I do like the like buttons, but I don't see any real benefit. If it was to be used for trip reports, it could work but then somehow the best TR always find a way to come to the first page time and time again.
I can see on the other travel site *cough* MP *cough* their like/thanks system is there, but basically useless as there are threads where everyone likes each other posts.

That's because Likes feed a reputation index there. If we don't have any reputation index then gaming Likes will have no wider benefit.

So then what would be the plan? in a subforum do sort by likes?
Or in a popular thread, place the X most liked/thanked posts at the top?

To start with, just display the Like count per thread and let readers visually scan for highly rated threads. We might as well take this one step at a time. There's less chance of an unpleasant surprise that way.

.


^
^
^

I scan for threads that are of interest to me. Whether they have likes or not or are highly rated is irrelevant.

Also on MP I've seen likes given for information that is 100% wrong, which is another reason I don't pay much attention to likes. Not always a good barometer of accurate or valuable info.

Cheers.

I'm willing to be convinced about a "like" experiment on FT, but I understand that when it was done during the early days of FT, there were big problems. My impression is that its effect on MP has been negative, although at the very beginning it seemed rather fun and innocuous.

I think FT's early reputation thing was very different than the modern positive-only vote system. It allowed people to vote something down, which was (as I understand it) the major source of problems with the way it was used.

I've addressed that point previously in this thread. Thoughts?

How about some of the following options:

Thanks / Helpful / Accurate / Welcoming / Agree

So someone could give a post all five different types of likes?

You can on Yelp. Why would it be a problem to rate a post as Helpful, Accurate, and Welcoming if it's all three?

I'm thinking about the number of likes on MP on steroids.

That doesn't really answer my question. I don't understand the problem with seeing:

under a post. Seeing that will give you an idea that this person tends to be helpful and welcoming and that three other people found his/her advice accurate, too.

Here's an example from a Yelp review:

http://cb3f593c014f3f419d9b-bf92ec02...yelprating.png

Even if those numbers were:

how could that possibly be a bad thing? That illustrates several different positive attributes about that particular reviewer--that many people found the review useful, that some more found it funny, and a bunch of people thought it was cool. That is helpful information to me when looking up this person--he/she is generally thought of as a provider of useful information in a humorous, hip fashion.

Similarly, on FlyerTalk, if someone has a very high "Accurate" rating, then that person is known to provide trustworthy information. If someone has a very high "Welcoming" rating but almost no "Accurate" points, then you might consider double-checking key information that person posts, as it may not be the most accurate information. It helps you to put the post into context for its quality and accuracy without allowing (as the old FlyerTalk reputation system did) negative mudslinging by voting things down.

I just don't understand how that could possibly be a bad thing.

I strongly urge Talkboard members to vote AGAINST a Like button.

We are not a glorified Facebook.

Cheers,

Doc

Because that's much more clutter for a speed reader to cut through. Too much information is almost as bad as too little.

There's a reason that most sites have a simple thumbs up count only: It's the easiest for readers to use. No system is perfect, and the harder you try the more unintended consequences appear.

I recommend starting simple and seeing how it works for FT. Maybe we can get more elaborate later, but a simple like (and no dislike option) is the right place to start.

^ Agreed!