If we are going to conflate "like" and "helpful" then there is no point in having such a button since it becomes meaningless. On the other hand, if we are to have a "helpful" button that actually means "this post contains helpful factual information" then that could be useful, especially if there was a way to view a large thread that only showed posts rated "helpful".

I fear this poll and thread has already conflated "like" and "helpful" and hence the votes and comments are only making the issue more confusing as people are talking about different things as if they are the same.

I'd be interested in that as well.
Considering the "I have inside information," and the trial, I wouldn't be surprised.

If only there were no such thing. That said, people can say whatever they wish here absent it being a FT TOS violation -- even when the facts may point to the contrary.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with lobbying efforts, or with people registering as new members to vote, or people deciding to vote on an issue when otherwise they aren't very active on FT in terms of posting terms. It's a freely available vote opportunity for any and all registered FT accounts that aren't suspended, right?

What is "helpful" is something that varies based on opinion. Or is FT going to have a FT word police force that decides whether or not your idea of helpful is superior or inferior to someone else's idea of "helpful"? Use of "like" would include liking things that are "helpful", regardless of whether or not someone else's idea of helpful is akin to your idea of helpful or not.

It really does not matter to me whether or not FlyerTalk should have a “like” button; so my personal opinion will not be much of a factor — if at all — when voting.My personal experience in dealing with the decision makers at Internet Brands over the years suggests that that statement is indeed true.

This also brings to light another matter. If a post about attaining status is marked helpful in 2014 but the program rules change in 2015 or any subsequent time, is that post still helpful or does it fall into the misleading category? The same can be said for any manufactured spend post or credit card churning post. The rules change frequently and some posts would no longer be helpful.

Indeed. What is to be "liked"/"helpful" at one time may not be so in a different time context. Will the notations/counters be wiped out and reset after fixed periods of time? Will they be wiped out for posts edited after they were noted/counted as "liked"/"helpful".

And when what is fact can't be confirmed by someone else, does that make the fact posted less "helpful" even when it is confirmed fact by those in a position of authority or with reliable access to such authorities outside FT?

This "helpful" or "like" thing turning out to be helpful in any way other than by being a school-type popularity contest of sort or mere entertainment? I have my doubts that there is any chance of that being the general case. I expect it will just be clutter to my eyes after the novelty (of the popularity contest/games) wanes. Or can members disable this feature for their own posts, for the like/helpful counters, and for viewing "likes" if they care to do so?

True, but if there is a "helpful" button that is used to mark posts that contain helpful information (as opposed to simply posts or posters liked by someone) this could be a good step towards making FT more useful to more people. Even if old threads or old posts (e.g., more than a few years) are discounted and viewed as less helpful despite the 'helpful' button on posts.

Possibly no, in which case we're no worse off than now. But there is a chance that it could be a step forward, especially if combined with a way to view threads that only shows such posts.

Obviously, those actively participating in threads would want to see all posts and would respond to some. But those who do as we implore and use the search feature to find information may wish to view long threads (with thousands of posts) with only 'helpful' posts visible.

You ask valid questions ^ and I'm sure that this will be spun by those pushing this in a way to make "well, gosh golly gee, we never thought about that at all" to "I have some inside information that I can't share but don't worry be happy" instead of giving us real answers

What makes anyone sure that the posts/members being cliqued (intentional Freudian slip) as "helpful" are not just noted for reasons that are not limited to your idea of "helpful information"? Keep in mind that the idea of what is helpful and not may vary from one reasonable person to another reasonable person. Are we to have FTers suspended for no other reason than having a different opinion of what constitutes "helpful" when using the "like"/"helpful" notation in an "unpopular" (with a clique) way?

The "do a search" (or not doing it) stuff will continue -- probably just as much as usual -- with or without this feature enabled for general member play. The more complicated a forum becomes, the harder it may become for new/less-experienced members to separate signal from noise as the like/helpful games would enable another source for noise on FT. Din can be entertaining, but it can also lead to tin ears and more din.

Is there going to be a search feature for only "liked"/"helpful" noted posts? Is it going to default by pulling up every post with one "like"/"helpful" notation? Will members be able to note their own post as "like"/"helpful"? The answer to that last question is probably no, right?

The more I think about this, this feature being turned on for us plebes can make FT a more entertaining place if your idea of entertainment is the OMNI Games type threads. Want a lot of "likes"/"helpful" notes? Then play the popularity games and become a member of the clique that clicks for members of the clique and run up those counters (masked or not).

I've taken several days off to collect my thoughts on this topic. I'll say again that I am delighted by the extensive discussion and surprised by the complexity of the issues and choices. At this point I am unlikely to advocate a site-wide reader feedback button. I would prefer to wait until the mobile application is working well and then find a way to enable reader feedback selectively by forum.

Now let me address some inaccurate hyperbole:

I don't see how a complete reading of what I have posted in this thread could lead either of you to conclude that I believe there are 6 TalkBoard votes for reader feedback or that that CD has decided to add reader feedback. This is a study in progress, not an attempt to force some existing product on our members. I suppose Carol could do that, but that's not at all her style, as everyone knows.

For goodness sake, we do have some odd theories going here. Seriously, what would be the point of asking for members' opinions and then manipulating the poll? That would only make sense if you were intent on forcing an outcome regardless what arguments were made. TalkBoard members can be stubborn, but we listen well. We wouldn't want anyone messing with our input from members.

The observations and arguments made in this thread are much more important to me than the vote count in the poll. We need to consider all the advantages and disadvantages when specifying potential reader feedback functionality. The fact that the poll is approximately evenly split warns us to be even more careful not to solve one problem by creating two more.

C'mon goalie, you know better than this. The inside information was Carol's internal demonstration and related information that she herself posted just a short while later. You make it sound sinister when you know it's not.

As to not giving answers, I don't understand why you would expect me or anyone to present a fully specified list of features and functionality when the whole point of this thread is to find the most useful set of features and functionality and then discuss whether or not we want to move forward to a trial of some sort.

There are enough questions in this thread to keep me busy a long time thinking about features and functionality. I'm not in a rush and the mobile app comes first, so there is plenty of time to discuss first features, then feasibility, then options for a trial. After all that we might vote on something, or we might not. It's the farthest thing from a done deal than I've ever seen on TalkBoard, outside some votes which were conducted purely for show.

Don't underestimate the ability and diligence of TalkBoard members to read and understand the issues and to make intelligent decisions for the benefit of FlyerTalk members.

Example: Given that a forum-specific reader feedback button is not currently available I for one am going to proceed very slowly and carefully. While we could run a short trial of site-wide reader feedback, that would be largely pointless unless we knew that we could have forum-specific reader feedback in the near future.

Please keep the comments flowing here. Your TalkBoard members are reading them.

Talk about people reading things how they wish -- sort of like how people read things as "helpful" however they wish.

I never concluded anything about whether or not nsx believed/believes that there are 6 TalkBoard votes for this feature to be enabled; nor did I ever conclude anything about whether or not nsx believed/believes that the CD has decided to have this featured enabled for further use than what we have already had take place.

When I said the feature is a done deal and pretty much ready to go, I was talking about the feature, the software feature. I can't imagine IB decided to spend IT resources on this being pretty much ready to go if they thought it would be a commercial drag; but it doesn't take imagination to realize that a feature that is technologically a done deal and pretty much ready to go is far more likely to be toyed with than say something technically far more complex that is not currently deliverable.

Inaccurate hyperbole? My second paragraph above is a response to inaccurate hyperbole.

I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification. Yes, IB has something ready to go. I'm pretty nearly convinced that it's not good enough for our purposes in its present state. It needs some work, which will not happen until the mobile app is done, if then. So to me, that makes it not a done deal. Maybe that's why I misunderstood.

Don't be bullied.

I agree. Normal user votes should stay confidential. Votes from Talkboard members should be public.