I support the idea of a Helpful post button because it adds a qualitative dimension to the post counts, titles (Evangelist, Legend), and program affiliations which members may use to assess a post's credibility. Positive reinforcement encourages more of the same, and this tool should increase engagement of members who are high quality, but infrequent, posters.

We already have a triangular Unhelpful button, located in the lower left corner of every post.

I don't think TalkBoard's role is to simply follow the results of a poll, but the number of members who have voted in the poll approaches the number who voted in the most recent TalkBoard election, and it should be given some weight.

How many people view the "alert a moderator" button as an "unhelpful" button? If they use it on a post that just doesn't contain 100% correct information, what action do moderators take?

"Alert a moderator" is one of the vBulletin functions needing improvement, IMHO. It provides no convenient way for a moderator to respond to the originator. Such a response would be useful when the moderator decides not to take any public action. Currently the originator has no way to know that the Alert was ever read.

I'm pretty sure that this problem has been mentioned to IB more than once, but I will be sure to include it in any discussions of software modifications for a "Helpful" button.

That doesn't answer my question though.

I agree with this sentiment. On other forums, "Helpful" is one of the things I find useful - I have no need for "Like". In theory, is the difference between real answers to questions and flaming-run-amok.

If a post contains inaccurate information it would not be ideal to mark it "Unhelpful". Instead, you should reply to the thread by posting the correct information. If there were a Helpful button your more accurate reply should attract clicks.

If I do receive an Alert indicating that a post is inaccurate (rather than misplaced or disruptive) I either post a reply as described in the previous paragraph, or contact the poster and suggest an edit, but anyone could contact any poster by PM (unless the member has opted out of the feature) to suggest an edit.

But we're not talking about a moderator editing a post here, we're talking (or at least the way I read it) about a post marked as helpful when it is not in fact that and what action a moderator is/is not to take-and THAT is a very big difference as I personally don't think moderators should be acting on what other members like/dislike/find helpful as then moderators are changing the opinion of another member. And with all of that, no one who has proposed or is actively supporting this issue has stated how that comes into play (or answered other questions for that matter but I digress)

I may have misunderstood, but I believe Kipper asked about what a moderator does if the existing Alert function is used to report an inaccurate post. Opinions are neither accurate nor inaccurate. I ignore Alerts which express disagreement with an opinion. I act on Alerts which report inaccurate factual content, but I do not edit the post directly.

Color me confused. Where have we seen this?

Maybe I'm just in a confused state of mind, but can you clarify what you mean? I can't make out the point of your post.

It kind of sounds like you're saying that you do not believe moderators should be censors of inaccurate information. That's fine, and I don't see any proposal here to make moderators censors of inaccurate information.

Alert a moderator is not the same as unhelpful.

Unless the post is edited there is no public record to offset a helpful indicator. If you're suggesting that moderators be tasked with updating posts for inaccurate or dated info, that it a significant reach beyond what I understand the moderator's role to be. This might not be welcomed by general membership of FT (how long before accusations of censorship arise?) or by moderators (significant extra workload and quite a change in tone of interaction with other members).

This is an interesting observation. In many ways. I think it says quite a lot about the TB elections, but to stay on topic, I'll keep it to this poll.
Nsx said the reason for re-opening this feature request was his pledge to his constituency, so a support of some 385 votes in this poll is to be expected. Some of the proponents are campaigning for this poll while I haven't seen any of opponents do, so I guess that means the final result will be a majority of 'support' when the poll closes.

But if the like feature was the main platform of nsx's TB candidacy, what does another poll really say that the TB election didn't say? Are we just polling nsx's TB candidacy all over again?

Of course we can't know that each poll'er meant by their vote. My point is a poll can only go so far in aiding the TB for a decision. I think we elect a complete TB to make balanced and informed decisions for us using all available information. A poll can be given more or less weight depending on circumstances, but I guess what I am saying is that it still is just a poll.

I very much appreciate TB having this thread open and nsx for returning to the thread and keeping outlining his thoughts. I've seen a lot of very good comments here and I hope this thread have been as helpful to TB as intended. At this point I find it difficult to add anything substantial.

So, it's really not an unhelpful button, then is it? It's a, "this post is in bad taste, harassing, violating TOS, etc." button, isn't it?
I asked about it, because you said that it already serves as an "unhelpful" button, but in clarifying your answer later, it really doesn't serve as that.

It is. An "inaccurate" post is not a post that should be marked as Unhelpful. If you recognize that the information is inaccurate, post the correct information. A disputive post is unhelpful, and can be reported with the Alert function.

I'm not confusing anything.

They were examples.

I believe there was a concerted effort over a couple of days to get people to vote "Yes."

Topics/posts leading to a barrage of "in before the lock / IBTL" posts come to mind.

When posted information is inaccurate, hopefully it is alerted to the mods or, if others point it out to the OP, the OP adjusts/deletes the misinformation.