I can’t speak for Tom, but it’s certainly never been the case for me. It’s purely about it being easier to click the like button than compose a reply that is worth posting. It is absolutely always an inferior way of expressing myself.
habibi
1692
I was nodding my head in agreement to this statement.
or, I could just Like it instead of posting this two useless statements :)
Not at all. Even plebian workaday posts saying “thanks, I’ll give that a shot” and the like offer some value. Not all conversation can-- or even should– be scintillating.
There’s a distinct difference between an ordinary not sparklingly witty parcel of conversation and a shitpost, like everybody posting “you go girl”, which was mildly amusing at best the very first time and then instantly grew tiresome. Those are a net negative.
You do not go, girl. Do. Not. Go.
This is where you lose me. You appear to be saying that you would rather put some content out there, and that likes are inferior to doing so, but you opt for likes just because. I need more than that. Is it just laziness? Why go for the inferior option when you clearly have such antipathy towards likes?
I dunno. I was more entertained by the progression of those posts than I have ever been by a like.
It is mostly laziness, yes. (Well, and in most of the circumstances I’ve done so, the prediction that I’m not going to get the return on the investment of my energy that I want in the form of replies, so I might as well take the easy road. I hope that things wouldn’t get that bad here.)
One of the most obvious examples of this, for me anyway, is a reply to a tough post, for example in the Having Cancer thread. I personally strongly feel that a written response in those threads is important, no matter how awkwardly and insufficiently worded. But it can be very difficult to write such a post. So if likes as a substitute are available, I might use that instead, even though I know, to me (!), that like is insuffcient. When likes are off, I don’t have that choice, so I post anyway. At least, I did, because after the debacle in this thread I find I’m hesitant to do either.
And yes, I understand that many people would not respond to those threads at all, precisely for the above mentioned reason, and that likes are a plus there. A very valid point. I just posted this to respond to divedivedives question, not to debate that particular issue again.
Ah, I see what you’re getting at. I honestly thought you were slinging an insult about my posts being worthless. :) My bad, legowarrior.
But I do disagree with your premise that the value of a post is based on some measure of quality. The act of posting has value in that you’re participating in a community. You are a member of that community and unless you’re rudely interrupting someone or shouting over people or being a dick, your expressions aren’t just valuable, they’re fundamental. Your expressions are the building blocks of this community. When we talk to each other, the interaction itself is arguably more important than what we’re saying.
Does that make sense?
-Tom
Teiman
1700
It makes sense. And is a interesting view on things.
*shots at the sky with a american made ak-47 to celebrate*
Thank you Tom. I am sorry about how my initial post had come off that way. Things like that might be why I like Likes.
Anyway, I see your point, and I don’t completely disagree with it, but I still think the increase in people willing to make a some small level of effort to show appreciation and the reduction of clutter might still make Likes a net positive.
Post-Memorial Day things I am most excited about:
- Comey Testimony
- QT3 Like Decision
- Donuts (a timeless constant in my life)
Just because you say with conviction that something is bad, it doesn’t make it true. Perhaps “likes” are simply a more efficient way of expressing approval of a post without cluttering a thread with pointless verbiage. In fact this “You go, girl” phenomena is an excellent example of why likes can be preferable. They express an opinion in a far less obtrusive manner. Give me likes over trite commentary any time.
Razgon
1704
Just because you say with conviction that something is bad, it doesn’t make it true. Perhaps words are simply a more efficient way of expressing approval of a post without cluttering a thread with pointless likes.
I’d much rather people used their words, than trite likes any time.
Anyways - I’d be all for it if stusser made a skin for the forum without likes. That would enable us to have both our ways, even though I’d be sad to loose the comments from several people here, who would just use the far easier, and less likely to be antagonized over ,likes.
Clay
1705
I may abandon this forum forever if every. single. freaking. thread. ends up filled with repeated instances of “You go girl.”
Synth
1706
A theme that hides likes would be ok for me. As long as we’re allowed to set the title of people who use it to “Snowflake who needs a safe space from likes” that is.
Spam + vikings is an obvious reference to my childhood favorite show. I assumed this is what people were talking about the entire time…
Razgon
1708
And once again scorn and personale insults from the like crowd. Why is that kind of behaviour neccesary?
mono
1710
In the past, there are countless times I’ve appreciated a post, gotten a laugh from one, but move on. It’s good to have the like button to show a tiny bit of appreciation. It’s never stopped me from replying. Similarly, as DrCrypt expressed, it’s nice to see that someone felt that way about one of your posts.
I see the feature as additive, but I recognize it does have pitfalls (see stusser’s con list). Even if we add them back ‘permanently’ in a month, there’s no reason they can’t be turned off again, or re-evaluated, if they engender negative behavior.
