum software. Furthermore, forum discussion has in many areas been supplanted by other forms of online interaction. We can play ostrich and pretend that this is the best of all possible FlyerTalks, but I find that very hard to believe.

A reader feedback button is a small step, and it might fail. But if we don't try even small steps, the online world will eventually pass us by.

What happens if there is a poll and it's split 50-50? Without clear guidelines determining what equals success and is in favor of implementation, and what equals failure, how can one really judge if it is a success or a failure and if it should be implemented?

I'm all in favor of improvements, but I think this is a step that isn't viewed as an improvement by many, has not been thought out, and is being pushed far too much when there isn't a clear consensus that it is wanted or needed.

Just because it is something new does not mean it is an improvement. A solution in search of a problem is not always an improvement. To make an improvement, one should have a clear concept of how to define success of the improvement. This lacks that.

I might reconsider where I stand on this if there was a clear plan for how to define success and failure, what happens if it's still split 50-50 at the end of the trial, and what happens if this is tried out sitewide and found to be a disaster very quickly. I see the complaints about the Premium Deals forum, and I'm not convinced that if this is found to be a disaster, TB would reconsider quickly.

Please, define a clear plan before moving forward!

Bolding Mine: So you have no plan whatsoever?

Bolding mine: Simple as that!

This.

Thanks for the reassurance that we're not playing Whack-a-Mole here.

We didn't have a detailed road map of the sort you want when we tested allowing images in posts. The fact that the horrible situations we feared never happened was sufficient. Even though only a small minority of members used the new feature, the images they posted had indisputable value. Once it was clear that disaster would not occur, a wider rollout occurred, if I recall correctly, by the Community Director without TalkBoard involvement.

Reader feedback is a bit different than images, in that its value is not as obvious. So we have something to demonstrate beyond just avoiding disaster.

In my mind, if a feature pleases 10% of our members and doesn't bother the other 90%, it adds value to FlyerTalk. If a feature improves post quality without bothering members, it adds value. If a feature improves post quantity without degrading post quality, it adds value. These are the three ways in which I expect reader feedback to improve FlyerTalk. This is why I want to test it.

A member survey could address the question of whether members are aware of the new feature, and if so whether it pleases them, bothers them, or neither. That's an easy one.

Improvements in post quality will almost certainly be subtle and essentially invisible. I don't see any way to quantify that, but I'd like to hear any ideas.

Increases in post count will also be small, since reader feedback is such a minor change. We could measure post count, but I doubt the numbers would be meaningful. There is also the Hawthorne Effect to consider.

I want to make this proposal the best it can be, but there will be limits to our knowledge both before and after any trial. At that point we need to apply our own judgment. That's why TalkBoard exists.

A time-limited trial would add information. The only reason not to add information is if one's opinion is immovable no matter what the new information is.

I expect that TalkBoard will be able to see how IB's existing reader feedback capability looks soon. That may alleviate some concerns about a trial.

Bolding mine: Reader feedback is a lot different as opposed to "a bit different"than images and you've got an awful lot of "if's" and your "if's" only refer to a positive outcome. I'd like to see you view it from the other side of the fence with "if's" from a negative outcome as you seem 99 44/100ths sure that this is is a good thing and what the members want

I'd say this is more something that nsx wants & is going to do his best to get through. TB normally didn't push something when approximately 50% of FTers who did take the time to post were against it and when TB members themselves weren't all that supportive. I've certainly not seen TB do so when it was a normal FTer suggesting something that had approximate 50% no votes. As someone noted in a different motion, it's good to be a TB member ;).

Cheers.

No, I think there's about a 75% chance a test will succeed, but even a 25% chance of success would be worth testing. There is essentially no risk to a test, and essentially no cost if IB already has the capability.

On your other point, a negative outcome would be a large positive correlation of the "vote" totals with the snarkiness of posts. That to me would qualify as a disaster. Now that I've said that, I have provided any opponents of low integrity a means to sabotage the trial, but such people don't need me to point out what will be obvious to them.

Another negative outcome would be if members find the feature useless or nearly so and it consumes significant screen space. (I don't yet know whether IB's implementation uses any screen space that is not currently empty.)

Another negative outcome would be if posters complain that their good posts are getting no feedback while others' snarky or otherwise deleterious posts are getting positive feedback.

I think it's unlikely to be a difficult decision to call the test a success or a failure. Failure will be especially apparent. In the absence of failure, a member survey will tell us the answer.