logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> (Likes) feature
net2007
post Sep 5 2013, 05:50 AM
Post #1


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,232
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



I thought it might be interesting to have a likes option on each post. When reading an interesting post, I don't always have something to add afterwards, or a question to ask. I lurked at AD for almost two years at one point, but still read debates from time to time. It would be an easy way to let someone know you read their post, or thought what they said held some value. I notice most forums get a lot more reads than they get replies, for those who are just reading through the forums, it could be a small way they could participate on some level if they don't have the time for more.

Facebook, Youtube, and some debate forums have this feature, it could be something interesting to have.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 17)
moif
post Sep 5 2013, 06:56 AM
Post #2


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,685
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



thumbsup.gif <----like?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Sep 5 2013, 11:16 AM
Post #3


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



This sort of function wouldn't bother me, per se....but my visceral hatred of all things Facebook doesn't compel me to energetically advocate for it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Sep 5 2013, 12:25 PM
Post #4


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



Some boards, often comments on articles, have thumbs us, thumbs down and will hide posts with too many thumbs down. A type of self moderation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Sep 5 2013, 05:40 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,328
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



I think it would discourage the free-flow of ideas.

If a person disagrees, they should openly disagree and not just surreptitiously punch a 'thumbs down' button knowing that no one will be able to tell who it was. Likewise, if a person agrees and thinks the post is good he/she can always send a PM (or write a constructive reply). Let's face it, 99 percent of the time a person is going to 'like' the post they agree with and 'dislike' the one they don't. The button system is essentially a popularity contest of ideas, the antithesis of what this place is about, IMO. I want people to feel free to present constructive, but perhaps unpopular ideas (even if they sometimes annoy me).

Just my 2 cents, but I'm very old school in internet years and hate those like and dislike buttons anyway (and facebook, and pretty much all social networking sites for that matter).

edited to add:
Reading the above, I do come across like a grinch. I'm sure I'd get several thumbs downs for this response, if said button were available (insert Cartman "I hate that *bleeping* thumbs down!") laugh.gif blush.gif

This post has been edited by Mrs. Pigpen: Sep 5 2013, 05:46 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
net2007
post Sep 5 2013, 06:31 PM
Post #6


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,232
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Sep 5 2013, 01:40 PM) *
I think it would discourage the free-flow of ideas.

If a person disagrees, they should openly disagree and not just surreptitiously punch a 'thumbs down' button knowing that no one will be able to tell who it was. Likewise, if a person agrees and thinks the post is good he/she can always send a PM (or write a constructive reply). Let's face it, 99 percent of the time a person is going to 'like' the post they agree with and 'dislike' the one they don't. The button system is essentially a popularity contest of ideas, the antithesis of what this place is about, IMO. I want people to feel free to present constructive, but perhaps unpopular ideas (even if they sometimes annoy me).

Just my 2 cents, but I'm very old school in internet years and hate those like and dislike buttons anyway (and facebook, and pretty much all social networking sites for that matter).

edited to add:
Reading the above, I do come across like a grinch. I'm sure I'd get several thumbs downs for this response, if said button were available (insert Cartman "I hate that *bleeping* thumbs down!") laugh.gif blush.gif



I've seen the Grinch come out in debate, what you said is fine, your just being honest.

Facebook isn't so bad though, it's a communication tool that can attract some immaturity and pointless posting, but it's all on how you use it and who you decide to communicate with. I feel a bit stuck between the generations regarding my FB opinion. blush.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ataal
post Sep 5 2013, 07:01 PM
Post #7


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 354
Member No.: 674
Joined: April-17-03

From: Phoenix, Arizona
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



Because of my job, I spend most of my browsing time on http://community.spiceworks.com/

Instead of "likes," they call it spices. You can spice up or down a topic, but can only spice up a post within each topic, not down. You can also click on the pepper to see who spiced it up.

I absolutely love it because sometimes there's not much to say other than "I agree" and if I'm not going to spend the time to simply write "I agree" as a reply, I'm not going to send them a private message. It also has the added benefit to hold the "spiciest" post of the month, year, etc... Instead of having people try to remember which post they liked and search for it, it's just a matter of pulling the report and seeing which posts got the most spice ups.

I think it also helps weed out irrelevant and long-winded posts. People tend to feel they need to say they agree with something, but can't just say that. Whether that's due to community rules or the fact that it doesn't add to the conversation. So, they use "filler" arguments.

Granted, spiceworks is an IT community where people are looking for answers to questions, whereas this is a debate site. So, an argument could be made that we're comparing apples to oranges. I still like the idea for AD, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JohnfrmCleveland
post Sep 5 2013, 07:20 PM
Post #8


********
Master Debater

Sponsor
September 2009

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,459
Member No.: 8,090
Joined: November-1-07

From: Cleveland, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Sep 5 2013, 07:16 AM) *
This sort of function wouldn't bother me, per se....but my visceral hatred of all things Facebook doesn't compel me to energetically advocate for it.


thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gray Seal
post Sep 5 2013, 08:10 PM
Post #9


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 2,405
Member No.: 335
Joined: December-12-02

From: Edwardsville, IL
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



I have sent PMs to those who write post I think are very well done. I wish I could state so publicly. I want to make it public not because I like a post. It is when I believe the author has "nailed it".

It would be good have the chance to echo what someone has said and not have to, essentially, repeat what someone else has presented in a top notch manner.

So, perhaps a LIKE button would be good but I would like a NAILED IT button. The NAILED IT button would be important for discussion purposes. When various people are involved in a thread it is good to see whom agrees strongly with what some else has stated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Sep 10 2013, 05:16 PM
Post #10


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,937
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Sep 5 2013, 06:40 PM) *
I think it would discourage the free-flow of ideas.

If a person disagrees, they should openly disagree and not just surreptitiously punch a 'thumbs down' button knowing that no one will be able to tell who it was. Likewise, if a person agrees and thinks the post is good he/she can always send a PM (or write a constructive reply). Let's face it, 99 percent of the time a person is going to 'like' the post they agree with and 'dislike' the one they don't. The button system is essentially a popularity contest of ideas, the antithesis of what this place is about, IMO. I want people to feel free to present constructive, but perhaps unpopular ideas (even if they sometimes annoy me).

Just my 2 cents, but I'm very old school in internet years and hate those like and dislike buttons anyway (and facebook, and pretty much all social networking sites for that matter).

edited to add:
Reading the above, I do come across like a grinch. I'm sure I'd get several thumbs downs for this response, if said button were available (insert Cartman "I hate that *bleeping* thumbs down!") laugh.gif blush.gif


I'm not sure I agree - sometimes a lot of the shorter posts in threads are people posting just to agree with a post they like (or disagree with one they don't) and then padding it out to avoid falling foul of the one-liner rule.

And it doesn't have to be anonymous - it could be more like "favouriting" (an ugly neologism) a tweet on Twitter, where it's publicly visible who has done it.

That way we'd still be able to see substantive posts, but would skip some of the filler that's just a long-winded way of saying "what he/she said".

I'm all for anything that might ginger up ad.gif a little; it seems to have been a little moribund lately.

I don't think this is ad.gif's fault, particularly; it's more that every news website in the world now has some pretty good comment functionality and a lot of people like that. ad.gif's huge selling point, over most news websites, is that everyone gets to write above-the-line (within the Rules i.e. there has to be a question to debate).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Sep 11 2013, 03:33 AM
Post #11


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Sep 5 2013, 10:40 AM) *
I think it would discourage the free-flow of ideas.

If a person disagrees, they should openly disagree and not just surreptitiously punch a 'thumbs down' button knowing that no one will be able to tell who it was. Likewise, if a person agrees and thinks the post is good he/she can always send a PM (or write a constructive reply). Let's face it, 99 percent of the time a person is going to 'like' the post they agree with and 'dislike' the one they don't. The button system is essentially a popularity contest of ideas, the antithesis of what this place is about, IMO. I want people to feel free to present constructive, but perhaps unpopular ideas (even if they sometimes annoy me).

I couldn't agree more. It's like getting a grade in Junior High or winning or losing a popularity contest. I'd kind of like to think ad.gif doesn't want to go there, that unpopular ideas are welcome. I've been on those kind of forums and it always subtracted from them it seems to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ataal
post Sep 16 2013, 05:26 PM
Post #12


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 354
Member No.: 674
Joined: April-17-03

From: Phoenix, Arizona
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



I have to wonder if the words "Facebook" and "Twitter" were never mentioned, would the responses have been the same?

This idea is used on many different forums with great success. It's completely optional. If you don't want to like or dislike something, don't. It really does cut down on the number of irrelevant and "filler" arguments, though.

If you agree with what someone has said and have nothing more to offer to the conversation, like it. Most forums don't allow for a dislike on a post, but do for a topic. So, if you disagree with someone, you can either not like it, or you can post a response as to why you disagree. Having a high number of dislikes for a topic itself has many benefits that should be pretty much self-explanatory.

This "popularity" angle is confusing. I don't understand it at all. I've been in IT for over 15 years and have used more forums than I care to count. In that time, I have never, ever, heard someone boast about the number of likes they get. Nor has it ever changed the way people post because of someone's ridiculously large "popularity." I think if Wertz were still around, he'd have a ton of "likes," and I don't think anyone would have had a problem with that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Sep 18 2013, 01:13 AM
Post #13


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(Ataal @ Sep 16 2013, 10:26 AM) *
I think if Wertz were still around, he'd have a ton of "likes,"

I think so too and I also think he would find the thumbs up - thumbs down process narcissistic, trivial and silly. He was a guy with thoughtful and passionate opinions and to reduce the process to a good or bad checkoff in effect would seem like a lame cop out substitute for a seriously defended point of view.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Sep 18 2013, 04:01 AM
Post #14


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,351
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Dingo @ Sep 17 2013, 09:13 PM) *
QUOTE(Ataal @ Sep 16 2013, 10:26 AM) *
I think if Wertz were still around, he'd have a ton of "likes,"

I think so too and I also think he would find the thumbs up - thumbs down process narcissistic, trivial and silly. He was a guy with thoughtful and passionate opinions and to reduce the process to a good or bad checkoff in effect would seem like a lame cop out substitute for a seriously defended point of view.

Agreed that Wertz would have hated the idea. I've never indicated a like or dislike on anything in the Internet with those buttons. It does seem rather pointless.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Sep 18 2013, 09:22 AM
Post #15


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,937
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Sep 18 2013, 05:01 AM) *
QUOTE(Dingo @ Sep 17 2013, 09:13 PM) *
QUOTE(Ataal @ Sep 16 2013, 10:26 AM) *
I think if Wertz were still around, he'd have a ton of "likes,"

I think so too and I also think he would find the thumbs up - thumbs down process narcissistic, trivial and silly. He was a guy with thoughtful and passionate opinions and to reduce the process to a good or bad checkoff in effect would seem like a lame cop out substitute for a seriously defended point of view.

Agreed that Wertz would have hated the idea. I've never indicated a like or dislike on anything in the Internet with those buttons. It does seem rather pointless.


Well, before we turn into a spiritualist forum, channelling the post mortem thoughts of Wertz from beyond the grave, perhaps we might remember that ad.gif has always had rather more lurkers than posters, and that a "Like" function might be the kind of small-scale interaction that could lure more of them into the sunlight of open debate.

I always liked Bill, but I'm not sure any of us know what he would have thought of this idea (or anything else he didn't specifically comment on in real time), and I'm more than a little suspecting that he would have been pretty depressed and somewhat angry at the thought of any posters invoking his name, or the supposed wishes of his ghost, as some kind of appeal to authority. Whatever else he was, he wasn't much of a fan of logical fallacies.

If you've got a problem with the idea of a "like" function, let's hear the pros and cons - leave Bill Wertz to rest in peace.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Sep 18 2013, 10:29 AM
Post #16


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



Julian ad.gif is a place for opinions. My opinion on what Wertz would have thought is just an opinion; it has no authority.

As for:
QUOTE
If you've got a problem with the idea of a "like" function, let's hear the pros and cons - leave Bill Wertz to rest in peace.


If this isn't an example of spiritualist channeling, I don't know what is. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Sep 19 2013, 02:10 PM
Post #17


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,937
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



QUOTE(Dingo @ Sep 18 2013, 11:29 AM) *
Julian ad.gif is a place for opinions. My opinion on what Wertz would have thought is just an opinion; it has no authority.


Well, above all else ad.gif is a debate forum - the clue is in the name - rather than a mere opinion forum. By expressing an opinion, you (and others) are using what you imagine Wertz may or may not have thought about a 'like' function to attempt to persuade others to your point of view (that such a function is a good or bad thing that should or should not be adopted).

I'm not saying your opinion has authority, or that it has none - no more than anyone else's here - but that the way that you're framing it is a logical fallacy called "appeal to/argument from authority".

You might as well say "Jesus wants us to have a like button" or "Allah, the High and Merciful, wants us not to have a like button." Nobody can argue with that because nobody can know what Jesus or Allah really thinks, and more than we can know what the Easter Bunny, Gilgamesh, Alexander the Great - or Bill Wertz - think. And it's fallacious anyway because you can't know what any of them thinks either. Prefacing your fallacious assertions with "I think that Jesus/Allah/Wertz would have..." doesn't make your argument any less bunk - or those of anyone else using the same fallacious argument from any side.

Which is why I said...
QUOTE
If you've got a problem with the idea of a "like" function, let's hear the pros and cons - leave Bill Wertz to rest in peace.


For you to then reply
QUOTE
If this isn't an example of spiritualist channeling, I don't know what is. rolleyes.gif

either indicates you didn't follow what I was saying - hence my clarification - or just didn't want to understand it, in which cae I fail to see how asking that we leave the imagined opinions of a dead acquaintance of ours out of a current debate has anything to do with spiritualism*. It's not as if I claimed Wertz had told me what to say from the Other Side.

*what we British skeptics tend to refer to as "utter bollocks".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Sep 20 2013, 12:03 AM
Post #18


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



This is getting silly. I don't know Jesus however I did have some acquaintance with Wertz not only from this forum, but a couple of previous ones. He was the one who invited me over here. Somebody else brought up Wertz, in relation to a button positive position, and I responded with an opinion of how I thought Wertz might react to the button issue. I was just conversing. This "argument from authority" is making the matter a bit weighty and over the top.

As for the second part, I thought your little exercise in spiritualist cognitive dissonance was kind of funny. I'm sorry you couldn't take it that way. giveup.gif

Edit. I just had a thought. The Chinese have an expression for unnecessarily over elaborating essentially simple matters. They call it painting legs on the snake.

This post has been edited by Dingo: Sep 20 2013, 04:43 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: July 19th, 2018 - 11:35 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.