Author Topic: Likes  (Read 3505 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online ShiningInLuz

Re: Likes
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2016, 05:10:18 PM »
I applaud the intent to keep the forum fresh and relevant.

And the pertinent question is whether it has improved the forum or not.

I tend not to be a fan of like or dislike buttons.  It simply adds more froth for us to bicker about.

On media reports with hundreds or thousands of comments, I do use the ratings to try to cut through the dross a bit.

However, most popular or least popular does not influence my evaluation of the comment.  There or here.

So it's back to the test as to whether it is seen as an improvement or not.
In mods I trust!

Offline Alice Purjorick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6592
  • Total likes: 2641
  • One man's style must not be the rule of another's.
Re: Likes
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2016, 07:20:05 PM »
I applaud the intent to keep the forum fresh and relevant.

And the pertinent question is whether it has improved the forum or not.

I tend not to be a fan of like or dislike buttons.  It simply adds more froth for us to bicker about.

On media reports with hundreds or thousands of comments, I do use the ratings to try to cut through the dross a bit.

However, most popular or least popular does not influence my evaluation of the comment.  There or here.

So it's back to the test as to whether it is seen as an improvement or not.

That will be in the eye of the beholder according to which team of campanologists* is putting up the most "likes".

* Ringers  ?{)(**
I tell you it's Burt Reynolds

Offline G-Unit

Re: Likes
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2016, 07:34:51 PM »
My accusation was not directed at you, G-Unit, although you can now see how works.
As I said - both Brietta & I have experienced, on another forum, how certain people like to manipulate statistics & ikes to suit their own ends. I have every reason to believe they are operating here.
Perhaps John would do the sensible thing & revert to the old practice, where truth & justice matter & the "reputation"  of Mr Anonymous doesn't.

How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by  "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.

I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?

I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.

If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline misty

Re: Likes
« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2016, 07:42:29 PM »
How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by  "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.

I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?

I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.

If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.

I think Alfie more than explained what is happening in the opening post. I happen to support his stance, based on my own experience elsewhere & based on the knowledge that some of those same people are on here.
Please stop thinking that every accusation is levelled at you or it may make people think you actually have a guilty conscience.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Likes
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2016, 08:47:04 PM »
I think Alfie more than explained what is happening in the opening post. I happen to support his stance, based on my own experience elsewhere & based on the knowledge that some of those same people are on here.
Please stop thinking that every accusation is levelled at you or it may make people think you actually have a guilty conscience.

Who are your accusations levelled at then? Speak out and give us names and reasons instead of insinuations. The most profilic 'liker' is someone called 'Kipper' who has never posted. The 'likes' seem evenly distributed between members holding opposing views, however. Are you accusing 'Kipper' of wrongdoing?

It would be interesting to see how you liked it if people accused you of being involved in manipulating 'likes' to make yourself feel popular. Perhaps that's why these accusations are being made; have manipulations been attempted and have failed?

Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline misty

Re: Likes
« Reply #20 on: June 01, 2016, 09:18:19 PM »
Who are your accusations levelled at then? Speak out and give us names and reasons instead of insinuations. The most profilic 'liker' is someone called 'Kipper' who has never posted. The 'likes' seem evenly distributed between members holding opposing views, however. Are you accusing 'Kipper' of wrongdoing?

It would be interesting to see how you liked it if people accused you of being involved in manipulating 'likes' to make yourself feel popular. Perhaps that's why these accusations are being made; have manipulations been attempted and have failed?
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.

You work it out.

Offline Alice Purjorick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6592
  • Total likes: 2641
  • One man's style must not be the rule of another's.
Re: Likes
« Reply #21 on: June 01, 2016, 10:05:46 PM »
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.

You work it out.

Are you referring to the original leader who was voted up there by a poster who has been on here for 3 years and made only 97 posts, perchance ?. Oh what a kin shame, both "sides" have ringers, now there's an amazing revelation. I am truly mortified such scurrilous behaviour should take place.
I tell you it's Burt Reynolds

Offline misty

Re: Likes
« Reply #22 on: June 01, 2016, 10:14:09 PM »
Are you referring to the original leader who was voted up there by a poster who has been on here for 3 years and made only 97 posts, perchance ?. Oh what a kin shame, both "sides" have ringers, now there's an amazing revelation. I am truly mortified such scurrilous behaviour should take place.

No, Alas, I'm not. 'Twas a poor soul who got a mite upset about my lolling but we sorted it out by jovial screed.

Offline Alice Purjorick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6592
  • Total likes: 2641
  • One man's style must not be the rule of another's.
Re: Likes
« Reply #23 on: June 01, 2016, 10:21:34 PM »
No, Alas, I'm not. 'Twas a poor soul who got a mite upset about my lolling but we sorted it out by jovial screed.

The mind boggles at a leveled layer of concrete with a smile on its kite.
I tell you it's Burt Reynolds

Offline G-Unit

Re: Likes
« Reply #24 on: June 01, 2016, 10:43:11 PM »
The mind boggles at a leveled layer of concrete with a smile on its kite.

Not much joviality in this;

screed;

a long speech or piece of writing, typically one regarded as tedious.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Likes
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2016, 10:46:00 PM »
Are you seriously suggesting that people would conspire to make sure certain members got more likes than other members? Do you really think that people would bother?

I think suggesting there might be some grand conspiracy afoot to 'bolster the reputation and egos of certain members' says a lot more about you than about anyone else. Just because you don't appreciate these people's posts you think it must be a conspiracy if others 'like' them?

Perhaps, Alfie, people just like the posts pure and simple, much as it galls you.
yes, I really do believe some people are that childish. 

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Likes
« Reply #26 on: June 01, 2016, 10:50:51 PM »
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.

You work it out.
Haha, exactly right! 8@??)(

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Likes
« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2016, 11:02:25 PM »
How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by  "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.

I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?

I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.

If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.
Have you actually seen whose contibution  to this forum is the most liked? *&*%

Offline mercury

Re: Likes
« Reply #28 on: June 02, 2016, 12:21:00 AM »
I cant see the like button anymore, what could cause this pls?
Eta

Pls ignore question,they have reappeared for me
« Last Edit: June 02, 2016, 12:59:21 AM by mercury »

Offline G-Unit

Re: Likes
« Reply #29 on: June 02, 2016, 08:30:42 AM »
It's being suggested that members have conspired to get the most 'likes'. If true, it's very childish and immature and it makes the 'like' button obsolete because it doesn't really reflect the opinions of members.

Having said that, I find it childish and immature to complain about it too. I can almost hear the voice in the playground 'Miss, Miss, it's not fair!' Why anyone should care escapes me.

I shouldn't really be so surprised. Some people seem more interested in scoring points over others than in serious discussion and this seems to be just another demonstration of it. The last one was a vote which had to have it's rules changed in order to produce the result desired by some (in my own opinion, of course).
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything