Add likes / dislikes to threads?

[ruslan120]

Are likes / dislikes for threads an upcoming feature?

Could be useful for threads that are spam or are fake leaks, could appear as a green / red bar under the thread icon.

Edit: To make it easier to implement it could also be “like or dislike the first post” then the UI reflects those on the list without opening the thread.

 

[arn]

The next version of the forum software does have an option to allow thread upvotes/downvotes. It's meant for suggestion type forums. But I'm not sure it really translates over to general threads. Should there be downvotes for question threads, for example?

If we used it, it may require its own dedicated forum -- like iOS Wants or something like that.

arn

 

[0128672]

I would not like to see upvotes/downvotes for general threads because I think there's already a well-oiled mechanism to root out spam, i.e., probing for proof or simply not responding to some threads. I also think it might be intimidating to some members for whom English is not their first language. I feel post-level reactions are sufficient.

 

[Populus]

I politely disagree with this idea. Not sure if some want to turn this into Reddit, but I honestly hate how limited the speech is there (or how some ideas end up buried) because of their voting mechanism.

I don’t see the point, having a gorgeous REPORT button that is very useful to bring mods attention.

 

[jbachandouris]

I also want the downvote button. Sometimes I vehemently disagree but would rather not comment and risk being banned. Report is not helpful in such cases.

 

[ruslan120]

I guess a way to express an opinion could also be to write a comment, but in large threads that point might be lost amongst the noise. The benefit of a like or dislike button would be the ability to see how people feel about a certain topic at a glance

I politely disagree with this idea. Not sure if some want to turn this into Reddit, but I honestly hate how limited the speech is there (or how some ideas end up buried) because of their voting mechanism.

I don’t see the point, having a gorgeous REPORT button that is very useful to bring mods attention.

I agree with your point. And agree regarding Reddit.

 

[annk]

I also want the downvote button. Sometimes I vehemently disagree but would rather not comment and risk being banned. Report is not helpful in such cases.

It's fine to disagree vehemently, you just need to use civil language and avoid things like name-calling and insults.

 

[ruslan120]

... use civil language and avoid things like name-calling and insults.

b-bu-but it’s the internet

 

[44267547]

I rarely ever use the ‘like button‘, unless I truly believe the post has some genuine merit or is witty where it drew a ‘good laugh‘ from me. And no matter how much I disagree with somebody’s post, I don’t need to use a ‘dislike [Thumbs down] button‘, I simply ignore their drivel and comment on those who actually have something that has substance Contributing to the thread/topic.

 

[macintoshmac]

I rarely ever use the ‘like button‘, unless I truly believe the post has some genuine merit or is witty where it drew a ‘good laugh‘ from me. And no matter how much I disagree with somebody’s post, I don’t need to use a ‘dislike [Thumbs down] button‘, I simply ignore their drivel and comment on those who actually have something that has substance Contributing to the thread/topic.

This is so true. Why complicate things unnecessarily by having a downvote/ dislike button? If something is offensive, report to the mods, if not, and you don't want it again, just ignore. Let's not get into the trap of likes and dislikes.

 

[44267547]

This is so true. Why complicate things unnecessarily by having a downvote/ dislike button? If something is offensive, report to the mods, if not, and you don't want it again, just ignore. Let's not get into the trap of likes and dislikes.

Bolded:

Oh, believe me, I do (I’ve worked with the moderators with problematic members [One specifically] over the years). If you’ve been here long enough on this website, you likely have a solid idea of how the operations work in terms of what you can and cannot post. My theory is, if you have to think twice about it, don’t post it. And for some members who have been banned multiple times (then later reinstated), rather that be in PRSI or any other forum, they don’t get it, simply because they either choose not to and/or they’re just really not that smart of an individual making the same repeated mistake. I know that comes off a bit harsh, but that’s the brisk reality for those who can barely survive on Macrumors.

 

[macintoshmac]

Bolded:

Oh, believe me, I do (I’ve worked with the moderators with problematic members [One specifically] over the years). If you’ve been here long enough on this website, you likely have a solid idea of how the operations work in terms of what you can and cannot post. My theory is, if you have to think twice about it, don’t post it. And for some members who have been banned multiple times (then later reinstated), rather that be in PRSI or any other forum, they don’t get it, simply because they either choose not to and/or they’re just really not that smart of an individual making the same repeated mistake. I know that comes off a bit harsh, but that’s the brisk reality for those who can barely survive on Macrumors.

Wholeheartedly agree. I have been on MR long enough and understand MR to be a very reasonable and tolerant space, at least so far, in my experience. I have come across forums where there is a certain bent and when members go against the tide, they get reprimanded. It is often political, and sometimes it is just a weird high-handed autocracy of sorts. I do not remain a member of those fora in that case.

What you said is true for every interaction in and of life, not just online on forums, to refrain from speaking/ posting if you have to think twice about it.

 

[ericgtr12]

The next version of the forum software does have an option to allow thread upvotes/downvotes. It's meant for suggestion type forums. But I'm not sure it really translates over to general threads. Should there be downvotes for question threads, for example?

If we used it, it may require its own dedicated forum -- like iOS Wants or something like that.

arn

What if you were to change Like to (something like) Rate and then add a thumbs down to the row of icons? Maybe not exactly a upvote/downvote but it would essentially serve the same purpose.

Just thinking out loud here but back in the vB days that function/code would be pretty easy to duplicate into a second button where you could tweak it as well. Not sure how this forum operates but the fundamentals are basically the same.

 

[S.B.G]

I rarely ever use the ‘like button‘, unless I truly believe the post has some genuine merit or is witty where it drew a ‘good laugh‘ from me.

I am truly honored.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Might be worth trialling it as a ‘downvote’ option might prevent many threads getting out of hand. Rather than arguing a person the simple gesture of downvoting it might be enough? Not sure to be honest.

 

[44267547]

I am truly honored.

View attachment 928662

I hope you know I put hours of thought into that post if I should’ve given you a ‘like’ or not. (Yeah, not much happening on my Saturday afternoon). Consider yourself very fortunate.😁

 

[bunnspecial]

FWIW, I'm a member of only one forum that has an upvote/downvote system. On that particular forum, it's tagged as "was this post helpful or interesting?" with a yes/no button, and the cumulative total is displayed next to that.

It's a car forum, and awards "top contributor" badges. The upvote/downvote system is intended to make sure that badge is rewarded not only on the basis of prolific posting, but also making sure the badge is only given to people who actual contribute good content. The site owner has also explained some other factors that go into how the badges are distributed, and the other important metric is your ratio of technical forum posts to "off topic" forum posts.

It's an imperfect system, but if you see a 4-star "Top Contributor" you can pretty well trust that the advice/answers they give are accurate while a person with 10,000+ posts but without the badge is probably only posting a bunch of drivel(there are a few in the latter category).

 

[Julienne]

Yeah I’m waiting for that 👎🏿 Since ages. Please bring it already. Alot people deserves it.
[automerge]1593403819[/automerge]

I also want the downvote button. Sometimes I vehemently disagree but would rather not comment and risk being banned. Report is not helpful in such cases.

I totally agree. Alot of members are banned for minor disagreements. And some just gets away with it.

 

[annk]

I totally agree. Alot of members are banned for minor disagreements. And some just gets away with it.

This isn't true - disagreements are just fine. In fact, it could be argued that without disagreements, there would be no interesting discussions.

Members are never banned for anything other than rules violations.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

This isn't true - disagreements are just fine. In fact, it could be argued that without disagreements, there would be no interesting discussions.

Members are never banned for anything other than rules violations.

Unfortunately it’s not always as clear cut as that though is it? Admins can interpret things completely wrong and people get unfairly punished on certain occasions.

 

[annk]

Unfortunately it’s not always as clear cut as that though is it?

Yes, the claim in @Julienne's post is clear cut. Users are not banned for minor disagreements, which is what she wrote. Users are banned for rules violations. It's perfectly fine to disagree with another user, whether the disagreement is minor or major. But if a user breaks a rule while disagreeing, that post will be moderated. Not because of the disagreement, but rather because of the rule violation.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Yes, the claim in @Julienne's post is clear cut. Users are not banned for minor disagreements, which is what she wrote. Users are banned for rules violations. It's perfectly fine to disagree with another user, whether the disagreement is minor or major. But if a user breaks a rule while disagreeing, that post will be moderated. Not because of the disagreement, but rather because of the rule violation.

My point is that rule violations are not clear cut when those reviewing them have the ability to apply incorrect interpretations to what they are reading. Its all well having a detailed rule code for the forum but I am not convinced its followed correctly by those enforcing it. Just my opinion.

I do think an 'up and down' system would save a lot of bickering on here though.

 

[annk]

My point is that rule violations are not clear cut when those reviewing them have the ability to apply incorrect interpretations to what they are reading. Its all well having a detailed rule code for the forum but I am not convinced its followed correctly by those enforcing it. Just my opinion.

It's not a perfect system certainly (we can make a mistake), and on the other hand not every complaint is equal to a mistake (the user who complains is not necessarily right). Someone has to make a decision at some point, and that job rests with the staff. I understand that users will have varying opinions about the decisions that are made - it's inevitable.

I can at least say that when we catch a mistake ourselves or a user points something out and we agree, we reverse moderation and apologize. And we learn from it - we take it seriously when we make a mistake. Sometimes users will be sure we're still wrong, even after the admins do a thorough review and don't decide in favor of the user. This is where the staff and users will sometimes have to agree to disagree.

I do think an 'up and down' system would save a lot of bickering on here though.

You may be right, even though it caused problems last time. I can mention that there are concrete complaints associated with downvoting, but I can't speculate whether the complaints would outweigh the benefits, such as the one you predict.

Personally I think that downvoting would be great if it were only used by users who wanted to show disagreement with post content. That could both help avoid bickering AND be a good rating system for responses in tech discussions. Unfortunately there's potential for abuse.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

It's not a perfect system certainly (we can make a mistake), and on the other hand not every complaint is equal to a mistake (the user who complains is not necessarily right). Someone has to make a decision at some point, and that job rests with the staff. I understand that users will have varying opinions about the decisions that are made - it's inevitable.

I can at least say that when we catch a mistake ourselves or a user points something out and we agree, we reverse moderation and apologize. And we learn from it - we take it seriously when we make a mistake. Sometimes users will be sure we're still wrong, even after the admins do a thorough review and don't decide in favor of the user. This is where the staff and users will sometimes have to agree to disagree.

I think 'agreeing to disagree' is good advice when its a different opinion with no real impact, like posters disagreeing which iPhone is better. When the impact is a poster losing posting privileges due to an admin review misinterpreting the intent/wording of a post, then its hugely unfair to the poster who has lost out. It creates a distrust towards those moderating the site which is often unnecessary if a more objective approach had been taken.

You may be right, even though it caused problems last time. I can mention that there are concrete complaints associated with downvoting, but I can't speculate whether the complaints would outweigh the benefits, such as the one you predict.

Personally I think that downvoting would be great if it were only used by users who wanted to show disagreement with post content. That could both help avoid bickering AND be a good rating system for responses in tech discussions. Unfortunately there's potential for abuse.

I can appreciate this system could be abused by posters wanting to discredit each other due to a personal dislike etc. I suppose it could be worth trying.

 

[annk]

I think 'agreeing to disagree' is good advice when its a different opinion with no real impact, like posters disagreeing which iPhone is better. When the impact is a poster losing posting privileges due to an admin review misinterpreting the intent/wording of a post, then its hugely unfair to the poster who has lost out. It creates a distrust towards those moderating the site which is often unnecessary if a more objective approach had been taken.

I think this is just the way it rolls when one set of people is tasked with enforcing rules. There will always be some that simply don't agree with how those rules are enforced, don't trust the people doing the enforcing, and/or feel that they are being treated unfairly - regardless of how carefully those in charge carry out moderation. Users with whom we agree will tend to trust us, users with whom we disagree will sometimes distrust us (I say sometimes because I don't think it's always the case).