Endorse Post Function

I'd like to see an endorse post function. Sometimes a fellow makes a post that's so spot on that you have to endorse it. Such as correctly identifying the superiority of pc's and laptops over consoles. Or correctly identifying how a burger should be prepared. (The correct answer is medium-rare, with bacon, pepper jack cheese, a potato bun lightly crisped, topped with an onion ring accompanied by a side of handcut cajun fries dipped in vinegar.)

Such things are worthy of ENDORSEMENT. And below that users post they could see, XXX has endorsed you. And they would know they are correct.

Signed by Virote_Considon.

I'm for it, the admins have shot it down multiple times in the past.

I don't see what the problem with it would be. If it were to have any impact on discussion, surely it'd just be in getting rid of 'I agree' and '^ this' type posts. Also would work as a way to positively reinforce (or encourage) quality posting.

Its definitely not going to get rid of "I agree" posts, they will still be there as +rep posts. I don't know how you could be at all familiar with this system and not know that.

I fail to see how it will actually encourage better discussion, since this system elsewhere just results in people going +rep for almost anything that is even slightly amusing or just because they agree with a post even though it isn't correct. Its just ends up being another set of meaningless internet points to add to your e-peen.

Besides there are certainly a lot more important matters to attend to on the forums, like archiving the dead other games childboards.

/signed

Maniacal said:

Its definitely not going to get rid of "I agree" posts, they will still be there as +rep posts. I don't know how you could be at all familiar with this system and not know that.

I fail to see how it will actually encourage better discussion, since this system elsewhere just results in people going +rep for almost anything that is even slightly amusing or just because they agree with a post even though it isn't correct. Its just ends up being another set of meaningless internet points to add to your e-peen.

Besides there are certainly a lot more important matters to attend to on the forums, like archiving the dead other games childboards.

Click to expand...

People post '+rep' and stuff like it with a reputation system, no? Rather than with a 'like' system? I've never seen anyone on Facebook like a post and then post 'I liked that post' or 'I agree'. They don't need to, because they've already conveyed that exact sentiment. Though even if it didn't eliminate these posts, a system that encourages posts that will attract 'likes' doesn't exactly seem likely to set off a spate of poor quality posting. Past proposals have suggested each member has a limited number of 'likes' per day, so as to not just reward mildly amusing posts, which seems like a pretty decent idea. But to be honest, it's not like there's much comedy going on in most forums; people are far more likely to 'like' a post providing good strategic advice, especially seeing as that's more the type of thing most people come to the forums for.

I think one of the other problems identified in the past has been what happens when something 'likes' a rule-breaking post? I imagine it'd be possible to allow moderators to delete 'likes' if they were attached to objectionable material, and to sanction those that have placed them under the general 'agreeing with trolling is trolling' principle.

Whether there are other important matters to attend to or not is entirely irrelevant to the merits of a 'like post' system.

+rep/+endorse, same difference. People are still going to make agreement posts to show agreement. I don't know if limited endorsements per day would do much, maybe, maybe not. There's plenty of 'comedy' and humour going on on CFC, but you have shown yourself to be completely blind to most of it.

I think one of the other problems identified in the past has been what happens when something 'likes' a rule-breaking post? I imagine it'd be possible to allow moderators to delete 'likes' if they were attached to objectionable material, and to sanction those that have placed them under the general 'agreeing with trolling is trolling' principle.

Click to expand...

Sounds like more work than necessary for the staff, I'm sure they will love that.

Whether there are other important matters to attend to or not is entirely irrelevant to the merits of a 'like post' system.

Click to expand...

It does matter because it shows they obviously have little enough time to do what the long list of fixes they already need to do, especially when they have shot down similar ideas many times before.

I support this idea.

If only there had existed an endorse post function we may have been spared such a post ^

Exactly why I found it sorta funny

A really good idea.

I would enjoy and use this feature. It's not an e-peen thing, I get the feeling that most of the support for this idea is from posters who want to give rep/likes/endorsements (rather than care disproportionately about getting them).

Although I agree with Maniacal, Other Games should get a pruning first before this is considered.

Maniacal said:

Besides there are certainly a lot more important matters to attend to on the forums, like archiving the dead other games childboards.

Click to expand...

While I wouldn't mind an "endorse" or "like" feature. I really just endorse this post.

A feature like this would be exceptionally useful in things like the ISDG (in my sig). In a team of ~20 active members, there are lots of "agreed" and "good idea" posts, and they are totally necessary. Many senior players in games like these get frustrated because team members often agree with an idea, but don't go to the trouble/don't think it it's worth it to express their agreement. It would also help cut down on marginally useful, cumbersome poll threads. OT convenience aside, "Endorse Post" would be a really, really helpful in games like there.