The discussion explores whether the current ‘like’ system on the forum is sufficient to gauge post quality and if alternative options should be considered. Webinsane questions the reliance on likes, suggesting the system might be too narrow and closed-minded. erlend_sh counters that likes are effective 90% of the time and that the system is not about closed-mindedness but practicality. They also list potential alternatives like ‘detailed feedback,’ ‘expansion of options,’ and ‘customization.’ sam references a past discussion on the topic, while jesselperry notes that the like function is standard across most social and blog platforms, making it familiar and widely accepted.
Should likes be expanded? Are they really enough to mark the post content quality? Are we that closed-minded to have everything based on liking system. Should posts have alternative options next to the likes for example:
Dislike
Agree
Do not agree
Irrelevant Content
Funny
Useful
Helpful
Inappropriate
What is the value of the post author based on the “custom likes” above?
[quote=“Webinsane, post:1, topic:29968”]
Are they really enough to mark the post content quality?
[/quote]90% of the time they are, yes.
[quote=“Webinsane, post:1, topic:29968”]
Are we that closed-minded to have everything based on liking system.
[/quote]It’s not closed-mindedness, it’s good design.
Option abundancy…
I’ve seen many more cases of a “post opinion” system failing than succeeding.
There was an ancient discussion about this, we do not intend to add flavored likes to the core
I would say too that since virtually every social and blog platform in use has the similar heart/like function, it’s what 99% users are used to using. Anything different would confuse people and probably wouldn’t be used.