Why No "Like" Button?

[Jinx]

In this day and age, why doesn't the SD introduce a "Like" button for each remark within any given thread? Sometimes, that's all one requires to respond! hint hint hint... ;)

[samclem]

Just shoot me now. :(

[runner pat]

Cause we all growed up now.

[Northern Piper]

No Like.

[Alice The Goon]

Only if we can have a "hate" button, a "bullshit" button, and a "stfu" button.

[Gleena]

A "no u" button and a "ur fat" button would be good, too.

[Lobsang]

Just shoot me now. :(


Only if you shoot me first.

[cochrane]

Would you like to shoot me now, or take me home and shoot me?

[Peeta Mellark]

"Like"? What's a "like" button? Is that one of those newfangled FaceTweet things the kids are using these days? Why, in my day we just posted +1 and we liked it!

[elmwood]

It's a feature. The admins and mods hate features, as do a large and vocal portion of the SDMB community.

[Siam Sam]

In this day and age, why doesn't the SD introduce a "Like" button for each remark within any given thread? Sometimes, that's all one requires to respond! hint hint hint... ;)

No like this post.

[TubaDiva]

We would prefer you to use your words. That being said, we really dislike posts that say "Me too" or similar no-content sentiments. So please don't do that either.

[MsWhatsit]

We would prefer you to use your words. That being said, we really dislike posts that say "Me too" or similar no-content sentiments. So please don't do that either.

I will have you know that it took every ounce -- literally, every last ounce -- of self-restraint that I possess in my body, not to make the obvious response to this post. You just can't go around setting people up like that, seriously.

If we're putting buttons in, btw, I want a "Cite pls" button and an "F-" button.

[Chronos]

I will have you know that it took every ounce -- literally, every last ounce -- of self-restraint that I possess in my body, not to make the obvious response to this post. You just can't go around setting people up like that, seriously.Like.

[Frank]

We would prefer you to use your words. That being said, we really dislike posts that say "Me too" or similar no-content sentiments. So please don't do that either.

I will have you know that it took every ounce -- literally, every last ounce -- of self-restraint that I possess in my body, not to make the obvious response to this post.
Me too.

Oh shit.

[the lone cashew]

damn, Frank beat me to the punch! (and I was looking forward to be the one to irritate Czarcasm)

[runner pat]

We would prefer you to use your words. That being said, we really dislike posts that say "Me too" or similar no-content sentiments. So please don't do that either.

Like.

Me too.

Oh shit.

+1



Damn

[Cheshire Human]

Just shoot me now. :(

OK...

BANG!

Now me...

BANG!

....

BEEEEPPPP!!!

[Cheshire Human]

Sorry, but I've just spent WAAAAYYYY too much time in the ER, the past couple of weeks. Deal with your own mother dying. I don't care.... BEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.................

[elmwood]

Seriously, I don't have karma or any upvote buttons on my forum. Why not? I'm trying to avoid features that would make the site seem cliquey.

[SoulFrost]

yah fuck a bunch alike. if we likes domehting, whe'd comment on it. damn facebook to hell

[MsWhatsit]

yah fuck a bunch alike. if we likes domehting, whe'd comment on it. damn facebook to hell

This right here is why I love surfing the Dope late on a Saturday night.

[SoulFrost]

This right here is why I love surfing the Dope late on a Saturday night.

So baby............... whatg's your signe?

[Peeta Mellark]

Seriously, I don't have karma or any upvote buttons on my forum. Why not? I'm trying to avoid features that would make the site seem cliquey.

Yeah, that's a valid reason. It would just tend to make the Big Name Posters look more important and newer people would feel more blatantly left out.

[Der Trihs]

In my experience such things create problems. Including people who apparently troll just so they can get as big a negative reputation as possible, and as mentioned cliques that gang up on people they don't like to give them a major negative reputation, or gang up to increase the reputation of those they like.

[BigT]

"Like"? What's a "like" button? Is that one of those newfangled FaceTweet things the kids are using these days? Why, in my day we just posted +1 and we liked it!

Whoa. You got me thinking of an actual Facebook Like button. You know, that one you see on a lot of sites where they want you to pimp them on Facebook? I've never actually used it, but I assume it would post a status update recommending you check out this amazing site.

[Polerius]

I think having "karma" or "reputation" points for users is bad for all the reasons mentioned above, but I also think that allowing posters to give a "thumbs up" to a post could be a good thing.

Many times, someone is arguing against 2 or 3 persistent people, and it's not clear if the lurkers reading the thread think he/she is making any sense. Having 2 or 3 posters argue with you telling you how wrong you are may not convince you that you are wrong, but having their arguments upvoted by hundreds of users should be a wake up call. Or, alternatively, having your posts upvoted by hundreds of users can be a great indicator that your arguments do make sense, despite what the 2 or 3 stubborn people you are arguing with think.

And there are tons of people for whom clicking a "thumbs up" button is something they are much more likely to do than post a full reply to explain in detail why they agree with a particular post.

[No "thumbs down" should be allowed, because then people can gang up on someone and downvote their posts to make it seem like no one agrees with them]

[Cheshire Human]

.... having their arguments upvoted by hundreds of users should be a wake up call. Or, alternatively, having your posts upvoted by hundreds of users can be a great indicator that your arguments do make sense, despite what the 2 or 3 stubborn people you are arguing with think....

+1


[No "thumbs down" should be allowed, because then people can gang up on someone and downvote their posts to make it seem like no one agrees with them]

-1, errr I mean +1. make them work to post a -1 (and ideally post their reasons for disagreeing.)

[Ken001]

Personally I like the "Reputation" button which is available for VBulletin. Its a simple method of approving or disapproving a post, plus you can comment directly to the poster, without that being public.

The benefit IMHO is no need for +1 or Agreed posts which otherwise do not add to the discussion.

[An Gadaí]

I'm all for an "STFU" button asp per Alice's suggestion. Can we implement that please?

[Justin_Bailey]

Whoa. You got me thinking of an actual Facebook Like button. You know, that one you see on a lot of sites where they want you to pimp them on Facebook? I've never actually used it, but I assume it would post a status update recommending you check out this amazing site.

Like

...

But seriously, including a way for users to share interesting threads on their Facebook feed with a "Like" button should be a no-brainer. It's free to use, easy to install and will bring a ton of traffic to the boards. Most importantly, it'll make the SDMB some money in a non-intrusive, non-malware way.

Obviously, it'll never be added.

[cerberus]

Here's a thought: if all you have to say is "I approve/I agree", then maybe you don't need a post, because you're not adding anything to the conversation.

[Rushgeekgirl]

I never thought I'd like such a feature but lately I've been posting at a board where it's used (not overused) and I've been enjoying it. On that board there's a "like" and a "dislike". I guess you just get accustomed to something because when I come back here I'm automatically looking for that "like" button. It's not really as stupid as it sounds. It's become useful and I imagine it would be useful here too. We don't need a four paragraph post explaining why we agree with someone's sentiment. "Like" works just as well.

But I don't expect this board to change much. We're quite conservative here for such a large group of liberals. We think we're even too good for smileys. I'm surprised they're even offered.

[Morgenstern]

+1



word

[Czarcasm]

I never thought I'd like such a feature but lately I've been posting at a board where it's used (not overused) and I've been enjoying it. On that board there's a "like" and a "dislike". I guess you just get accustomed to something because when I come back here I'm automatically looking for that "like" button. It's not really as stupid as it sounds. It's become useful and I imagine it would be useful here too. We don't need a four paragraph post explaining why we agree with someone's sentiment. "Like" works just as well.

But I don't expect this board to change much. We're quite conservative here for such a large group of liberals. We think we're even too good for smileys. I'm surprised they're even offered.Tell me, in what way would a "Like" button tell us whether or not you liked the person rather than the argument put forth, let alone tell us what part of the argument you liked? What does it add to a debate other than that some people believe you can apparently vote on reality?

[Polycarp]

Personally I like the "Reputation" button which is available for VBulletin. Its a simple method of approving or disapproving a post, plus you can comment directly to the poster, without that being public.

The benefit IMHO is no need for +1 or Agreed posts which otherwise do not add to the discussion.

The last time this subject came up, I pointed to another forum as an example of how easy this feature is to abuse -- I have a reputation in the quadrillions over there, although I didn't engage in the "rep the last ten posters" game threads they had going, and recalculating people's reps. literally has crashed the server more than once. Good concept in theory -- bad one in practical use.

[Polycarp]

BTW Link (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=577015&highlight=reputation) to the last time this was discussed, not quite three months ago.

[Jenny Linsky]

I never thought I'd like such a feature but lately I've been posting at a board where it's used (not overused) and I've been enjoying it. On that board there's a "like" and a "dislike". I guess you just get accustomed to something because when I come back here I'm automatically looking for that "like" button. It's not really as stupid as it sounds. It's become useful and I imagine it would be useful here too. We don't need a four paragraph post explaining why we agree with someone's sentiment. "Like" works just as well.


I frequent a board with "agree" and "disagree" buttons, among others. It's nice to give the poster feedback without a 'me too' post, but it leads to a great deal of disagree wank. "OMG, why did I get a disagree? I said I liked peas!" and then the thread gets completely derailed with a discussion of why someone might have disagreed with the post, which is what those buttons were supposed to prevent.

[Peremensoe]

Many times, someone is arguing against 2 or 3 persistent people, and it's not clear if the lurkers reading the thread think he/she is making any sense. Having 2 or 3 posters argue with you telling you how wrong you are may not convince you that you are wrong, but having their arguments upvoted by hundreds of users should be a wake up call. Or, alternatively, having your posts upvoted by hundreds of users can be a great indicator that your arguments do make sense, despite what the 2 or 3 stubborn people you are arguing with think.

Not that having hundreds of people agree with you (or just "like" something about your post) actually means you're right.

Why should I care how many lurkers, or posters, think one way or another? I'm interested in the content and quality of the ideas themselves; a good one from one person is worth considerably more than a bad one from hundreds.

[Rushgeekgirl]

I frequent a board with "agree" and "disagree" buttons, among others. It's nice to give the poster feedback without a 'me too' post, but it leads to a great deal of disagree wank. "OMG, why did I get a disagree? I said I liked peas!" and then the thread gets completely derailed with a discussion of why someone might have disagreed with the post, which is what those buttons were supposed to prevent.


Don't think I've ever seen disagree wank, but it sounds like it might just be fun!

[Measure for Measure]

Well if we want more drama here, we could extend this feature to charter members only.

[Duckster]

{Bloody Mary}
You no like?
{/Bloody Mary}

Just call me a Cockeyed Optimist.

:D

[MsWhatsit]

Well if we want more drama here, we could extend this feature to charter members only.

And then make it so that approximately 40% of the time you try to use it, the board throws a database error and then you can't log in for five minutes afterward.

I'm just throwing ideas out here, people.

[Stoid]

We would prefer you to use your words..

Indeed!

We descend further and further into Newspeak with each passing day. I come here for relief!

(When I saw the name of the thread I thought it was some kind of "Share the Dope on Facebook" type of "like" button, not a "Why can't the Dope be Facebook?" button.)

[Stoid]

Whoa. You got me thinking of an actual Facebook Like button. You know, that one you see on a lot of sites where they want you to pimp them on Facebook? I've never actually used it, but I assume it would post a status update recommending you check out this amazing site.

I really need to be better about reading threads before I speak.

[Stoid]

Many times, someone is arguing against 2 or 3 persistent people, and it's not clear if the lurkers reading the thread think he/she is making any sense. Having 2 or 3 posters argue with you telling you how wrong you are may not convince you that you are wrong, but having their arguments upvoted by hundreds of users should be a wake up call. Or, alternatively, having your posts upvoted by hundreds of users can be a great indicator that your arguments do make sense, despite what the 2 or 3 stubborn people you are arguing with think.

Let me introduce you to the fallacy of argumentum ad populum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum)

"It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct"

This is the Dope...fighting ignorance, not putting it to a vote.

[Stoid]

Not that having hundreds of people agree with you (or just "like" something about your post) actually means you're right.

Why should I care how many lurkers, or posters, think one way or another? I'm interested in the content and quality of the ideas themselves; a good one from one person is worth considerably more than a bad one from hundreds.


You can come sit by me anytime.

[Stoid]

I never thought I'd like such a feature but lately I've been posting at a board where it's used (not overused) and I've been enjoying it. On that board there's a "like" and a "dislike". I guess you just get accustomed to something because when I come back here I'm automatically looking for that "like" button. It's not really as stupid as it sounds. It's become useful and I imagine it would be useful here too. We don't need a four paragraph post explaining why we agree with someone's sentiment. "Like" works just as well.



For whom is such a button meaningful?

With all due respect, if someone has nothing to actually add to the conversation, not even an individual and personalized expression of agreement, why should anyone care whether they have clicked a "like" button or not? And if you don't care enough to express yourself, why do you desire to have such a button?

[SenorBeef]

Like/dislike mechanics rarely reflect the value of the argument or idea of being proposed, but by how much the main demographic of the board is biased towards it. Repeating the same stuff you've heard everyone else say gets you +10000 OMG BRO YOU'RE A GENIUS whereas saying controversial yet well thought out stuff will get you downrated. It's a popularity contest more than a reflection of the merit of ideas.

[Ken001]

For whom is such a button meaningful?

With all due respect, if someone has nothing to actually add to the conversation, not even an individual and personalized expression of agreement, why should anyone care whether they have clicked a "like" button or not?

Because humans are social animals and internet fora are a way of socialising with each other. Reinforcement by approval or even disapproval tells a poster their view has been noticed by someone else. Its actually important.

Like/dislike mechanics rarely reflect the value of the argument or idea of being proposed, but by how much the main demographic of the board is biased towards it. Repeating the same stuff you've heard everyone else say gets you +10000 OMG BRO YOU'RE A GENIUS whereas saying controversial yet well thought out stuff will get you downrated. It's a popularity contest more than a reflection of the merit of ideas.

Mmmm......not for me. I regularly give good reputation points to people whom I disagree with but respect their thoughts.

[Czarcasm]

Mmmm......not for me. I regularly give good reputation points to people whom I disagree with but respect their thoughts.Do you understand that you have just undercut the arguments given by some of the others that are also for the "like" button? That button cannot tell us whether you like the person or the argument unless you add a note to the thread explaining what you meant by pushing it.
And if you are going to do that, you really don't need the button in the first place, do you?

[Ichbin Dubist]

I can see the utility of this on Facebook, where most people have maybe a few hundred friends and (generally speaking) know who they are. If 7 people "like" your status update it has some vague meaning to you. This place has how many active members again -- 10,000? 20,000? For a bunch of posts to have "141 people like this" appended to them, and you have no idea who most of those people are, sounds like something to ignore.

[Patty O'Furniture]

I like this idea.

[Rushgeekgirl]

For whom is such a button meaningful?

With all due respect, if someone has nothing to actually add to the conversation, not even an individual and personalized expression of agreement, why should anyone care whether they have clicked a "like" button or not? And if you don't care enough to express yourself, why do you desire to have such a button?

Oh come on, it's not like this board is limited to meaningful conversation.

Like I said, I didn't care much one way or another but lately posting on a board with such features I've come to realize they aren't bad at all. I guess it's just the atmosphere of that board that makes it work.

Here's an example. Someone might post a funny story but really there's nothing to say about it other than, "Cool story bro!" so occasionally people will just "like" it. Rarely do I ever see a "dislike" but it's usually during one of our stellar religious debates. Then it's generally ignored because it's that one guy that "dislikes" anything not related to his own religion.

Of course it probably wouldn't work here, not the way some people here hold grudges.

[Skammer]

Is there a line forming to shoot SamClem?

[Cheshire Human]

No, we already shot him on the previous page. Feel free to bust a cap in the corpse, however, if it will make you happy.... :D

[lisalan]

I think it's a good idea. There's a website where people can give you reputation points if they like your post. i don't know how easy it would be for the site admins here to implement that????

[Marley23]

I think it's a good idea. There's a website where people can give you reputation points if they like your post. i don't know how easy it would be for the site admins here to implement that????
If it's a vBulletin feature, it would be easy. But I hate those features and I think most SDMB posters (and staff) feel the same way. I don't think reputation points and like buttons add anything to the forum experience beyond giving you another button to push.

[Czarcasm]

I think it's a good idea. There's a website where people can give you reputation points if they like your post. i don't know how easy it would be for the site admins here to implement that????Is this supposed to support a poster's argument, or her/his reputation?

[lisalan]

Is this supposed to support a poster's argument, or her/his reputation?


To support an argument. It's actually a lot of fun.

[Czarcasm]

To support an argument. It's actually a lot of fun.But you previously said it was to support a person's reputation. Which is it?

[lisalan]

If it's a vBulletin feature, it would be easy. But I hate those features and I think most SDMB posters (and staff) feel the same way. I don't think reputation points and like buttons add anything to the forum experience beyond giving you another button to push.


I think it would be a lot of fun to give people points for good posts but I guess most don't feel that way.

[DrFidelius]

I think it would be a lot of fun to give people points for good posts but I guess most don't feel that way.

Fun? There are plenty of places you can go for Fun out there on the interwebs. No need to drag something that might be "fun" to this board.

Next you'll be wanting pictures, since some of those cats are "fun."

Bah. Humbug.

[lisalan]

I found this in the FAQ's of the board:

What are ratings?

The forums allow you to rate threads between 1 star (terrible) and 5 stars (excellent). Once enough votes are cast for a thread, stars will appear next to its name in the listings. These show the average vote, and can be an easy way to see which threads are worth reading if you are on a busy forum.

On the forum viewing page you can also arrange threads by rating, with either the highest or lowest at the top.

It therefore makes sense to rate threads because it helps all users. To do this, click on the 'rate thread' link at the top of the thread viewing page. Choose the number of stars you feel best represents the quality of the thread. You may or may not be able to change your choice of rating at a later date.


This is what I meant. i guess you did this at one time but don't any longer?

[lisalan]

Fun? There are plenty of places you can go for Fun out there on the interwebs. No need to drag something that might be "fun" to this board.

Next you'll be wanting pictures, since some of those cats are "fun."

Bah. Humbug.


Speaking of pictures.....we're not allowed to have a profile pic? I'm new here....please be nice:D

[DrFidelius]

re:stars

I do not remember that feature being live on this board at any time, and I joined two weeks after Ed Zotti.

I know another board I frequented had that turned on, and it lead to a furious flurry of ballot-box stuffing.

[Czarcasm]

I found this in the FAQ's of the board:

What are ratings?I can't seem to find these in the SDMB FAQs-could you please provide a link?

[runner pat]

Speaking of pictures.....we're not allowed to have a profile pic? I'm new here....please be nice:D

Paid subscribers only. :)

[Marley23]

I found this in the FAQ's of the board:

[...]

This is what I meant. i guess you did this at one time but don't any longer?
That's a generic FAQ page for all vBulletin forums. (It's over here. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/faq.php)) It talks about some features we don't use here. I don't think we've ever turned on avatars or reputation.

[lisalan]

That's a generic FAQ page for all vBulletin forums. (It's over here. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/faq.php)) It talks about some features we don't use here. I don't think we've ever turned on avatars or reputation.


Oh. Ok thanks;)

[Czarcasm]

I found this in the FAQ's of the board:

What are ratings?

The forums allow you to rate threads between 1 star (terrible) and 5 stars (excellent). Once enough votes are cast for a thread, stars will appear next to its name in the listings. These show the average vote, and can be an easy way to see which threads are worth reading if you are on a busy forum.

On the forum viewing page you can also arrange threads by rating, with either the highest or lowest at the top.

It therefore makes sense to rate threads because it helps all users. To do this, click on the 'rate thread' link at the top of the thread viewing page. Choose the number of stars you feel best represents the quality of the thread. You may or may not be able to change your choice of rating at a later date.


This is what I meant. i guess you did this at one time but don't any longer?We don't "rate" threads here-we participate in them. If a thread isn't to your liking, you can either chip in and try to make it better, or ignore it and watch it eventually slip off the front page. If you are concerned about how "popular" you are, you should do some research before you post things you think are facts, accept corrections gracefully, and hand them out just as gracefully-do this, and your reputation will skyrocket without the aid of any buttons, lights or whistles.

[lisalan]

We don't "rate" threads here-we participate in them. If a thread isn't to your liking, you can either chip in and try to make it better, or ignore it and watch it eventually slip off the front page. If you are concerned about how "popular" you are, you should do some research before you post things you think are facts, accept corrections gracefully, and hand them out just as gracefully-do this, and your reputation will skyrocket without the aid of any buttons, lights or whistles.


thanks:)

[spinky]

But seriously, including a way for users to share interesting threads on their Facebook feed with a "Like" button should be a no-brainer. It's free to use, easy to install and will bring a ton of traffic to the boards.

Two points: first, you already have a way for users to share interesting threads on their Facebook: you paste the link to the thread in your status update. People (including you) can then "Like" the link, and that does the exact same thing as a "Like" button on the thread page itself would have done. A large website I work on recently added "Like" buttons to every page, and we were a bit surprised when we rolled it out and loaded up one popular page to test it, and that page already had over 4000 "Likes." This is because people can "Like" a page whether or not you put a "Like" button on it. So the first point is: a "Like" button doesn't get you any functionality you don't already have.

Second: It's not a no-brainer. It may be free to use and easy to install, but it has a cost: performance. Facebook is friggin terrible about this. Every time you load a page from a site that includes "Like" buttons, your browser sends extra requests to Facebook to load the little image and the code for the "Like" button. On days when Facebook is performing badly (which does happen), it is incredibly annoying to wait 30 seconds staring a mostly-empty page on cnn.com with your status bar saying "waiting for static.fbcdn.com."

[elmwood]

I frequent a board with "agree" and "disagree" buttons, among others. It's nice to give the poster feedback without a 'me too' post, but it leads to a great deal of disagree wank. "OMG, why did I get a disagree? I said I liked peas!" and then the thread gets completely derailed with a discussion of why someone might have disagreed with the post, which is what those buttons were supposed to prevent.

I participate on a "hyperlocal" blog where issues related to one city are discussed. There's a very strong hive mind on there, which leans towards blind boosterism and "homerism". Make a well-worded, well-cited post that goes against the grain of the hive mind, and watch your reputation plunge.

The SDMB, in many respects, has a similar hive mind. Imagine what would happen to the reputation of an otherwise intelligent, articulate and well-regarded poster who admits to being a deist or having once enjoyed a meal at Olive Garden. Would posts by celebrity Dopers be judged differently than a lesser-known member?

[Stoid]

These show the average vote, and can be an easy way to see which threads are worth reading if you are on a busy forum.


Only if you decide which threads are "worth reading" based on how many other people have made that assessment. Which I realize many people do, I just don't support encouraging it.

I pick threads based on topic. My experience is that the herd has a very low bar for what they find compelling.

[Stoid]

I participate on a "hyperlocal" blog where issues related to one city are discussed. There's a very strong hive mind on there, which leans towards blind boosterism and "homerism". Make a well-worded, well-cited post that goes against the grain of the hive mind, and watch your reputation plunge.

The SDMB, in many respects, has a similar hive mind. Imagine what would happen to the reputation of an otherwise intelligent, articulate and well-regarded poster who admits to being a deist or having once enjoyed a meal at Olive Garden. Would posts by celebrity Dopers be judged differently than a lesser-known member?

This is what I was thinking of when i had an exchange with Guin a few days ago about the way this board has lost some of what made it great. Things are a lot hivier than they once were, and that's sad.

[Ken001]

Do you understand that you have just undercut the arguments given by some of the others that are also for the "like" button? That button cannot tell us whether you like the person or the argument unless you add a note to the thread explaining what you meant by pushing it.
And if you are going to do that, you really don't need the button in the first place, do you?

LOL "Like" :)

[installLSC]

Let's not forget the one thing we can agree on--the Straight Dope is for thoughtful discussions of topics, even if the topics themselves aren't very significant. "Like" buttons really don't help thoughtful discussions at all, and sometimes can hurt them. You might have people playing to the balconies, only posting highly popular opinions just to get high ratings. Reasoned people who hold unpopular views may quit because their ratings are too negative. Like buttons won't kill the Dope but they could certainly hurt the board.
We don't need a four paragraph post explaining why we agree with someone's sentiment. "Like" works just as well.
Unfortunately I worry that people who would in the past think up four paragraphs to reply will just think "ah hell I'll just push the like button".

[CaveMike]

Do you understand that you have just undercut the arguments given by some of the others that are also for the "like" button?So what? Ken can have different reasons than other posters for supporting a Like button.

[Czarcasm]

So what? Ken can have different reasons than other posters for supporting a Like button.Which makes it totally useless. Did the post get 25 "likes" because that many people agreed with what the poster was saying, because that many people like that poster, because of a combination of the two, or because certain people will push the "like" button for their clique no matter what is posted? The poster is stuck wondering why people are "liking" or "not liking" the post, and an exchange of ideas(y'know-the reason for a lot of these threads) is tossed to the side.

[Stoid]

I find the Facebook "like" button very confusing and limiting... when someone posts a link to a story about vicious baby-eating crocodiles, and other people come along and "like" the post.. what exactly is being liked...the story, or the vicious baby-eating crocodiles?

You see how this might get very messy.

[CaveMike]

Which makes it totally useless. Did the post get 25 "likes" because that many people agreed with what the poster was saying, because that many people like that poster, because of a combination of the two, or because certain people will push the "like" button for their clique no matter what is posted? The poster is stuck wondering why people are "liking" or "not liking" the post, and an exchange of ideas(y'know-the reason for a lot of these threads) is tossed to the side.I agree that there can be ambiguity about why people 'liked' a post, but I disagree with the conclusions you draw from that. Message boards with a Like feature still have plenty of lively discussions. Non-lurkers aren't satisfied with just liking or disliking a post; they still want to share their ideas and engage in discussion.

What you do see is a reduction in the 'Me too', '+1', and 'That' posts. In this sense the signal-to-noise ratio is increased. You also get more feedback from posters that tend to lurk. Personally, I like the idea of lurkers being able to influence the discussion. And judging by the popularity of polls in IMHO, I don't think I am alone. A poll is really a more complicated form of the Like button.

And while some people might automatically Like a post by a friend, what distortion is introduced? Isn't it likely that they really do agree with their friend's post?

Now I will admit that a Dislike button that can automatically hide a post encourages hive-thinking. It also degrades the S/N ratio with posts like: 'Why is this getting downvoted?' I personally prefer boards that provide only a Like button and not a Dislike button. It gives a poster feedback when their post resonates with readers without derailing a thread with popularity games. It highlights posts that readers might find particularly insightful.

I also prefer a board that does not track a user's karma -- that is the sum total of their Likes. Karma provides little and encourages gaming and clique upvoting.

I don't mind that the Dope doesn't have this feature and I realize that it never will -- adding features is not a priority here. But I do get frustrated by the conservative nature that many Dopers exhibit when a new feature is suggested. On a board that can be very tolerant of alternative ideas, it can be surprisingly hostile to alternative ideas about the board.

[Stoid]

Whoops...never mind

[Claude Remains]

This mofuga needs text to speech you know what I'm saying? With Auto-tune. Word.

[Inner Stickler]

I find the Facebook "like" button very confusing and limiting... when someone posts a link to a story about vicious baby-eating crocodiles, and other people come along and "like" the post.. what exactly is being liked...the story, or the vicious baby-eating crocodiles?

You see how this might get very messy.I don't actually, given that I am capable of understanding context.

[SenorBeef]

A different board I was on a few years ago switched to a system where you could rate posts from 1 to 5 stars, and your average post score would sit below your name on all your posts.

Now... it wasn't a very intellectual board, and something of an echo chamber. I, being used to GD style posting, familiar with citing and logical fallacies and such, usually provided a much more thought out and - not to brag too much - high quality post. But I had a lot of opinions that ran contrary to the echo chamber. So despite being one of the most valuable members of the boards, my rating was down to like 2.2 stars because people would downrank a post that didn't conform to the consensus. Meanwhile people that did nothing but repeat stuff they'd heard other people say in various ways would be in the 4.5s. It was just discouraging to me - why was I bothering to create these posts with some thought in them if people disliked them anyway?

And the SDMB needs quality opposition to whatever the majority opinion is. And often people put a lot of work into being that opposition - I wouldn't want them to be even further discouraged by this sort of mechanism.

Of course a like system is somewhat different than a rating system, and we'd probably be more fair in our use of the system, but I think people would still tend to rate based on how highly a person echoed their opinions rather than the quality of their posts, which threatens to progressively turn this board into more of a hivemind. I see that as a bigger risk than the relatively mild benefits.

[Stoid]

And the SDMB needs quality opposition to whatever the majority opinion is. And often people put a lot of work into being that opposition - I wouldn't want them to be even further discouraged by this sort of mechanism.



Oh, no worries. What doesn't kill me, and all that. :D

[Stoid]

I don't actually, given that I am capable of understanding context.

You might want to work on your joke-understanding skills.

[Inner Stickler]

I could. Or you could tell better jokes.

[Stoid]

I could. Or you could tell better jokes.

You only understand that a joke's a joke when it's a good joke? Man, that must lead to some ugly situations....

[Polycarp]

I find the Facebook "like" button very confusing and limiting... when someone posts a link to a story about vicious baby-eating crocodiles, and other people come along and "like" the post.. what exactly is being liked...the story, or the vicious baby-eating crocodiles?

You see how this might get very messy.

Here's a modest suggestion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlOb0XMxt84). :)

[elfkin477]

I'm okay with a like button if we can also have a button to mock people who don't read an entire OP before responding.