Important Questionnaire #10: Splitting the "Like" Rating

[Sunstone]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.


As you know, there are six "ratings" currently available for use by members. "Like", "Funny", "Winner", etc. Do you want to split the "Like" rating into an "Interesting" rating and an "Agree" rating? This would bring the total number of ratings to seven, and perhaps allow you to more precisely express why you "like" a post.


Please pick which one of these three options is closest to the truth. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: Yes, I want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION TWO: It does not matter to me either way whether the "Like" rating is split into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION THREE: No, I do not want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Option three. I'm not against having more ratings, but have yet to hear of any ideas pitched for them I'd vote yes on.

 

[Thief]

keep the like as is
you like it or you don't

but you could add a 'thumbs down'.....don't like

 

[74x12]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.


As you know, there are six "ratings" currently available for use by members. "Like", "Funny", "Winner", etc. Do you want to split the "Like" rating into an "Interesting" rating and an "Agree" rating? This would bring the total number of ratings to seven, and perhaps allow you to more precisely express why you "like" a post.


Please pick which one of these three options is closest to the truth. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: Yes, I want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION TWO: It does not matter to me either way whether the "Like" rating is split into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION THREE: No, I do not want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

Interesting idea, but I must say no thank you. Because I believe you can like a post without totally agreeing. So I would never say "agree" to a post that I thought was just flawed rather than being out right wrong. But if it's just slightly flawed then I can "like" it because I believe there is some redeeming feature of the post.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I said 3. I would instead split it into 'Like' and 'Agree' rather than 'Like' and 'Interesting'.

 

[Stevicus]

I was just thinking there should be a "Splunge" rating.

 

[sun rise]

I voted yes thinking of "nextdoor" which has: Thank, Like, Agree (+1), Haha, Wow and Sad. So I'm now agreeing with @Brickjectivity 's suggestion.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I guess I will come out of the shadows with my thoughts...

I think there is merits in something more diverse. But I'm not sure the best way of going about it. Ratings like "Respect" (the slang version of it meaning acknowledgement or similar to saying "Right on", not the standard definition), as well as I don't know if we are quite there yet, but maybe an "oy vey" or "agree to disagree" rating that adds positively to a person's frubal count. Maybe even a "good luck!" rating.

 

[Deeje]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.


As you know, there are six "ratings" currently available for use by members. "Like", "Funny", "Winner", etc. Do you want to split the "Like" rating into an "Interesting" rating and an "Agree" rating? This would bring the total number of ratings to seven, and perhaps allow you to more precisely express why you "like" a post.


Please pick which one of these three options is closest to the truth. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: Yes, I want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION TWO: It does not matter to me either way whether the "Like" rating is split into "Interesting" and "Agree".

OPTION THREE: No, I do not want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".

I am all for splitting the ratings into "like" and "agree" as "Informative" is the same as "Interesting" really....and what about a "respectfully disagree"? Am I asking too much?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nobody else vote! Its perfect!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Keep like, add interesting and agree.
*a sneezed out "and sympathy button."*

 

[Jedster]

@Sunstone

Yes, I want to split the "Like" rating into "Interesting" and "Agree".


because

I often agree, but also often like even if I don't agree. e.g. a good presentation/argument which I would find interesting

 

[SalixIncendium]

I'm for anything that shows more specificity in ratings.

Can we add a <yawn>ignore</yawn> rating inspired by @Jayhawker Soule that counts as a -1 rating?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I said 3. I would instead split it into 'Like' and 'Agree' rather than 'Like' and 'Interesting'.

I like and agree with that.

Can they be added as an option in the Vote.?

I have not voted

Perhaps we should be able to tick more than one box.

 

[Sunstone]

Can we add a <yawn>ignore</yawn> rating inspired by @Jayhawker Soule that counts as a -1 rating?

After seeing your outfit this morning, Salix, I am at a loss as to why you would be in the mood for a rating that essentially expresses boredom or indifference? I mean, boredom and indifference seem to have been the furthest thing from your mind when you got dressed this morning.

Really, Salix! Really? Fluorescent pink poke-a-dots on a lime green button-down with a bright red bow tie? Is that a shirt or one of Dr. Frankenstein's petrie dishes? And in either case, is it indeed hemorrhaging?

 

[Sunstone]

Perhaps we should be able to tick more than one box.

Good idea! Or perhaps wait for the next poll or two, my wise old friend.

I wonder how many old-timers are still left around to know how much this Forum owes to you?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'm for anything that shows more specificity in ratings.

Can we add a <yawn>ignore</yawn> rating inspired by @Jayhawker Soule that counts as a -1 rating?

After seeing your outfit this morning, Salix, I am at a loss as to why you would be in the mood for a rating that essentially expresses boredom or indifference? I mean, boredom and indifference seem to have been the furthest thing from your mind when you got dressed this morning.

Really, Salix! Really? Fluorescent pink poke-a-dots on a lime green button-down with a bright red bow tie? Is that a shirt or one of Dr. Frankenstein's petrie dishes? And in either case, is it indeed hemorrhaging?

Eh, it's probably actually a good thing we don't have a negative frubal rating. Salix would get an equal number of negative frubals and "Winner" ratings for his fashion sense. A forum wide war would ensue, with no end.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Speaking of "ticking more than one box," does the forum software allow for selecting more than one rating on a post? I've sometimes thought that friendly and creative posts that I like are winners that are both optimistically funny and informative, and were quite useful.

 

[Rival]

I don't mind either of the new ratings just as long as we keep also the original like.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't mind either of the new ratings just as long as we keep also the original like.

I like your liking the old like, so I liked it with a like.

How many will read "liking" as "licking"?