Could we have more likes, please?

[Walter Payton]

I'm back posting on B&C after a long hiatus. When I stopped posting earlier, there were no likes (or perhaps they had just come in). Now there are. I think this is a good development. However, I understand that we have a limited quota of likes per 24 hrs.

Is there a particular reason for this? I was upset to discover this today, because I've seen quite a few very insightful posts that I wasn't able to like because I was out.

[Grotsmasha]

I believe the quota started at 10, but am unsure if has remained there or was moved to 20.....

[Bryan Blaire]

Limited likes is a way to encourage additional discussion on things, rather than them simply becoming an easy way of agreeing without having to engage in discussion. The limitation is also to make the use of them more meaningful on the board, each user needs to really consider whether they want to Like something, because you may end up having to wait 24 hours before getting to use them again.

[Brother Tyler]

Up front, increasing the number of likes available to members is an option, and I'm not at all opposed. If we increase the quota, the trick will be in finding the "right" number.

 

Now we're not going to tell anyone how to use their likes, so what follows are merely my own thoughts and how I use them. This is important because it drives my own input into the discussion of how many likes members my have, as well as potential discussion on what we may increase the quota to.

 

I give likes to things like:

• Fully painted armies (minimum three colors and fully based, usually with some level of conversion and higher end of tabletop quality or better)
• Individual models converted and painted to a high quality (not necessarily Golden Daemon - just indicative of lots of work)
• Army background that is executed well (e.g., Index Astartes articles, similar backgrounds appended to armies, etc.)
• Battle Reports that are presented in such a way that I can readily understand how the game progressed, especially if thoughts behind tactics are provided
• Insightful posts that show both intellectual effort and constructiveness
• Humorous posts that lighten the mood (generally posts that help steer a topic back into the right direction)

The above could be summarized as me giving likes to posts that show constructive work on the part of the poster, things that enrich the hobby.

 

More importantly, here are the types of posts to which I don't give likes (these are things that are beyond the obvious posts that don't meet the requirements I've outlined above and which other members give likes to frequently):

• Mosts posts in the News, Rumors, and Forum Announcements forum, or news/rumors/announcements in other forums.

Yup, that's it. The reason for this is that these sorts of topics/posts aren't indicative of work on the part of the poster (other than learning about whatever it is we're talking about). For example, if GW makes a plastic Thunderhawk and I just happen to be the first person to post pictures of it here at the B&C, I haven't done any real work and don't deserve to have my reputation improved (via likes). GW is the one that has done the work (making the model). I'll make exceptions in that forum when discussion about a rumor leads to someone making a very insightful or constructive post, but you generally won't see me giving a like to the rumor itself.

 

Now truth be told, I simply don't have the time to go through the entire forum every day like I used to. This means that I don't give out likes to all of the posts that I see that meet my requirements, which is quite unfortunate. However, the limitations on my own time shouldn't mean that other members that have more time than me suffer. And just so we're clear, my own criteria for giving likes shouldn't be taken as how you should give out likes. If you want to give out likes to every post you see that correctly uses a four-syllable word, more power to you.

 

So the mods/admins will take another look at the number of likes members may give out in a single 24-hour period and determine if we should increase that number, and we'll get back with you soon to let you know the outcome.

[Kastor Krieg]

Thanks! I was about to post the same thing - often there's a thread that I'd be afraid of derailing with a spam of "yeah, I agree!", so I toss in a like. Also, some advice, some army shots, I just "like" what I see. It's a "thank you" or a "kudos!" in simplest form.

 

From what I've seen, inability to "like" doesn't make me post, it just makes me not do anything at all and makes me feel excluded. And with threads like we Templars run, or the fast paced news threads where you want to reward someone bringing some tasty morsel in, you run out of likes right quick.

There's also a problem with the timezones, because I've often woken up in Europe (Poland) to find I'm STILL blocked from liking because my last night's likefest was "today" already or it's still "yesterday".

[Xenith]

I don't think we need more likes.

 

I think I've only ever run out on one or two occasions since the system has been implemented.

 

If you find yourself running out a lot, you should think critically about what you choose to bestow favour upon. Pretend you're a chaos god, you don't grant your gifts to chaff.

[Brother Dallo]

I'll agree with what's been said here. I feel that having a limited number of likes gives them much more worth. Back in the day, I had a post going over at yaktribe gaming, where i got a reasonable number of likes on every single post, but it felt like it had less meaning because some members simply liked every single post they read in any thread ever. Don't get me wrong, it was still a nice sentiment, but it felt perhaps "cheaper" when giving out likes doesn't cost anything, even if it's just reducing your like availability for the day.

 

If I want to like something and have run out of likes, quite often I'll just come back another day, which I think is more meaningful, because it means that you make a conscience decision to come back another day to show your approval.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Dallo

[Sugarlessllama]

I wouldn't mind a few more likes as well. Like maybe five more?

[Brother Tyler]

The LIKES cap has been increased to 20 per 24 hour period.

The site averages about 973 new posts per day, so this means that members will be able to give a LIKE to one in every 48.65 posts (so about 1 in 50).

We're not going to tell you how to use your LIKES, but you'll have to figure out the criteria that work for you. I've posted my own criteria above, but even among the mods and admins there are different methodologies. Keep in mind, though, that the intent is for you to use your LIKES sparingly, indicating that you think a post is of high quality. LIKES here at the B&C aren't meant to be given out like candy - they are meant to indicate that you really like a post (I was tempted to change the name to "REALLY LIKES" ).

In concert with adjusting the LIKES cap, we've adjusted the reputation levels. Previously, we had two levels and they scaled very low. We've increased to five levels, starting much higher and scaling even higher. LIKES contribute to a member's reputation level. So you should give your LIKES out in a way that tells members that the recipient has contributed in a meaningful way to your enjoyment of the hobby. Reputation doesn't earn anyone any privileges - it's merely a rough indicator of how often a member has posted here in a manner that others appreciated significantly.

Please don't LIKE this post - save your LIKES for other things.

[Xenith]

Ok, but since we have more likes now, can we introduce a "SuperLike" for content that we thing really adds to the community here?

[Chaplain Lucifer]

Maybe the super like is already there. Maybe it's just writing: you did a wonderful job, we are proud to have you in this community.

 

Cheers!

[Jolemai]

Ok, but since we have more likes now, can we introduce a "SuperLike" for content that we thing really adds to the community here?

To be honest, whatever we do we are at the mercy of the forum software. Personally, I'd rather we could stack likes such as:

 

Like>Double like>Mega like>Ultra like>Monster like>Holy :cuss ad infinitum

 

But alas :(

[Brother Tyler]

No, there's no mechanic for qualifying LIKES. The concept of LIKES here at the B&C is the "super" LIKES being proposed. LIKES here aren't simple thumbs or likes such as would be seen at other social media sites. That's the whole point of why members have such a limited quantity. I think the key is for members to understand this principle - that LIKES here at the B&C are your way of saying that a post is a really good one and not just your run of the mill response.

 

Don't expect the LIKES cap to increase again.

[Othniel's Blade]

What if your like function doesn't refresh whatsoever? I haven't been able to use any in several months, at least.

[Brother Tyler]

It's an ongoing bug. Other members, including me, have noticed this. When you back out of the page and go back in (the hard way, not by hitting the back and forward buttons), your like should be showing.

[KrautScientist]

You know, guys, there's already a function for "super likes": It's called "comments" or "replies".

Just sayin'... ;)

[Brother Tyler]

You know, guys, there's already a function for "super likes": It's called "comments" or "replies".

Just sayin'...

Yeah, that might work if a member's reputation wasn't based on the likes they received. If reputation was driven by replies to one's post, your theory would work. However, such a mechanism would either limit likes to the original post (which isn't necessarily the post that is actually liked) or require a thread-based discussion construct rather than the linear construct the board software uses.

So since we want any post (not just the first) to have the potential to receive likes and we're not changing to some other software, your theory is invalid.

[Xenith]

As an aside, being related to likes but unsure where it goes in the forum - the little box on your profile that says how many likes you have total - I just noticed that mine has changed from good to noteworthy, or similar.

 

Can I ask how this is calculated? Absolute likes, or relative to total comments?

 

I'm asking because it should totally be the latter, for S/N ratio purposes. It'll have an effect on the people that spam post for likes.

[Brother Tyler]

It's on an absolute scale, but we just changed it. Previously, there were only two levels and they were set very low. Now there are more levels and each level scales by a factor (we're not going to tell you how many - y'all will have to figure that out on your own ;) ).

[Race Bannon]

People post to be liked?  I mean, isn't that up to the giver?

[KrautScientist]

You know, guys, there's already a function for "super likes": It's called "comments" or "replies".

Just sayin'...

Yeah, that might work if a member's reputation wasn't based on the likes they received. If reputation was driven by replies to one's post, your theory would work. However, such a mechanism would either limit likes to the original post (which isn't necessarily the post that is actually liked) or require a thread-based discussion construct rather than the linear construct the board software uses.

So since we want any post (not just the first) to have the potential to receive likes and we're not changing to some other software, your theory is invalid.

Now this is genuinely interesting, because I've never paid attention to the whole reputation angle: What does it actually do? Honest question here, I really don't know.

My original comment was supposed to touch on something that's a genuine issue to me, i.e. how I feel Likes as a mechanism encourage general laziness and only the tiniest part of (non)interaction -- sure, it's nice to receive many Likes, but if I post something that I am really proud of (and really invested in), and it gets a dozen Likes but not a single comment, that is hugely frustrating. To the point where I sometimes wish the forum would do away with Likes altogether. It's also the reason why I think Facebook is the worst possible forum for the hobby, because it encourages that form of (non)interaction above all else.

Sorry, I'm ranting... ;)

[Conn Eremon]

One would hope people like and comment, but I have a feeling most likes received without accompanying comments would have more than likely not commented anyway. The board is majority lurkers, and even the active folk spend more time just looking. If a post gets a dozen likes but fewer comments, without likes that post probably still wouldn't have gotten as many comments.

[KrautScientist]

@ Conn Eremon: See, that's where I disagree, at least in part: Sure, the bigger parts of Likes certainly wouldn't magically "transform" into comments, were Likes no longer an option. But I myself have been guilty in the past of liking something and then considering the matter closed, so to speak, with no further need for a follow-up comment. I am making an active effort to no longer to that, but I still think Likes do encourage a certain kind of laziness like that.

 

But I am well aware that there's really no simple solution to that, so yeah.

[IronDrake28]

I don't see the issue here. And liking a post isn't 'lazy'. If you like something then you like it, the person sees something they've posted has spurned someone to like it and they get some good feels.

[Brother Tyler]

Reputation doesn't give you anything tangible. It's just a quick visual indicator of how much content you've posted that others have liked. The two go hand in hand (likes & reputation), though, so likes are, and will remain, limited.

 

Sometimes I give a post a like and don't comment because I feel nothing further needs to be said. And sometimes I give a post a like and I comment, either on the post that I liked or on the subject at hand. That's just me, though. Your individual practices may vary.