"Like" button

[Earthling]

This isn't a good idea for the forums as a whole. However, it could certainly help on on-topic, civ-related sections, as the OP suggests, and could be worth a try if possible.

There are posters who specifically lie to new players just to troll them, and the moderators seem to refuse to infract this on, say, the civ4 boards. If other action isn't being taken to clean this up, a like system couldn't hurt (So, say, when a new player posts something like "how do I do this thing in my city" and the guys giving lies that will cause the game to do other things aren't voted up, they will be discouraged)

 

[Defiant47]

And please don't call me "man" - I may have changed a few of my opinions, but I haven't changed that much - I'm still female.

There's a FEMALE on the forums???



*ahem*
But yes, I have my doubts about this as well. It's annoying how something as fairly innocuous as this could be misused.

 

[Hakim]

Worth trying, as long as it's only up votes. Can't be fun writing your first post only to have it voted into the ground. Besides, the personality type enjoying trolling and mischief probably won't find much use of a possibility to up vote/digg.

 

[Mise]

All it takes is a few complaints of "Why doesn't anybody "Like" my posts?!" or some spammish comment to garner a bunch of "Like" ratings just so people can spam or troll without being caught at it. Then the complaints start coming in to the moderators, and the task of sorting it all out begins.

I still don't understand how this could possibly happen. Or why anyone would be more upset by no-one clicking "like" than by no-one responding to their posts. Or why anyone would be upset by that at all. Or why spam or trolling wouldn't be infracted as it is now. Or what anyone is supposed to be complaining to the mods about. I just... I just don't see why you think this could possibly result in anything negative happening. It's just a little button that says "like", that you click, and it gives a +1 to the post's rating. It's not a reputation system, it's not a personality cult, it's a "recommendation" system - people recommend this post as being a good one.

And even if there is a potential for trolling, who cares? We have those "wall" things on our profiles now, where anyone can say whatever they want - the potential for trolling on that is WAY bigger, and it doesn't even add any more functionality (why write on a wall when you can PM?). But it's still there. We have groups that are barely moderated; you could easily say whatever you want there, and the mods won't come a-knockin' unless someone reports it. There are even private groups ffs, rife for "gossiping" about people. But that's still there too.

 

[Catharsis]

All it takes is a few complaints of "Why doesn't anybody "Like" my posts?!" or some spammish comment to garner a bunch of "Like" ratings just so people can spam or troll without being caught at it. Then the complaints start coming in to the moderators, and the task of sorting it all out begins.

I suppose there is the potential for anonymous flaming with such a feature. It just seems like remarkably small potatoes, though.

I know that vBulletin has a "reputation" feature that I'm relieved has never been activated here. I've seen it cause immense damage and hard feelings on some forums. Whether a "half-reputation" (the 'good' half) could be implemented - I have no idea.

Total War Center has a half-reputation system like that, I believe. The administrator sets whether negative reputation can be given. The issue is whether the 'reputation' could be attached to a single post, not a user.

I still advocate trial periods. The most recent one I advocated was moving the DYOS threads from the Games forum to Arts & Entertainment. Since I've received no negative feedback whatsoever about that, I would conclude that the participants are happy with the move and it was a success. But if it stops being a successful discussion and story creation activity and turns into a spamfest, then it would probably be moved back to the Games section.

Yes, well, we can all probably guess what I think of stuff being moved to the Games section purely because it is a spamfest, but let's not get into that

If a like button is implementable, then it would be a good feature to put on trial, wouldn't it? What with Civ V coming out soon, and all: what better time to infuse a sense of positivity throughout the forum, to create a welcoming atmosphere for the inevitable barrage of new users! Never mind what those jaded cynics in OT do with it, who cares about them, they're old and bitter with rage.

And please don't call me "man" - I may have changed a few of my opinions, but I haven't changed that much - I'm still female.

I call everyone 'man', including women. Keeps things simple.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

You not down with the chicks then.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

Am i the only one confused because mise didn't mention the posts rearranging themselves because of the likes, yet everyone asuming they do ?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I still don't understand how this could possibly happen. Or why anyone would be more upset by no-one clicking "like" than by no-one responding to their posts. Or why anyone would be upset by that at all. Or why spam or trolling wouldn't be infracted as it is now. Or what anyone is supposed to be complaining to the mods about. I just... I just don't see why you think this could possibly result in anything negative happening. It's just a little button that says "like", that you click, and it gives a +1 to the post's rating. It's not a reputation system, it's not a personality cult, it's a "recommendation" system - people recommend this post as being a good one.

And even if there is a potential for trolling, who cares? We have those "wall" things on our profiles now, where anyone can say whatever they want - the potential for trolling on that is WAY bigger, and it doesn't even add any more functionality (why write on a wall when you can PM?). But it's still there. We have groups that are barely moderated; you could easily say whatever you want there, and the mods won't come a-knockin' unless someone reports it. There are even private groups ffs, rife for "gossiping" about people. But that's still there too.

Some people use Visitors Messages so they don't use up space in their PM allotment.

As for you not seeing the potential for misuse and complaints... all I can say is that you've never seen some of the post reports we've had. Most are brief and to the point, which is good. But a few are rather... dramatic, shall we say.

And you never know where the mods "come a-knockin'" - every day I randomly choose several threads I haven't read before (or recently) to see what's being discussed, and if there are any problems going on (or about to go on). I've dropped in on a few group discussions to do the same. I've no idea if the other mods do this as well, but you never know...

 

[Mise]

Right, so groups added to your workload, but they're still allowed. What's your point again?

Your point about visitor messages is irrelevant -- they are rife for trolling, yet they are allowed. They add to mods' workloads, yet they are allowed. What's the difference between that and a Like button? Especially when the potential for trolling is so ridiculously minimal compared to a freaking private group or visitor messages!! All your "objections" can be used to shot down pretty much all of the functionality on the forums already, so I don't see why they should be relevant now. Honestly, I really don't see what the fuss is about...

Maybe you should just answer me this: How is this possibly any worse than private groups or visitor messages?

 

[ori]

private groups are, well private, and even open groups are rather hidden with regards to the general forum user when compared to posts in the main forums. Visitor mesages are likewise only semi-public.

I don't know whether I like or don't like any rating feature limited to positive ratings (unlike full rating features which I know I am opposed to ) - however one thing is clear: such an option does not seem to exist in the vbulletin software without using some rather elaborate and seemingly unsupported hacks which will almost certainly not be used.

 

[Mise]

Well, from what's been said in this thread, there's already a rating system built in to vBulletin; it shouldn't be too hard to simply disable the negative rating buttons, and not show user's rating on your profile (if that's considered elitist).

private groups are, well private, and even open groups are rather hidden with regards to the general forum user when compared to posts in the main forums. Visitor mesages are likewise only semi-public.

Was this in response to "How is this possibly any worse than private groups or visitor messages" ? If so, you might want to tell me what exactly makes a "like" button worse than an easily trollable set of features, that create extra work for moderators already!

 

[Abaddon]

What's wrong with the 5star system we have for threads? I just think it should be implemented across the forum...

 

[Earthling]

What's wrong with the 5star system we have for threads? I just think it should be implemented across the forum...

That doesn't contribute to a single thing the OP suggested, or solve problems I and others have discussed? That this system has absolutely no relation to promoting good individual posts?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Right, so groups added to your workload, but they're still allowed. What's your point again?

I have stated my points. If you don't understand them, please re-read them.

Maybe you should just answer me this: How is this possibly any worse than private groups or visitor messages?

I did not say it was worse.

private groups are, well private, and even open groups are rather hidden with regards to the general forum user when compared to posts in the main forums. Visitor mesages are likewise only semi-public.

Was this in response to "How is this possibly any worse than private groups or visitor messages" ? If so, you might want to tell me what exactly makes a "like" button worse than an easily trollable set of features, that create extra work for moderators already!

Private groups don't tend to make a lot of extra work for moderators in matters of (for example) trolling. It's pointless to troll somebody who isn't a member and therefore can't see the troll (or flame, or whatever).

My current opinion on this: I have seen it used negatively on other forums and sites, and hard feelings were one of the results. If the matter comes to a vote in the staff forum, I will not be in favor. Of course, if such a feature is implemented, I will moderate accordingly, as required by the admins. But as has been said, Thunderfall tends to not be in favor of installing hacks/modifications to the forum software so we are arguing something that will likely not happen anyway.

As I said before, why not simply put a link to useful posts in your sig?

 

[Mise]

I have stated my points. If you don't understand them, please re-read them.

I understand them, what I don't understand is why you don't apply the same arguments to visitor messages and groups.

I did not say it was worse.

So where's the problem?

My current opinion on this: I have seen it used negatively on other forums and sites, and hard feelings were one of the results. If the matter comes to a vote in the staff forum, I will not be in favor.

Were you in favour of groups and visitor messages? Because, as you said, this would be no worse than either of those things.

As I said before, why not simply put a link to useful posts in your sig?

Because that has absolutely nothing to do with what I suggested?

 

[Chieftess]

There used to be a rating system at one time (i.e., in Civ3 Creation & Customization), but too many times it was either ambiguous (4 stars could've been 1 vote, or 1,000 votes), or someone would go through and give everyone 1 star.

 

[Mise]

Yeah, what I'm suggesting isn't like the current 1* to 5* rating on threads. Whenever someone clicks the "like" button, it adds 1 point to the post's rating. The more people that click the "like" button, the higher the rating. There are no negative ratings.

 

[azzaman333]

It's pointless to troll somebody who isn't a member and therefore can't see the troll (or flame, or whatever).

So very wrong.

 

[Lord Baal]

Yeah, what I'm suggesting isn't like the current 1* to 5* rating on threads. Whenever someone clicks the "like" button, it adds 1 point to the post's rating. The more people that click the "like" button, the higher the rating. There are no negative ratings.

The problem Mise, is that people won't give posts a thumbs-up because they like it, they'll give it one because they agree with it. Say there's a thread about communism. Commies on the board will "like" pro-commie posts, and the right-wing chaps will "like" the anti-commie posts. And so on. It adds nothing to the boards, and merely creates a popularity contest among the more childish posters.

Not to mention that young impressionable posters may notice that some right-wing Neo-Nazi nutjob has 400 people who like his post (face it, there are a LOT of racists on the boards, closet and otherwise) and decide that it's a good idea to follow this guy's lead. That sort of thing is obviously a problem.

 

[Mise]

Well if that actually becomes a problem it can be disabled in OT. Though I don't see how it's any more of a popularity contest than it already is. People already post "I agree" posts on posts they like, and "No, you're wrong" posts on posts they don't like. And it's not like it's completely intrusive either - it's just a little number next to the post # in the top right (like the star rating isn't very intrusive - except even less intrusive cos it's a dull green number not a bunch of eye-catching gold stars).

And in any case, it could have positive effects - if people notice that most of the "crowd" are opposed to their arguments they may be inclined to change their arguments to something that does seem to be working. This doesn't work very well on The Daily Mail's comments section, because you do end up with a bunch of idiots and racists getting the highest ratings. But it does work very well on The Economist's comment section, because that forum is populated mostly with thoughtful people. I think OT more resembles The Economist than The Daily Mail.


At the very least, I don't see why we shouldn't try it out. Like I said, it would encourage more participation from lurkers, maybe encourage people to sign up instead of surfing as a guest all the time, and bridge the gap between lurking and being an active, contributing member of the Civ community. I think that's worth a try.