If that is how I look to you, then I can't help that. Perhaps you should re-read what I posted?

I don't use the "Ignore" FT feature; and I, to the best of my mind, never have used that FT feature.

I have read all of the FT CD's posts in this thread -- definitely not all were reviewed in the most timely manner possible -- but then again timely omniscience is certainly not a human feature.

Perhaps this is a sign of a language-choice issue, but some sort of trial was already a "done deal" in the opinion of at least two FTers here. Fortunately, none of us here have a monopoly on what that means or doesn't mean, so opinions on whether or not that is the right way to characterize what has happened so far is going to vary. Even after having repeatedly re-read all this thread's posts made in the past week, opinions about this -- the language choice -- will vary.

I wouldn't be surprised if another trial re-starts in some way or another -- just stating what would not surprise me.

The definitive answers to how the trial came about are situated in this thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...-profiles.html.

The "like" or other indicator of presumed value is not a "done deal" at all. IB tech wanted to see how the feature built into vB might work here, and they were unprepared for the visibility in profiles.

I find these types of "voting buttons" to be absolutely useless. They would only serve to clutter up pages that are already way too cluttered. The first thing I would do would be to write a GreaseMonkey script to hide them.

^ Please vote no in the poll if you haven't done so already and urge your friends to do the same

+1 ^

I "like" this sentiment :D:D:D

When I voted against it, it seemed that just over 100 people had voted "for". Considering the size of the membership, it is not exactly a groundswell of opinion!

I used the story of thanking the story in the first place. I didn't assume you were opposed to thanking the speaker, and my apologies if that assumption was erroneous.

I come from a place where thanking is considered appropriate when receiving helpful advice.

Regardless, I don't think the "thanks" or "like" or "helpful" button should be there just for polite manners.

In its latest iteration, the British Army Rumour Service (arrse.co.uk) introduced a set of buttons visible for each post. Categories include: Like; Dislike; Funny; Informative; Bull....: Old [news/information].

That may be a bit excessive, and as I rarely go there these days I'm not quite sure how well its working. But certainly the option of "Helpful" and "Like" seem a possible benefit when trawling through long/complex Threads.

At the very least it might reduce the " ^ +1 " posts, which then often lead to a side-discussion or similar " ^ " posts.

No; but every bit of information helps towards my decision on how to vote — should a vote amongst members of TalkBoard become a reality...

I would probably settle for two acknowledgement buttons.

1. Like
2. Helpful

Like to be used to highlight points of view which argue for alternative presentations (including humorous insights to pedantic presentations)

Helpful to support comments which actually clarify or present new opportunities to understand airline policies (to the benefit of the FFer population)

Happy wandering

Fred

You're not alone and concur with your reasoning here. ^

My first reaction on hearing of this was, "What is this, Facebook?" It seems to me that FT is about conversations, not collecting "likes". If a posting is meaningful it will inspire further postings.

Also, even if IB claims that they would get no benefit from this feature, anything that increases the number of clicks and page views DOES enhance their ad revenue.

+1,000 on that.

I had originally voted "yes" in the poll, on the basis that the concept seemed harmless and if folks wanted it, why not. But if I had to do it over, I'd vote "no" for two reasons. One, the "opposition" arguments have swayed me more, and two, having now lost the old FT app when I switched to a new android phone, I'd prefer IB's time and resources be spent on that rather than a frivolous new feature.

This feature is already a done deal and pretty much ready to go.

Can this feature -- or poll voting -- be set up so that all members may know who is voting and how they voted/liked? If so, how easily can that be done?

The previous rating/voting/like system on FT was less "anonymous" than some had expected it to be.

:td:
I prefer the confidentiality of the ballot box, frankly. How I chose to vote [or indeed not] should not be deemed public information.