Only 21 "likes" allowed in 24 hours?


(Jeremy Apthorp) #41

Perhaps when people like your posts, you get extra likes? … hm! (although, you don’t want to encourage people being all “PLS LIKE THIS!!1”)


(Jackdoh) #42

It can be shown when you click the like button, maybe on a tooltip. “You have given 4 likes, each of your likes count as 0.25”. Or don’t show any visual cue. I think even if the user doesn’t realize the underlying math, it still works to balance between someone who thoughtfully like a post and someone who is compulsively like most posts. And the balancing is more fluid than a hard limit.

My pet peeve with reddit voting system is that someone can go on a up/downvote rampage, and their votes would count 100x more than a sensible voter. That is not democracy.


(Shad Sterling) #43

I suspect any fixed limit will trip up new users when they join an existing site with lots of discussions already underway, read a large number of those discussions, and like a nontrivial portion of what they read. (@BhaelOchon, is that how you hit the limit here?) The same sort of thing might happen occasionally when established users spend some time getting caught up.

I think the important case of abuse that needs to be limited is users liking posts without actually reading them, for which I think the best prevention might be to require viewing time per post of at least some lowish estimate of required reading time - for which the like button tooltip (or the button itself) could show a countdown. Overly concerned admins could have a plugin that automatically increases the time for users who match some heuristic detection of “like-spamming.”

The less important case of abuse is users who like everything they read (but do actually read), for which I think the best prevention might be to explain to users what the feature is for when it is invoked and they might not already understand. This could be done in a popup when the feature is used for the first time (~“Since this is the first post you’ve liked, …”) or some other criteria is met (~“You’ve just liked 5 consecutive posts, …”) with a message about expected use (~“only like the messages which add the most value to the discussion”) and a few links (e.g. to site policy on “like-spamming”).

I think both of these would be discoverable and non-punitive, so they would be unlikely to frustrate users or drive them away from a site (or just the like button), but might require admins to adopt a “like-spamming” policy.


(Bill Ayakatubby) #44

In part, yes.


(Chris Hanel) #45

I strongly dislike this suggestion, because it assumes abuse and discourages use of a core feature. If I really like a post at the beginning of the day, I don’t want that to be devalued simply because I decided to like other things.

My personal belief is that the act of liking something should always have the same function, and I shouldn’t have to fear my other actions devaluing my attempt to reward another user for contributing to the community. If you’re afraid of abuse, don’t allow likes to have as strong of an influence over the system.


(Jackdoh) #46

I think users who are intentionally abusing the like button (to promote their alter egos, etc) are equally damaging as the user who simple like everything for other reasons (easily entertained/favorite topic/stupid jokes/celebrity users).
And the latter group cannot be encouraged to be more selective by a message [quote=“Polyergic, post:43, topic:798”]only like the messages which add the most value to the discussion[/quote] Because they are not mass-liking by mistake.

To me, at least, “Likes” are indicator of exceptionalism. Different people have different opinion of what is exceptional. But I don’t think different users should have different voting power. The hard limit is a step toward balancing this, however there will still be people who make sure they reach the hard limit everyday versus users who “likes” only when they actually like something.


(Jackdoh) #47

It’s not perfect. But with a hard limit, once we reach the limit and see a post that’s really deserving a “Like” , we will be forced to go back and reevaluate all our liked posts and undo one of them. Or more likely we just grunt and forget about it. That seems more abrupt to me than an encouragement to spend our likes more judiciously right from the start.

A “Like” unlike a reply, is very low cost in terms of action required, so it tends to be instinctive and emotional. And I have to be honest, anything that can slow down the inevitable rise of pun threads, gets my support. :slight_smile:


(Peter Stoinov) #48

What about the hard limit be dispersed in the time? Instead to get 30 likes per day, you get 1 like per 45 minutes.
This way you still get the overall likes limit per day, but you also prevent user from going on a “liking spree” and instead forcing them to evaluate what they like while reading in a more manageable time frame.
This basically is a version of my previous suggestion:

[quote=“stoinov, post:21, topic:798”]implement percentage system based on arbitrary timeframe. Like

you have {value}% likes from the total amount of posts in the last {time interval}

This way you will pretty much specify the scarcity of the likes on the fly.
You could also implement different logic for different categories/tags.[/quote]
In this case the formula could be:

 you have {value}% likes for the next {time interval}

With such formula you could have additional logic that will for instance accumulate unused likes for certain period, but not indefinitely in order to prevent fake accounts that just accumulate likes for spam.

Or maybe the more you like the more you have to wait for the next like, after arbitrary initial value. This is similar to the way most systems prevent brute-forcing, which is kind of the same situation here. And if you gain enough trust, you get unlimited Likes.

In general, I think some kind of dynamic system for likes would be a lot better than just some hard limits thrown around or worse - devaluation of some people likes. This way everybody will feel equal when clicking the Like button.


(Alex R) #49

This is the only part of your post I disagree with. “Likes” are indicators of support and value. They are by virtue of affecting a user’s rep a distributed endorsement of a user (for posting something in particular), and by virtue of affecting a topic’s visibility an endorsement of the content of the post.

They provide, for new users, a way of gauging a community’s preferences (e.g. “This post has 100 likes; it must be exemplary.”).

It is secondary that likes must be scarce, not primary.

So I can’t like two posts in the same half hour? Or do I accumulate likes until my “like bucket” is full at the rate of 1 per 45 minutes?

I’d rate limit based on an arithmetic series, personally (e.g. your first like past 30 or whatever the limit is takes 1 minute to be available; the next takes 2 more minutes, the next takes 3 more, etc.). This would limit like-spam but provide leniency for legitimate users who use a lot of likes.

Like limit should (in ideal) be determined by the following factors:

  • Post volume (or post rate)
  • Expected (or desired) average time to read a post
  • Desired perceived scarcity of likes (r/mylittlepony wants more likes than r/askscience but fewer likes than r/circlejerk, to use a reddit analogy)
  • Expected (or calculated) user involvement (fora for hikikomori computer users might want more likes per day than fora that expect to be accessed only a few hours a week)

In practice… I don’t know how to put them together, so until someone more knowledgeable than me figures it out, hand set hard limit is good enough, although I prefer a hand set soft limit.


(Peter Stoinov) #50

For all of your concerns I put some suggestion in my previous post - different categories have different limits, there is initial value of likes that you can use, which then replenish at certain rate based on a formula including various parameters you pointed out. And finally, the increasing time between availability of likes after being used for a certain period. These techniques are easy (at least I think so) to implement. They just need good UI in the admin panel in order for normal users, that decide to host forums, to be able to set them according to their needs.


(Ben Doerr) #51

I think the great thing about how likes are implemented is that each community can determine if they want likes to be a mark of [quote=“jackdoh, post:46, topic:798”]exceptional[/quote] or if likes are just plain old [quote=“rpglover64, post:49, topic:798”]indicators of support and value[/quote] by how they configure the setting. If a community really wants to allow users to like just about as much as they want they can set the max_likes_per_day setting to 1,000,000 while a community that values conservative use of like can leave it low.


(Jeff Atwood) #52

Our general philosophy:

  • Keep it simple. No complex “how many likes do you get?” formula, just n per day that the forum owner can configure to taste.

  • Show you’re running out of daily likes only when you get close to the limit. I don’t want to create stress about how many you have, until you’re near the limit.


(mountain) #53

Bumping this because I just hit the likes-allowance ceiling.

My suggestion is to account time in between the last login and the one for current. I got out of the hospital today/March 6th (Best birthday gift, ever!) from being admitted on Monday and I’m reading/browsing every single topic I’ve missed. Basically, I’m catching up on all the likes I would give over the last four days and got hit with the ceiling.

Any other suggestions? Or should I consider this a very rare case and wait the 18 hours?

EDIT: I am now on hour eleven of the No-Likes-For-You Watch and I think I’m going through like withdraw in the form of some kind of “Reverse Operant Conditioning”. If I may use an analogy to describe the sensation in my brain when I click a like -> get an error: imagine a Predator picking up a cookie he thinks is his due to past experience and Dutch appears out of nowhere to say otherwise.

(The above edit is entirely in good fun and a way to creatively and safely output my current slight frustration with this edge case.)


Badge Discussion: Like Ratios + Spending Likes