Like/Thank You/Points System

[Dual Cee]

Ok this is completle weird almost a hundred people voted and the results are still exact 50% pro 50% contra how do we solve this, because I don't think many people will vote soon.

[~Shockwave~]

good grief. this has gotten us nowhere...

[Tilius]

If we disregard the poll results, then, and instead look at the reasoning behind people's decisions, the NO vote has demonstrated a more well-argued position. I think a lot of the YES votes were 'ER I DUNNO YA PROBLY' votes, rather than 'YES AND HERE'S AN AMAZING REASON WHY' votes. Besides, these 'like' systems are what you use on moron-hubs where intelligent discussion is discouraged, and I like to think that this isn't one of those places. Even though I know it is. KIDDING.

 

Seems that the 50% who don't want it are more enthusiastic about not wanting it than the 50% who voted in favour of it, basically, because the latter group didn't really present any decent arguments.

 

LIKE THIS POST IF YOU AGREE!

 

- Tilius

Edited December 3, 2012 by Tilius

[bonesiii]

I agree, Tilius. I "kinda" want it, but eh; that seems to be the feeling in general among those for it.

 

Incidentally, my math is again showing an even tie, now at 44/44 (votes). I don't think I've ever seen a poll so consistently split. I'd call this as "no clear winner" in terms of votes alone, and go with Tilius's reasoning as the tiebreaker, myself.

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

If we disregard the poll results, then, and instead look at the reasoning behind people's decisions, the NO vote has demonstrated a more well-argued position. I think a lot of the YES votes were 'ER I DUNNO YA PROBLY' votes, rather than 'YES AND HERE'S AN AMAZING REASON WHY' votes. Besides, these 'like' systems are what you use on *snip* where intelligent discussion is discouraged, and I like to think that this isn't one of those places. Even though I know it is. KIDDING. Seems that the 50% who don't want it are more enthusiastic about not wanting it than the 50% who voted in favour of it, basically, because the latter group didn't really present any decent arguments. LIKE THIS POST IF YOU AGREE! - Tilius

#END QUOTE Another fine example of a well-reasoned argument. But seriousely, you can't just say everyone who disagrees with you is being unreasonable, no one will listen. Enthusiasim is not a valid way measure reason. As for why those in favor of it aren't giving "amazing reasons" why there should be a "like" system, it seems to be the general concencus among those in favor that's it's not that big a deal, it's those against it who seem to be making a big deal about it. Maybe it reduces pointless posts, maybe it reduces meaningful discussion, maybe it even does a little of both, but personaly, I doubt it does much of either. It's just a fun little feature that at the end of the day doesn't make a big difference. Edited December 3, 2012 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[fishers64]

If we disregard the poll results, then, and instead look at the reasoning behind people's decisions, the NO vote has demonstrated a more well-argued position. I think a lot of the YES votes were 'ER I DUNNO YA PROBLY' votes, rather than 'YES AND HERE'S AN AMAZING REASON WHY' votes. Besides, these 'like' systems are what you use on moron-hubs where intelligent discussion is discouraged, and I like to think that this isn't one of those places. Even though I know it is. KIDDING. Seems that the 50% who don't want it are more enthusiastic about not wanting it than the 50% who voted in favour of it, basically, because the latter group didn't really present any decent arguments. LIKE THIS POST IF YOU AGREE! - Tilius

Says the guy who doesn't want this system to exist. And actually, I disagree with this line of reasoning, because we haven't really produced too many arguments. It's the people for it that are making the long-winded posts, trying to defeat our arguments, which are: Such a system would: 1. Discourage discussion2. Turn BZPower into a popularity contest I submit that those arguments are pretty solid, especially number 2. I mean, really, such is the nature of the thing. It's like the old hot topics list and people trying to get more likes. The old HT list generated complaints about people creating mindless topics just to get there - this is just more of the same. Worse if there were publicly visible names telling who liked what. That just creates cliquish groups of people banding together to get more likes. People who don't like stuff very often will be viewed as stuck up snobs (or inactive). Visiting a topic and not liking it will be seen as a slap in the face. And so on. Mostly it just takes away your ability to save your face by keeping your mouth shut. People will see your name in a topic and think you should respond because "you have no excuse" not to. After all, just as simple as pressing a button. Evil. * * * However, I sadly suspect that the implementation of this system is only a matter of time: The last poll on the subject: Should BZP have a Like Button? registered a pretty strong opposition to the thing. 57/37. Thus, the trend is moving towards a system. So all of you who want this should just wait. Eventually, the majority will agree with you.

[Lyichir]

Nice to see that my lines of reasoning have been completely ignored by the opponents of such a system who think this is an open-and-shut discussion.

 

I haven't seen any evidence that such a system would detract from discussion or turn posting into a popularity contest. All the evidence of these issues has been anecdotal.

 

BZPower already has features that often turn into a popularity contest on other sites, like post count. Do you know why this doesn't become a problem on BZPower? Because BZPower has rules in place to prevent this. Rules that say posts have to be substantive. Systems in place that keep posts from counting in forums like the Voting Booth and COT. Obviously a "like" system would necessitate new rules, such as rules against "petitioning" for likes, and systems that eliminate any sort of "like total" from showing up on member profiles. With these sort of things in place, I don't think the second issue would be much of an issue at all.

 

As for the first? I see no reason why anyone who had something valuable to contribute to a discussion would choose to "like" something instead. Likes would supplement posts, not replace them. What you WOULD see is an increase in feedback from members who might not have been able to contribute otherwise. If any posts would be discouraged, it would be the ones which don't contribute anything meaningful to discussions. I see that as a positive, not a negative.

The only reason there's more enthusiasm from the anti- faction than from the pro- faction is that at worst, nothing will change on BZPower, and members who are already here to vote on this topic have already decided that they like it here. But if contentedness with the status quo means that we should never try to improve things, very little progress would be made. And it should be considered that improvements could potentially make BZPower more accessible to newcomers, which there have been fewer of since Bionicle ended.

[~Shockwave~]

Nice to see that my lines of reasoning have been completely ignored by the opponents of such a system who think this is an open-and-shut discussion.

 

I haven't seen any evidence that such a system would detract from discussion or turn posting into a popularity contest. All the evidence of these issues has been anecdotal.

 

BZPower already has features that often turn into a popularity contest on other sites, like post count. Do you know why this doesn't become a problem on BZPower? Because BZPower has rules in place to prevent this. Rules that say posts have to be substantive. Systems in place that keep posts from counting in forums like the Voting Booth and COT. Obviously a "like" system would necessitate new rules, such as rules against "petitioning" for likes, and systems that eliminate any sort of "like total" from showing up on member profiles. With these sort of things in place, I don't think the second issue would be much of an issue at all.

 

As for the first? I see no reason why anyone who had something valuable to contribute to a discussion would choose to "like" something instead. Likes would supplement posts, not replace them. What you WOULD see is an increase in feedback from members who might not have been able to contribute otherwise. If any posts would be discouraged, it would be the ones which don't contribute anything meaningful to discussions. I see that as a positive, not a negative.

The only reason there's more enthusiasm from the anti- faction than from the pro- faction is that at worst, nothing will change on BZPower, and members who are already here to vote on this topic have already decided that they like it here. But if contentedness with the status quo means that we should never try to improve things, very little progress would be made. And it should be considered that improvements could potentially make BZPower more accessible to newcomers, which there have been fewer of since Bionicle ended.

 

that's not it at all. at least not me. the problem I have with this is, there is a "no sociol networks rule" the main one I can think of has this. by implimenting this, we are implementing one of the reasons we can't discuss them. granted, that doesn't mean anything, It's mostly just the fact that I dislike rules like that in general...

 

so, basicly, I say that unless we can discuss that site, this system will only make us the very thing that's being blocked.

 

I'm more in favor of reworking the rules first.

[Lyichir]

Out of curiosity, I know they couldn't be mentioned here by default, but does anyone know any examples of sites which originally lacked such a function and were made worse by the addition of it? Many people are accusing sites with "likes" of discouraging discussion and having a less thoughtful userbase, but the only ones I know of with this functionality originated with it, have plenty of discussion despite it, and the quality of their userbases is not necessarily due to that feature.Also, would it be possible for BZPower to institute a change like this on a trial basis, say, for a month or so? It'd be easier to come to a decision if there were actually some evidence for or against BZP instituting such a feature, instead of everyone having to decide based on anecdotes and gut feelings.

[bonesiii]

To those asking for evidence a "like" system can turn bad -- it's more "Dislike" or thumbs-down type systems that can create problems, as it encourages hostility. Pure positive (or neutral) likes, not sure, though. But it is logical that given human nature some people may post less and use it instead. It's the sort of thing that by definition would be hard to document, but that doesn't prove it doesn't happen.

 

(I presume we're only considering a positive/neutral system.)

 

Shockwave, "social network" is a rather loose term that technically applies to everything humans do, including certainly forums, so not sure that is relevant. The main issue with "that site" is that it encourages the public posting of private information such as real names (there are even certain cyberbullies out there that will demand it!), and various other non-kid-friendly issues. That really has nothing to do with whether BZP will have a like feature or not...

[Dual Cee]

Out of curiosity, I know they couldn't be mentioned here by default, but does anyone know any examples of sites which originally lacked such a function and were made worse by the addition of it? Many people are accusing sites with "likes" of discouraging discussion and having a less thoughtful userbase, but the only ones I know of with this functionality originated with it, have plenty of discussion despite it, and the quality of their userbases is not necessarily due to that feature.Also, would it be possible for BZPower to institute a change like this on a trial basis, say, for a month or so? It'd be easier to come to a decision if there were actually some evidence for or against BZP instituting such a feature, instead of everyone having to decide based on anecdotes and gut feelings.

I would use a one month trial and then revote to see if the people like it.

[Blessed Blade]

Bones: And the fact that anything goes with content, to add to that. That probably adds to the fact that it's not allowed as well. =P But it's definitely not because of a Like system. 0_o

[Tilius]

But seriousely, you can't just say everyone who disagrees with you is being unreasonable, no one will listen.

Well, I'm not. It's just nobody has really come forward with any amazing reason in favour of it, whilst plenty of people have put forward decent reasons against it.

Enthusiasim is not a valid way measure reason.

Nope, but it's a great way of measuring a response when a poll result presents a 50:50 split - it's half the reason why poll topics are TOPICS, not just polls, because discussion is important. If one 50% is passionately against it, and most of the other 50% gave it about 5 seconds thought and voted and then probably forgot they even voted, then the votes of the former 50% should be given more weight.

As for why those in favor of it aren't giving "amazing reasons" why there should be a "like" system, it seems to be the general concencus among those in favor that's it's not that big a deal, it's those against it who seem to be making a big deal about it.

That....that's exactly what I'm saying. You post like you're disagreeing, yet you're agreeing with me.(Also, you seriously censored the phrase 'moron-hub'?)

Says the guy who doesn't want this system to exist.

And actually, I disagree with this line of reasoning, because we haven't really produced too many arguments. It's the people for it that are making the long-winded posts, trying to defeat our arguments

.....is it?

Such a system would: 1. Discourage discussion2. Turn BZPower into a popularity contest I submit that those arguments are pretty solid, especially number 2. I mean, really, such is the nature of the thing. It's like the old hot topics list and people trying to get more likes. The old HT list generated complaints about people creating mindless topics just to get there - this is just more of the same.

So....you agree as well?Seriously, don't open with 'I disagree' and then go on to agree with me....Still, provoked some more responses on this so hopefully it'll help with the decision making.- Tilius

[fishers64]

Does anyone have evidence that a "like" system would actually improve BZPower? Most of what I've seen is denouncing the opposition - I would like (pun not intended) to see the reasons why the administration should go to the time and trouble to implement such a system.Edit:

 

And actually, I disagree with this line of reasoning, because we haven't really produced too many arguments. It's the people for it that are making the long-winded posts, trying to defeat our arguments

.....is it?

Such a system would: 1. Discourage discussion2. Turn BZPower into a popularity contest I submit that those arguments are pretty solid, especially number 2. I mean, really, such is the nature of the thing. It's like the old hot topics list and people trying to get more likes. The old HT list generated complaints about people creating mindless topics just to get there - this is just more of the same.

So....you agree as well?Seriously, don't open with 'I disagree' and then go on to agree with me....Still, provoked some more responses on this so hopefully it'll help with the decision making.- Tilius

In your post, you made two points:1. That all of us who don't want a like system feel more strongly about it than those who do.2. That a like system should not exist on BZPower. I disagree with point 1, agree with point 2. Edited December 3, 2012 by fishers64

[bonesiii]

The only pro argument I'm aware of, which I mentioned in my original post, is that it would give an option for those that tend to just post "I like it" spam in the creative forums (and "I agree" posts in some other contexts). I do have to delete these often in General Art for example.

 

 

 

But I'm convinced now that this isn't a good enough reason. The thing is, the people making those posts are those that haven't spent the time to read the rules anyways, so they probably will keep making spammish posts. A better solution would be for their posts to have actual content specifying what they like (and/or dislike) about a creative work / reasoning / etc.

 

And while it might reduce those spammish posts a little, it might also reduce the amount of detailed posts, as right now there is a positive motivator for people to post those details. This would provide a way around that motivator, and I think that's the biggest problem with it.

Edited December 3, 2012 by bonesiii

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

 

But seriousely, you can't just say everyone who disagrees with you is being unreasonable, no one will listen.

Well, I'm not. It's just nobody has really come forward with any amazing reason in favour of it, whilst plenty of people have put forward decent reasons against it.

#END QUOTE

There are truths in this world beyond what you believe. You can't just say those who agree with you are more reasonable, that itself, is unreasonable. . . Also, I have seen reasoned arguments refuting arguments that it will reduce meaningful discussion, but still no one has explained why someone who had something important to say would feel satisfied by simply pressing a "like" button. Just because they can, does not mean they will.

 

Enthusiasim is not a valid way measure reason.

Nope, but it's a great way of measuring a response when a poll result presents a 50:50 split - it's half the reason why poll topics are TOPICS, not just polls, because discussion is important. If one 50% is passionately against it, and most of the other 50% gave it about 5 seconds thought and voted and then probably forgot they even voted, then the votes of the former 50% should be given more weight.

#END QUOTE

Why do you imply those voting in favor gave it 5 seconds thought but those who voted againts gave it more thought? You have no statistical data for this. 99 people voted but there are only 55 posts with posters posting more than once, seems like most people just voted.

 

 

As for why those in favor of it aren't giving "amazing reasons" why there should be a "like" system, it seems to be the general concencus among those in favor that's it's not that big a deal, it's those against it who seem to be making a big deal about it.

That....that's exactly what I'm saying. You post like you're disagreeing, yet you're agreeing with me.

#END QUOTE

Do not twist my words to support yourself. Original quote:

As for why those in favor of it aren't giving "amazing reasons" why there should be a "like" system, it seems to be the general concencus among those in favor that's it's not that big a deal, it's those against it who seem to be making a big deal about it. Maybe it reduces pointless posts, maybe it reduces meaningful discussion, maybe it even does a little of both, but personaly, I doubt it does much of either. It's just a fun little feature that at the end of the day doesn't make a big difference.

#END QUOTE

Your "amazing reasons" are blowing a tiny little feature that most people will probably forget about, out of proportion.

(Also, you seriously censored the phrase 'Snippity Snip Snip'?)

#END QUOTE

You basically insulted everyone who uses other and more successful social networks than BZP. I do not condone this, and thus I removed it from my post.

Edited December 4, 2012 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[bonesiii]

Are we seriously going to fight over even this?

 

If there is some reason someone is tempted to, though -- don't. Discuss logic, not insults.

 

 

 

 

Also, I have seen reasoned arguments refuting arguments that it will reduce meaningful discussion, but still no one has explained why someone who had something important to say would feel satisfied by simply pressing a "like" button. Just because they can, does not mean they will.

 

 

I just did in the post above yours. But here it is again -- human nature. As it is, there is positive motivation for people to post details -- the desire for social interaction and responses to creative expression, plus the rules against mere "I like it" spam (in the creative forums I'm mainly talking about). This generates motivation to post details. That way, in order to give that feedback, you are forced to think, and post those thoughts, or your post is deleted. Add a like button instead of that, and that would be removed.

 

It doesn't take up as much space as a spam post, so there's a tradeoff, admittedly, which is why I'm kinda "eh" for it to some extent or not diametrically opposed anyways -- but basically it would systematically welcome spam while not encouraging details, except for the superficial post count motivator (which I don't care about and don't encourage caring about lol).

 

Again, there is no real way to quantify this. I can attest that I feel that motivation when I make posts personally, and others can say whether or not this is true of them too. It doesn't mean a like button would actually stop their ability to do so, but this should never be the question; making it so is a big mistake because in reality human nature and basic psychology does affect behavior.

 

Our big priority really should be finding positive ways to encourage more discussion. This is basically irrelevant to that, and it actually likely discourages it, even if it may be to a small degree. I would hope that we spend our energy trying to find positive additional motivators to discussion rather than arguing about whether a discouragement is small enough to tolerate...

 

 

more successful social networks than BZP

Do you mean more successful Bionicle forums? There are none. Other "social networks" (forums and comment systems) may have more members and activity, but they're not Bionicle forums, so the comparison is not apt.

 

And, the main point I wanted to make to this is, there's more than one way to judge "success" and BZP intentionally judges it more by quality, not quantity (though we have the most activity and members as well of any moderated Bionicle site -- leaving out the LEGO.com forums which essentially are not moderated and are just spam oceans).

Edited December 4, 2012 by bonesiii

[Tilius]

There are truths in this world beyond what you believe. You can't just say those who agree with you are more reasonable, that itself, is unreasonable. . .

I'm not. I'm saying one group put together a decent argument, the other group, for the most part, clicked 'yes' and didn't post why. It's like believing a statement or believing one based on facts - you're more likely to believe (not necessarily agree with, though) the one with the facts. It's a similar situation here - 'I have X opinion and here's a good reason why' is more reasonable than 'I have X opinion'. Basic.

Why do you imply those voting in favor gave it 5 seconds thought but those who voted againts gave it more thought?

BECAUSE MORE OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED NO CAME ON HERE AND EXPLAINED THEIR RESPONSE I'VE SAID IT LIKE 5 TIMES and relax. I'm not going to assume that people thought about their decision if they didn't post a coherent argument. I'm assuming stupidity, here, which is the better of the two assumptions to make.

Do not twist my words to support yourself.

I'm not. The sentence I quoted is basically a rephrasing of my entire point. It isn't a big deal, and yet people people seem to be passionately explaining why it shouldn't happen. There are fewer people passionately explaining why it should happen, because it's not a big deal to them. But it is a big deal to the people taking the time to write looooong posts on it. So those making the looooong posts care more about it and demonstrate they've thought about it, and so their opinion is worth more because they clearly care.

You basically insulted everyone who uses other and more successful social networks than BZP. I do not condone this, and thus I removed it from my post.

Well, I didn't. I use social networks. I just insulted the simpletons who use them - the sort who name their baby Hashtag, for example. There's a good number of regular, thinking people, but the vast majority are morons. I'm sure they're very nice people, but that doesn't mean they're not morons.

 

I've changed my mind - we should have a LIKE system. And since decent reasoning is apparently overrated, I don't need to add anything more. There, that's one less vote for NO and one more vote for YES. That's decided it then, good, now we can all shut up. TOPIC CLOSED.

 

WAIT I HAVE A REASON. If we had like/dislike on member pages which weren't anonymous, I could more easily keep track of who likes me and who doesn't, so I can avoid any discussion with those that don't like me because they're a waste of time. That'd actually be convenient. I lose track over who I've offended over the years so it'd be nice to have a list.

- Tilius

Edited December 4, 2012 by Tilius

[Black Six]

Thanks everyone for your feedback.