'Like' button for posts

(355 Posts)
insertcleverusernamehere Wed 30-Nov-11 15:33:45

I think it would be great. Especially on webchat, we could like questions that have been put forward and that will clarify which questions a lot of us want the answers to.

wodjer funk?

fastweb Wed 30-Nov-11 19:16:21

I'm in favour of an opt out-able (or opt in-able) trial. Despite being likely to chose to not to use/view a like finction.

But am going to duck now, cos I've posted on a thread like this before.

ZacharyQuack Wed 30-Nov-11 20:42:34

This was discussed recently - here

It was contentious.

See MN passim

CarolCervix Wed 30-Nov-11 20:46:30

fucking hell.

No

No

No

No

NO

NO

No

NO

southeastastra Wed 30-Nov-11 20:47:31

<likes> carol's post

cheesesarnie Wed 30-Nov-11 20:48:39

noo.
go to facebook

Milliways Wed 30-Nov-11 20:48:50

I asked for this years ago. Sometimes you read a post & just splutter and need to "Like" but have to post a grin instead.

I also wanted a "No. of views" count......

SanTEEClaus Wed 30-Nov-11 21:17:37

Are we talking about this again?!?!?!

Why do we need this? Are we incapable of saying 'hey, I like what you said?' Or even 'I didn't like what you said'?

Stop trying to make MN like Facebook and elsewhere. It's unique. Leave it that way.

::gavel::

TEE.

Sit on my hands please.

No

SanTEEClaus Wed 30-Nov-11 21:48:33

Kinky Chaos. Why am I doing this?

Gah, if I start on my vehement dislike for Like...

SanTEEClaus Wed 30-Nov-11 21:54:06

Oh okay, if it's to save you from yourself :: sits on Chaos' hands::

Still think it's kinky. grin

ShowOfHands Wed 30-Nov-11 21:54:40

Just use your fricking words.

SoupDragon Wed 30-Nov-11 21:55:30

FFS.

Do we have to do this again?

Jacksmania Wed 30-Nov-11 21:56:01

I want a "like" button. Purely because on the off-chance yes you can start laughing now that I ever say something profound, I want to bask in everyone's adulation see if anyone noticed grin

total MN nobody here grin

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo thank you.

<cuts Chaos' hands off, saves an awful lot of kinky time>

cheesesarnie Wed 30-Nov-11 21:57:41

'Just use your fricking words' <like>

RSaTOB.

You don't mean that.

I wouldn;t be able to type if I didn't have hands.

sad

Oooh.

Capital A.

Interesting...

<<raids memory banks>>

SuePurblybiltbyElves Wed 30-Nov-11 22:03:56

Oh for goodness sakes. Stoppit.

I've always had a capital A, Mrs Caps Monitor, to keep you from moaning at me. Anyway, type with your toes.

FairyArmadillo Wed 30-Nov-11 22:04:40

No.

NO WAY!

I think you mis-remember.

<<taps noseside>>

Valpollicella Wed 30-Nov-11 22:08:05

Nope. Simple is how we like.

No tickers, no likeing, and no quoting

<gavel>

<goes off to investigate before being gobbier>

Why would I always type RSaTOB?

Huh?

Huh?

You is janking my chain?

You is talking the mickey?

You is lighting the gas?

grin

Acanthus Wed 30-Nov-11 22:09:25

FGS no

Valpollicella Wed 30-Nov-11 22:09:47

I think she might be trying to grind your gears, Chaos

I'm right. You're wrong. Always been a capital A. So ner.

Incontinence anyone?

Do you think we should consider avatars?

ConOfScience Wed 30-Nov-11 22:12:59

Didn't they do a poll?

Hmmm, did you look back to when you first choosed the name?

Seriously now, RSaTOB, I'm starting to doubt myself, and it's worrying me.

<<sobs>>

Valpollicella Wed 30-Nov-11 22:14:55

RockStock...

<ahem>

"RockStockandTwoOpenBottles Wed XX-Jun-11 14:18:08"

Be prepared to eat Chaos's specially prepared humble pie....

I have just looked through my registration details and it's not there with a l/c, what date exactly was that then Val?

OliviaMumsnet (MNHQ) Wed 30-Nov-11 22:17:52

Ahem, Chaos..
<taps watch>
<STERN>

Valpollicella Wed 30-Nov-11 22:18:24

I only blanked it for non searchable reasons (in case of cententiousness etc) but...

RockStockandTwoOpenBottles Wed 01-Jun-11 14:18:08

Now you fuckers, listen here! I have looked back through my name history AGAIN - so massive (not) and it is NOT there with a lowercase a. At. All.

UterusUterusGhali Wed 30-Nov-11 22:22:20

No no no.

Also, keep these naked sides please.
--->
<-----

Now I see it - why does it now show in my username history? Pass me the pie then and I'll eat it. Chaos, it pains me, but you are right. Seriously, though, I do not understand why it's not listed in my username history, when the one where I fucked up (in Chaos' strict world of CAPS) and put a lowercase r at the start, is there. confused

Arf.

Change it.

Cahnge it now!!!

Gwan you know you wanna.

<<smoochies>>

Olivia, I know, but it's so much fu-u-un.

grin

Oh.

cross-posts.

No pie here - but I have some of my special Caramelised Alomnd and Sea Salt Mendiants, if you'd like to partake?

<<frisbees>>

Er. Hmmmmm. Yes.

Valpollicella Wed 30-Nov-11 22:28:12

I don't think caps get recognised in a n/c....in the same way that I am capitalised to keep Chaos happy but when I sign in I don't need to capitalise my v

(that sounds vaguely rude)

arf.

grin

Ariesgirl Wed 30-Nov-11 22:35:47

Don't want a Like button, but I would like an "I am being ironic" emoticon.

freedom2011 Wed 30-Nov-11 22:44:36

Departing from my usual messages of peace and love -

HELL NO to the like button. Really? You need approval on what you say from random internet strangers to feel good about yourself? Get a grip. If you have said something, I assume it is what you believe and you 'like' what you've said so grow up and stop looking for ways to bolster your pathetic egos by being able to see if other people 'like' what you said. And if you really 'like' what some else said post - yes, what X said.
'Like buttons' <spits in disgust> So bloody teenage.

That is all. Off to spread some more peace and happiness.

Jacksmania Thu 01-Dec-11 04:52:26

Hey Chaos, what was Olivia tapping her watch for - did you miss your curfew again? grin

HedleyLamarr Thu 01-Dec-11 09:06:50

Hows about a "fuck off to the far side of fuck" button?

Far more useful. smile;)

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 09:18:25

What Carol said.

With the addition of Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

The op is suffering from a bad lack of capitals as well shock.

And Jacksmania - it's all very well to want a profound post "liked" but imagine the horror of typing an interesting, profound and amusing post and having not one person "like" it. It would be unbearable.

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 12:02:51

Well I never. I seem to have hit a nerve. Are you all so absolutely full of yourselves?

No one has addressed the area where I suggested it would be useful - on webchats.

"Are you all so absolutely full of yourselves?"

Yes.

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 12:12:08

Well I don't think it would be useful on webchats either hmm. It is much better for everyone to give their point of view, not just lazily "like" other people's.

And, yes, we are all opinionated full of ourselves and proud of it

coolascucumber Thu 01-Dec-11 12:17:00

Like

coolascucumber Thu 01-Dec-11 12:18:18

It would stop those huge threads where basically everybody says the same thing over and over again and you have to wade though pages of repetition waiting for the OP to come back on and take the discussion further.

SoupDragon Thu 01-Dec-11 12:18:39

"Are you all so absolutely full of yourselves?"

Or are we fed up with having this surface so regularly and think it's a crap idea?

SoupDragon Thu 01-Dec-11 12:19:19

But I would like a "fuck off to the far side of fuck" button.

ChrisMsBrian Thu 01-Dec-11 12:27:32

<chortles>

this again....

I wish MNHQ enlightened us on their intentions, as I put quite a little bit of effort in when this was last discussed, but am not going to keep banging on about trials if they have no intention whatsoever to do it.

SoupDragon Thu 01-Dec-11 12:28:06

I thought they held a vote and it came back "no"

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 12:30:20

Actually, SoupDragon, there's another useful acronym - FOTTFSOF.

I wonder if I posted that on a thread would it be deleted as a personal attack [ponders].

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 12:50:24

Really sorry I broke into your circle, ladies.

Where does the Daily Mail come in, though? The Guardian and Telegraph both have 'Recommend' facilities on their comment sections.

Acanthus Thu 01-Dec-11 14:39:59

We're not full of ourselves, we just think it is a shit idea.

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 15:30:20

And what, exactly, does what The Guardian and The Telegraph have, have to do with MN?

Why does everyone want to make every site on the internet the same? Are you so scared of things that are different?

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 15:31:26

I didn't compare the G and T to MN. I said, why is 'liking' exclusive to the DM?

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 15:33:53

Huh? Now you're not even making any sense.

And if you want MN to be like the DM? You are definitely in the wrong place.

And I think you'll find liking is not exclusive to the DM. It's used lots of places.

Still doesn't make it right for MN.

See, we like to talk. A lot. And exchange ideas. And disagree. And have, on occasion, a bun fight or two.

You have none of that if all you have to do is click 'like'. Where's the discussion? The conversation?

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 15:38:54

Oh, am I in a circle confused?

<looks vaguely around>

Yes to "we like to talk. A lot.".

I'll add - we like to exchange ideas and opinions with a slightly wider range of options than just "agree with op" or "disagree with op".

On mumsnet if you like or dislike someone's post, you say so, often giving reasons or adding to it. Rather than lazily pressing a button.

You don't seem to like it here much hmm.

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 15:40:53

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to have read my post. You made a good point in the last two sentences of your post, though. Nice to be spoken to rather than just be ridiculed for suggesting something.

The Guardian and MN have an awful lot to do with each other.

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 15:42:08

Only through marriage. grin

And what part of your post do you think I didn't read? (I'm assuming you are talking to me. As I thought my last two sentences were pretty ace myself .[modest emoticon])

Get0rf Thu 01-Dec-11 15:44:47

I don't think it would be a good idea, not on the general board or in webchats. It would add absolutely nothing imo.

You seem rather hostile yourself OP. It is a shame that you cannot enjoy this forum as it is smile

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 15:51:30

May you've all been here for ages. There is a great exchange of ideas, moral support and general, feel good chit chat. But IME, anyone suggesting something that the general MN public doesn't agree with, tends to get shouted down and belittled.

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 15:52:48

*Maybe

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 15:59:00

"...anyone suggesting something that the general MN public doesn't agree with, tends to get shouted down and belittled."

I would disagree you've been belittled. You have, indeed, been shouted down.

MNHQ more or less listens to their population. Except where 'The Secrect Service does not comment on procedure' or TSSDNCOP. And their population has been very vocal that they don't want a like button.

Or to be able to ignore posters (which I disagree with, I would love an ignore poster option) or have tickers. ::shudder::

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 16:04:49

I believe someone said I 'suffer from a distinct lack of capitals'. Someone else asked if I 'need approval from random internet strangers to feel good about myself'. I think both those statements are belittle-ling.

Would you like to be new on these boards?

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 16:17:10

But that's jokes, banter if you like. It's all part of conversation, usually peppered with grin or smile or wink to indicate that we are all in a good mood and happy to chat. The capitals comment was to do with the fact that Chaos and RockStock were discussing the appropriate-ness or not of an "A" in the middle of a name.

I get very confused when people get so cross when all we are doing is chatting.

I often talk to people whose names I don't recognise. I presume some are new, I don't know, I don't check their names before I talk to them. One or two of them have even taken in good spirit some friendly advice on, for example, not posting contentious or upsetting stuff in aibu, having names which don't include yummymummyofanittypittyickleone, or putting capitals in their names. It's all part of the chat confused.

I didn't realise I was going to be offending people. I thought I was being friendly [sigh].

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 16:22:25

There are fine lines, is all I'm saying. The random stranger comment didn't come across as a joke, it sounded like 'Get a life' mixed with 'you'll never be part of this club'. Now the only reason I don't 'get a life' (I should be leaving work but I'm not, I'm talking to random strangers) is because I know that there is so much to be gained on here in terms of sharing knowledge, banter, and support.

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 16:23:56

You think I've been on these boards for 10 years? We've all been new once.

The difference between my being new and, apparently, your being new is that I didn't expect MN to change to suit me. I poked around and found my niche about 3 years ago and have never left.

And you do suffer from a lack of capitals. And it's one of Chaos' bugabears. Just ignore her. Or get to know her. She's brilliant, if obsessed with capitals.

You are being friendly, Maryz. Don't be daft. grin

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 16:35:13

I've been here since March 2010, I thought it would be a feature I would 'like' using, thought other may feel the same way, posted about it, and got sat on. All that needed to be done was say 'already discussed', link, and that would have been the end of that. I think someone did at some point.

When Chaos said 'lack of capitals' I thought she meant one of those posts like 'aibu if i dont think xxxxx. LONG.'. Can't have myself compared to that <shudder>.

SanTEEClaus Thu 01-Dec-11 16:37:37

Well then you're hardly new, are you? grin

Chaos has this thing about Proper Capitals in user names. If she ran the universe your name would be InsertCleverUserNameHere. But she doesn't. Although I might vote her Empress. grin

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 16:44:09

No, I'm not new, and if I still feel this way, maybe I have a point? Or maybe I'm wasting my time.

Chaos I am standing in opposition. My campaign button will say 'vote insert'.

SoupDragon Thu 01-Dec-11 16:57:21

You whinge about people belittling you and yet come out with

"Well I never. I seem to have hit a nerve. Are you all so absolutely full of yourselves?" and

"Really sorry I broke into your circle, ladies. "

hmm

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 17:00:18

You need to meet crazynanna. She is also standing up for the little letters, especially the little c's grin.

We had a campaign recently in site stuff, followed by a poll, so it's all still a little bit raw. A bit like European Constitution Referenda in Ireland - if the country votes wrong, the Government redoes the referendum until the people vote for the "right" result.

Many of us want mumsnet towers to stick with the result of the last poll in case the result of the next one is wrong hmm

Maryz Thu 01-Dec-11 17:01:18

Whoops, my last hmm looks wrong. I really mean [ponders] not [sneery face]

insertcleverusernamehere Thu 01-Dec-11 19:10:57

Soupdragon maybe my sentiments have something to do with you telling me I'm whinging?

Maryz I shall tiptoe around sensitive stuff 'like' this itf.

Acanthus Thu 01-Dec-11 21:07:16

You haven't been belittled. We just don't like your idea.

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Fri 02-Dec-11 19:51:33

<jaw-cracking YAWN>

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 03-Dec-11 10:03:09

ChrisMsBrian

<chortles>

this again....

I wish MNHQ enlightened us on their intentions, as I put quite a little bit of effort in when this was last discussed, but am not going to keep banging on about trials if they have no intention whatsoever to do it.

Hello. So sorry that we've haven't posted on this thread.

As for our intentions, we are planning to release a kinda 'like post' thing <technical description> at some point soon but anyone who doesn't like it <ha!> will be able to opt out of seeing it.

RustyBear Sat 03-Dec-11 10:15:01

Can't believe no-one commented on this....

ChaosTrulyReigns Wed 30-Nov-11 22:08

I wouldn;t be able to type if I didn't have hands.

She has hands??!! you would never Adam and Eve it grin

BertieBotts Sat 03-Dec-11 10:32:05

I hate the idea of a "like" button in any form because of what SanTEE and Maryz said, and also the fact that they can cause a heap of shit and drama, but if you HAVE to introduce one, please please PLEASE can you use a less twee and inane word than "like"? "Agree" would be better. Or "I agree with this poster". Or even "X number of posters thanked this post". Or a thumbs up. Or an up arrow. Or anything but bloody "like".

("Recommend" makes no sense either, for the record.)

I can see how it might be vaguely useful in a webchat, although most decent guests seem capable of noting "Ah, posters X, Y and Z have all asked a similar question, I'll answer them together" and does so.

I think people are resistant to the idea of change on MN because it's one of the few places on the web which is still very clean and simple in looks, operation and whether that makes the text stand out as more interesting or whether the text has to be more interesting in order to claim your attention I don't know, but it's just a nice welcome safe haven from the rest of the web.

I'll even forgive you the way the text box is extremely clunky in android grin

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 03-Dec-11 10:50:42

We hear you, BertieBotts. We'll put our less twee/less inane thinking caps on.

All suggestions welcome, btw...

SoupDragon Sat 03-Dec-11 11:57:37

And make it Opt In rather then Opt Out.

<consummate apprival> of Soupy's post.

Oh bugger.

And Bertie?

hmm with knobs on.

grin

Acanthus Sat 03-Dec-11 16:19:36

Yes - definitely opt in to it rather than out of it. Maybe we could also do that with IT APPEARS YOU ARE USING A MOBILE DEVICE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO TO OUR MOBILE SITE or whatever the feck it says.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 03-Dec-11 16:22:19

Acanthus. We're sorting that pesky pop-up, promise. The Techs are on it.

Re the opt in 'like' (or whatever it's called): I think we're thinking all newbies will get it as a default (that they can opt out of) but, if you've been here for a bit, it won't be visible until you decide to opt in.

But don't quote me on that just yet. Or the Tech team might kill me

RustyBear Sat 03-Dec-11 16:32:12

Thing is, saying 'if you don't like it you can opt out', is, to use an MN cliché, disingenuous. Because if a like button exists at all, it's going to change the whole dynamic of the threads. So people (like me, and I think we are in the majority) who don't want it don't just want not to be able to see it, we don't want anyone else to be able to use it either, we want them to have to add a comment, because comment is what MN is about....

fastweb Sat 03-Dec-11 16:37:44

Helen

Did they go for the anon or named "like" option?

<crosses fingers for the anon version>

BertieBotts Sat 03-Dec-11 17:00:19

I agree with Rusty. It does change the dynamic which is why opt in/out/whatever is pointless.

Plus MN you never answered my query on the other thread. Do you not think that anon "liking" is problematic from a trollhunting perspective? Situation, someone posts a sensitive thread, perhaps one or two people make subtle (or not so subtle) reference to the fact they think it's a troll, other people have suspicions but perhaps just report anonymously or stay quiet. Add an anon like button and suddenly this one, maybe two posts have 25 "likes" on them. Because it's easier than reporting and not as risky as posting on the thread.

ChippingInNeedsSleep Sat 03-Dec-11 17:06:52

HelenMumsnet I'm very surprised you are going to do this? It is going to ruin MN. It's not a matter of opting in or out - if it's there, it's there. The vast majority didn't/don't want it - so why is it being inflicted on us?

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 03-Dec-11 17:09:34

OK, the 'liking' won't be necessarily be anon. We might be able to make it so you can hover over whatever the 'like' symbol is and see "RustyBear and BertieBotts liked HelenMumsnet's post" <in my dreams>

No promises, mind, but that's how we're thinking...

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 03-Dec-11 17:11:26

RustyBear

Thing is, saying 'if you don't like it you can opt out', is, to use an MN cliché, disingenuous. Because if a like button exists at all, it's going to change the whole dynamic of the threads. So people (like me, and I think we are in the majority) who don't want it don't just want not to be able to see it, we don't want anyone else to be able to use it either, we want them to have to add a comment, because comment is what MN is about....

But people right now are posting things like "like your post, RustyBear" or "what RustyBear said" or "yy RustyBear" or "Great post, RustyBear" - which is kinda the same thing, isn't it?

OhYouBadBadReindeer Sat 03-Dec-11 17:11:30

I hate the idea of a 'like button' sad I like to live under the illusion that of course everyone likes my posts.
seriously, my ego is too fragile for a 'like button'.

plus I agree with the fact that it will change the dynamics of mn, which are perfectly fine as they are thank you very much.

OhYouBadBadReindeer Sat 03-Dec-11 17:14:00

It's not the same thing at all, 'like buttons' It will emphasise the fact that some people are more popular or wittier than others.

OhYouBadBadReindeer Sat 03-Dec-11 17:14:56

(can't even type coherently this evening!)

BertieBotts Sat 03-Dec-11 17:19:32

It's not really the same thing, you still have to go to the trouble of typing it out - and if people are doing that then why not just let them continue to do that and let the people who wouldn't use a like button carry on as usual? Ie not commenting unless they have something to add?

Non-anon liking carries it's own heap of problems, really. Imagine the bitchfests.

RustyBear Sat 03-Dec-11 17:32:33

"But people right now are posting things like "like your post, RustyBear" or "what RustyBear said" or "yy RustyBear" or "Great post, RustyBear" - which is kinda the same thing, isn't it?"

Not so often as you'd think actually..... sad grin

But no, I don't think it is the same, really, as others have explained, probably better than I can.

<<sees link between those two statements....>>

SoupDragon Sat 03-Dec-11 21:21:05

In the spirit of fairness, you really need to add a "dislike" option too.

Maryz Sat 03-Dec-11 21:34:16

Well, saying it's optional is a load of rubbish shock.

What you are saying is that you are ignoring the majority who don't want it and introducing it anyway.

Which has really pissed me off [grumpy].

I commented on this on another thread - if you introduce one on a trial basis, but say "if you don't like it, ignore it", you are being very unfair. Because if we use it, you will say "oh it works" and if we ignore it other people will use it and you will also say "oh it works".

So much for listening to members hmm.

SoupDragon Sat 03-Dec-11 21:41:08

I agree.

RustyBear Sat 03-Dec-11 10:15:01
Can't believe no-one commented on this....

ChaosTrulyReigns Wed 30-Nov-11 22:08

I wouldn;t be able to type if I didn't have hands.

TBF I did comment - I suggested she might type with her toes. But as it was me that said I'd chopped off her hands, I'm wondering that that ay not constitute a comment...

It's cHaOs (delib) - she will find a way. grin

*may not ay FFS

ChippingInNeedsSleep Sun 04-Dec-11 02:27:17

I agree with Mary - a trial wont prove anything. It will show that some people use it/like it. It will not show the vast majority seething at it, or simply just giving up on MN and quiety leaving as the site becomes less and less what the majority of posters want it to be sad

SanTEEClaus Sun 04-Dec-11 06:52:11

I am totally shocked to hear you are adding a like button, MNHQ.

I guess I was wrong when I told the OP you listen to your members.

RustyBear Sun 04-Dec-11 07:13:32

RSATB - I was expecting:
"I wouldn;t be able to type if I didn't have hands"
"No change there then"
grin

SilveryMoon Sun 04-Dec-11 07:14:30

I like it.
I'd opt in.

Blackduck Sun 04-Dec-11 07:20:29

Agree with rusty. And typing that is different, fundamentally different, to clicking a like button. And in my view it is the thin end of the wedge even if you can opt out........
And PLEASe sort out that mobile device message! Turn it OFF until you have fixed it FGS.

habbibu Sun 04-Dec-11 07:22:11

"We might be able to make it so you can hover over whatever the 'like' symbol is and see "RustyBear and BertieBotts liked HelenMumsnet's post" <in my dreams>"

On a busy thread that could lead to just a huge list for some posts, as there are many lurkers, and this'll be particularly true of new people, so it doesn't look all that practical.

If MN is about anything, it's surely about having the courage of your convictions, and openly stating what you think. "Like" doesn't do any more than a nod in that direction. Why do people actually want it? I don't understand.

Imagine what a boring thread this would have been if all people had posted was "*like*" and "*dislike*".

No no no no!

And no no no no! to an opt-in/-out, too.

Like/dislike buttons, in whatever form, are mindless and irrelevant.

I don't want to know that x number of lurkers (because that's what posters will become) had an opinion about a post. What's the point in having an opinion if you aren't prepared to support it?

It would be like posting YABU or YANBU without any explanation. 'We' don't like that, either.

Maryz Sun 04-Dec-11 09:24:24

The thing that gets me as well is that it seems to be lurkers who want the like button, not posters.

Which is all very well, but the site would be pretty slow if there were more lurkers and fewer posters shock.

The last time there was a poll on something (can't remember what; was it a "like" button, or maybe about quotes?) every poster on the thread bar 3 were "against" and gave reasons why, but there were about 150 votes "for".

So 147 lurkers willing to vote, but not to post to explain their view confused.

What's the point?

<clasps hands to face>

It's the beginning of the Eeeeeennnnnnnnddddddddddd! shock

SoupDragon Sun 04-Dec-11 12:40:35

I like to think MN is too literate for a dumb "like" button.

Maryz Sun 04-Dec-11 21:35:00

Well, if they are going to "trial" one, maybe it isn't hmm.

They can Trial it all they like.

If you Like my posts then say so. If you disagree then say so.

Anyone who can't type 'I agree with Xxxxx' isn't worth my attention.

SuePurblybiltbyElves Sun 04-Dec-11 22:24:31

I agree with Beer
<lickarse>

RustyBear Sun 04-Dec-11 22:27:06

Have MNHQ actually said what the criteria for success or failure of this trial would be?

<bats away Sue from trouser region>

Thank you for posting that. Shows you have a Brain and Fingers connected to it.

SuePurblybiltbyElves Sun 04-Dec-11 22:31:32

grin I have neither brains nor fingers. That Psychic German Squid thing? That's me.

Maryz has it, that mammoth thread about this resulted in the majority voting for a trial, including Justine grin, but most posters rabidly saying no. So it felt as if people who don't post much atm wanted to be able to like/dislike but couldn't even be arsed to actually say so. Which didn't suggest that the idea would contribute anything to conversation....

But I will convert to the Ayes if I can have a Dislike button of my very own.

Get0rf Sun 04-Dec-11 22:33:34

"But people right now are posting things like "like your post, RustyBear" or "what RustyBear said" or "yy RustyBear" or "Great post, RustyBear" - which is kinda the same thing, isn't it?"

Actually, this happens a lot less than you may think. And also, people may say 'I agree with x' but they also usually put theit twopennorth in as well, thereby adding to the debate.

It won't add anything but imo will impact the site negatively. So the normal gobshites will add their opinions, and the quiet lurkers will just hit like. What does that add exaclty?

Plus - having it as an opt-in patently will NOT work. I imagine that there will be accusations of people 'liking' their mates posts and all the quichey crap, and if you have opted out you will not be able to see what anyone is on about. Plus, the opt-in function will only work if you could opt out of people liking your OWN posts. I don't like the idea, so I wouldn't want people to 'like' my posts. And if you are unable to like all posts, it would make the whole function unworkable.

There is SO much opposition to this, there was a whole thread on it. Yes it is not our site and perhaps you think that the changes would be beneficial, but I wish you would think again, tbh. Lots of people feel very strongly about this.

They're never going to rig that Dislike Button up to deliver a mild electric shock to the poster in question, though sad

If they did I'd christen it the I'll Tell You The Effect! It's Pissing Me Off!!! Button.

Get0rf Sun 04-Dec-11 22:36:54

The last thread pretty much ended up as Justine stamping her foot and saying I'll scream and scream until i'm sick saying that she wanted to do something novel.

And there was a sense of inevitability about that. But yes there needs to be a dislike function.

But why give the lurkers a way into mumsnet. I don't give a fuck about the lurkers. Just bloody join in and say summat. We don't bite lies

SuePurblybiltbyElves Sun 04-Dec-11 22:37:38

Yes. I'd like mine wired up to the 'Is that all you have to worry about?' posts. It would be a Mercy Zapping.

Novel hmm

Yeah, um, ok.

As it is, I like to think that Lurkers become Posters eventually. Purely because all that sitting on your hands gets a bit dull after a while.

I thought MNHQ wanted to get away from Personalities on threads? A Like button is a surefire way of encouraging that and discouraging debate.

Lurkers pressing Like means Lurkers who feel they have an input though. Who will stick around and increase advertising revenue <shrug>

Get0rf Sun 04-Dec-11 22:49:31

Well if that's the reason (increased revenue) then fair enough, I suppose. I don't know how those things work but it would make sense.

I still don't LIKE IT though. <stamps>

SuePurblybiltbyElves Sun 04-Dec-11 22:50:58

Oh, is that the thing? They don't like the personalities?
Ah well then, I'm screwed, that's the only bit I do like. I can take or leave all this parenting lark.

That's my take on it, GetOrf. You can get comfy on a site like this and make it mean something to you. When it really doesn't, in the vision of its founders.

Bums On Seats, innit?

Sue, I put that badly feel free to Dislike my post. MNHQ don't like Personalities. Introducing a Like Button seems to contradict that to me, as it will encourage competition, factions and tallies.

KateMiddIeton Sun 04-Dec-11 22:57:31

This again? I ran a whole survey the last time. Majority said noooooo! MNHQ said it's our website and we're doing it any way, so feck off tough.

So, with that in mind... Christmas survey coming soon! <licks lips>

ExitPursuedBySanta Sun 04-Dec-11 22:58:34

I thought we had been through all this with KateMiddleton's fabulous pie charts and decided that a Like button was a shite idea. Or AIBU?

Just No.

(And what is webchat confused?)

ExitPursuedBySanta Sun 04-Dec-11 22:59:18

x posts Kate

SuePurblybiltbyElves Sun 04-Dec-11 22:59:59

Ah, with you now.

KateMiddIeton Sun 04-Dec-11 23:00:27

<<likes Exit's post>>

habbibu Sun 04-Dec-11 23:16:01

"The last thread pretty much ended up as Justine stamping her foot and saying I'll scream and scream until i'm sick saying that she wanted to do something novel."

Yes, well, like buttons are surely the very opposite of novel these days, aren't they?

Maryz Sun 04-Dec-11 23:18:18

I wish they would tell us why they want one confused.

Would it really increase traffic?

Is a lurker pressing "like" more "involved" than a lurker just, erm, lurking?

Do the advertisers want one?

I just don't know.

Maybe if they introduce one all the regular posters should, for a week, have an agreement to only press "like" and "dislike" and not post at all, just out of curiosity to see what will happen grin.

Now who wants to organise the protest?

I couldn't press it though, because I will be opting out.

Protests at this stage are utterly futile, I believe. It's a done deal. <shrug>

Maryz Sun 04-Dec-11 23:23:29

It's still reasonable to ask why though hmm.

If there is a dislike, I'm going to opt in and dislike everything [evil grin].

habbibu Sun 04-Dec-11 23:26:52

Well, you could always agree Not To Buy Anything from advertisers from the duration of the trial. But that would be petty and childish. And I never buy anything from Boden or GLTC anyway...

ChippingInNeedsSleep Mon 05-Dec-11 01:32:37

Maryz - I'm with you there. If there is going to be one despite the vast majority not wanting one, it would be nice to know the reasoning behind it. Anyway, the way things are going RL may get more of my attention soon as MN becomes less & less appealing.

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 07:07:48

"Have MNHQ actually said what the criteria for success or failure of this trial would be?'

I guess when the illiterati stop wanting a way of agreeing without having to type anything.

SanTEEClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 09:27:46

I think if it's going to be opt in or opt out we might as well be able to hide posters as well. It's the same thing, really.

'Oh, I have 10000 likes'

'Do you? I can't see them.'

SuePurblybiltbyElves Mon 05-Dec-11 09:48:48

Bounty, I believe, have a Most Liked and a Most Active poster of the week tally pinned on their forum page somewhere, like Discussions of the Day here. I noticed when I went trolling when I linked to something there.

This Like business is on the same track, it'll turn people bonkers trying to up their like tally. And I think it's a gift to the Daily Fail researchers - imagine the '700 Mnetters like the idea of corporal punishment' quotes because 700 eejits clicked a post. Nothing to reflect the number of us who USED OUR WORDS wink to disagree or shouted at the screen.

MarshaBrady Mon 05-Dec-11 09:50:00

I use mn not fb because I want to avoid this sort of inane stuff.

Pity it's going to put on here.

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 09:54:01

"Bounty, I believe, have a Most Liked and a Most Active poster of the week tally pinned on their forum page somewhere"

What an utterly horrendous idea. and how demoralising for all of those posters who aren't me

SuePurblybiltbyElves Mon 05-Dec-11 09:58:21

I think it's Highest Number of Liked Posts or something, not Most Loved grin

But still, yes. Poor everyone but Soupy wink

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 12:14:09

Well, I suppose we won't need Mumsnet Royalty threads any more, we will just see a list of "most liked" grin. So there is a silver lining hmm.

ExitPursuedBySanta Mon 05-Dec-11 12:27:31

But there will be smugness.

I quite like it on the odd occasion when people refer to me by name.

Acanthus Mon 05-Dec-11 12:37:44

Oh no, they're going to do it. Bugger. We'll all be like facebookerswhataladofoldcrap

And that message is STILL on the active convos page.

Bah. Humbug.

SuePurblybiltbyElves Mon 05-Dec-11 12:41:18

And it'll be so depressing. Imagine seeing whoever is top of your Shit List post something horrible and seeing 65 cheesy thumbs-up underneath it. You'd give up entirely.

Given the recent mutterings about the Doghouse or Feminism being dominated by particular posters who think they're always right, introducing the means for people to instantly and facelessly agree but not disagree unless you dare to post opposing views seems odd and a little inconsistent to me.

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 12:41:36

I haven't looked at the For Sale boards in ages, but there used to be a completely unMumsnetty subculture on them. Huns chatting on the For Sale boards, hunning and hugging away to each other, and virtually never posting on any other boards. I didn't recognise any of the names.

If we have like/dislike buttons, with an opt-in, and hide poster facility, we're going to end up not just with another subculture, but with two completely different Mumsnets. There will be Mumsbook, inane, vacuous, bland and hysterical. And there will be a smaller Mumsnet, where the interesting, opinionated, passionate, articulate posters will interact.

Which might not be a bad thing. Unless the interesting, opinionated, passionate, articulate posters throw up their hands in disgust, switch off the computer and turn their attention to RL.

Either way MNTowers won't be bothered, because like/dislike encourages lurkers, which increases ad views and therefore advertising revenue.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 12:43:33

What if I'm on a thread with 200 people and only 3 "like" me shock. How upsetting would that be?

And do I have to "like" all the posts I agree with before I can post my own comment? That would take hours, going down a thread "liking" everyone. And what if you miss someone out - for example if there are two posters saying the same thing and I notice and "like" one of them but don't notice the other will I be accused of being a bullying bitch and only liking my friends and ignoring all the newbies shock.

It's a fecking minefield!

And what if I opt out of "liking". Will there be a bit sign by my name saying "Maryz has opted out of liking anyone", or will people take offense at me not "liking" their wonderful, thoughtful posts and so stop "liking" mine?

This is horrible. I may have to go for a lie-down and some chocolate to get over the upset.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 12:51:53

Hello.

OK, just to clarify things a bit: our intention is only to trial this in a limited area of Talk: see previous thread here

And we'll make it opt out.

And if it doesn't work, we'll change it.

We're also going to re-post here Justine's response to the naysayers on t'other thread because it sums up our thoughts on this pretty well in fact I'd 'like' it if I could <playing with fire>

"Well, broadly I think it's harmless and time-saving and thus potentially useful. Even the sceptics will have to agree it's caught on. And I think we here at Mumsnet can sometimes be in danger of being a bit over-sceptical of change. Years of trauma when tabling each and every new thing has convinced me of this smile. I also think that if it's opt-outable then it's worth a try. It's not like anyone is forced to use, or even see it. So it seems a bit miserable to deny those who'd like a trial at least [pleading eyes]."

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 12:55:56

So what, exactly, was the point of the vote?

BertieBotts Mon 05-Dec-11 13:39:34

What is meant by "Even the sceptics will have to agree it's caught on"? Just that more and more sites have been offering "like" buttons on various guises over the last few years? Avatars and signatures and sparkles and hundreds of emoticons seem to have caught on, but MN isn't adopting those (which is a good thing.)

I just don't get why the whole follow the crowd thing. The reason I like mumsnet is because it doesn't blindly follow the crowd. Change is fine - I much prefer the look of "new" to "classic", (although I know this was contentious at the time) but many of the changes which have been brought in have been recieved positively - the highlighting of various posts, the bookmark button, the new messaging system. It's not just about change and I find it quite patronising that that seems to be the assumption.

BTW, what happened to the twitter/facebook buttons which everyone protested about, they disappeared very quietly. (Not that I mind because I didn't like those either...) Perhaps we can hold out hope that this "like" thing will do the same.

oranges123 Mon 05-Dec-11 13:58:10

Maybe this has been explained somewhere up-thread but what exactly is the point of "Like"? I have never understood it on Facebook and I don't understand it here either. Just because X number of people "like" something you have said - what use is that unless they take the time to say what it is they like about it? I mean, why even bother?

Perhaps I am a Luddite (well, I am a Luddite - there is no perhaps about it) but it seems to me to be totally inane and pointless. The fact "it's caught on" surely isn't, of itself, a reason for doing it? If you offer people the oppportunity to click a button for no good reason you will just attract the sort of people who have made Facebook the place it is, with millions of people telling each other what they had for breakfast and then "liking" each other's choice of cereal.

Do we really want that kind of banal rubbish?

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 14:02:34

"what exactly is the point of "Like"?"

It is for those too lazy or illiterate to type "I agree with SoupDragon".

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 14:02:38

Fastnet has been posting some interesting stuff on the other thread, presenting the business reasons for having a like button. (I have even wondered whether Fastnet is, in fact, a Mumsnet staffer.)

If what Fastnet says is true, why did you not present these arguments to us in the first place? You have attempted to give us the illusion of having some say in the way MN looks and works - after all, without the posters there would be no MN. I feel thoroughly patronised.

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 14:04:04

I understand it on Facebook as there it draws attention to whatever you like - people who are your friends can see you liked it and click through the link. It serves a purpose.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 14:06:59

Well, I'm a sceptic and I don't think it will catch on on a site where there is more value to opinion than there is to merely agreeing.

And it isn't possible to opt out of a trial unless I can opt out of being "liked" as well as "liking".

And "it's worth a try" isn't a reason for having it, it's more a "it'll do no harm" type of comment.

There must be a reason for confused. It must be time-consuming for Tech, so what makes it worth while? Is it really going to bring in a lot more people?

MarshaBrady Mon 05-Dec-11 14:09:57

It's nice that each post carries the same weight here. Yes some others might agree but really it's a democracy. A post with 50 likes will be seen as stronger than those with none, won't it?

I did think mnhq liked the democratic feel.

But I see we just look like fighters of change. If you do do it, can I ask that you don't do dislike which will just make people feel awful.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 14:10:20

Oh, I missed that PrettyCandles - where's the other thread?

<wanders off to look>

SanTEEClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 14:15:31

The thread Helen just linked to, PrettyCandles? I can't find a poster by that name.... confused

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 14:21:09

I had forgotten about the other thread, but I can't see Fastweb (or any convincing arguments).

It does remind me of my argument against, though.

How many of you went to the recent Mumsnet meetup with a booklet of yellow smiley face post-its and a booklet of red angry face post[its, and went around sticking faces on other people depending on whether or not you agreed with them, rather than actually talking to them?

And if anyone did, was there anyone at all there who thought it was a great, forward-thinking idea - after all, it saves time and effort grin.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 14:39:25

Are the mN founders not actually proud of the fact that the widely viewed USP of this site is that it is formed mostly of articulate people who are able to have a meaningful debate <shades of Mrs Merton>?

Having a like button is a lowest common denominator setting - it reduces every argument to black and white, gives credence to those who cannot actually articulate their view in written english, and will polarise things and actually create arguments. Just think of the more incendiary threads we have on here. It is horrible when someone posts something offensive and inflammatory. How much more horrible would it be if there were 76 likes against it.

For example, there were plenty of people who thought that 'retard' was a perfectly good word to use on a thread a couple of months ago. ONE person posting disablist stuff like that is bad enough, knowing that x amount of people (possibly anonymously) agreed with them would be hugely, hugely hurtful and would trigger all sorts of arguments.

I know that MNHQ delete offensive posts, but of course you are not able to do it immediately, and stuff like that could remain up for hours.

I don't think anyone has put forward a strong argument in favour of having a like button, other than 'it's nice on FB' hmm, and (from MNHQ) please can we have something novel. However, theer are plenty of people wo have put an argument against adopting a like button, I really wish we would be listened to <plaintive>

SanTEEClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 14:54:38

Very well said, G0F. <like> grin

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 14:57:09

STOPPIT they may see

grin

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 14:57:34

This thread.
These posts:
fastweb Tue 11-Oct-11 15:37:17
and
fastweb Tue 11-Oct-11 16:12:11

RustyBear Mon 05-Dec-11 15:02:11

If MNHQ want something novel, how about putting the My Topics facility from the MN iphone app on the main site?

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 15:26:53

It is horrible when someone posts something offensive and inflammatory. How much more horrible would it be if there were 76 likes against it.

That works both ways though. I felt like I was out on a limb when I posted on a thread where the majority didn't see the issue with the execution of a mentally ill man.

I was only gping to make one protest vote so I didn't feel like Imhadn't even tried.

Then numbers next to my post started appearing. Not as many as vile posts made hours beforehand. But still. Felt a lot less lonely, kept on posting. And a couple of posters asked questions, a few engaged with me in less dismissive tones.

A man was still dead and it was hardly a raging victory in terms of winning hearts and minds.

But still better than a single post and then giving up in the face of what seemed like insurmountable odds of not having my voice drowned out by a huge tide of people leaping to conclusions and making knee jerk assumptions about mental health.

Mainly cos I came away feeling less impotent and hoplessly outnumbered.

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 16:51:14

"It is horrible when someone posts something offensive and inflammatory. How much more horrible would it be if there were 76 likes against it."

That's easy - add a "dislike" button. We much allow the inarticulate to say they disagree too.

Acanthus Mon 05-Dec-11 16:54:39

I thought the whole point of mumsnet was that it was for intelligent people, not this vacuous shit.

<not happy>

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 16:59:03

<Joins Acanthus on the "not happy" bench>

[mutter]

SanTEEClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 17:06:08

It had better be a very large bench. ::shoves people over and sits, arms crossed::

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 17:07:05

But fastweb, why wouldn't you have the same effect by people posting that they agreed with you and (perhaps more importantly) offering further arguments to support your cause?

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 17:43:28

I would also appreciate it if MNHQ would tell us if it is to do with increasing traffic/something advertisers would want. I think we all realise that this is a commercial concern for the owners, and if this will increase the vialbility of the MN brand then that's fine.

Just don't think we are all sitting her clutching our cardigan hems because we Don't Like Change. We have constructed reasonable arguments against - it would be nice to hear constructive arguments for the like button as well.

I know we are very lucky in that we do get a degree of consultation before any changes - Justine et al could just think 'bollocks to you all' and commence the changes without notice am sure she is tempted when we start moaning on grin

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 17:44:07

Sorry, Fastweb, not Fastnet.

I'm not saying that they are convincing arguments, merely that they are relevant. And if there are relevant business reasons for MNHQ to want to introduce a like button, then MNHQ should have mentioned them in the first place.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 18:09:51

SoupDragon

So what, exactly, was the point of the vote?

Well, we didn't suggest a vote! That was Katie Middleton off her own back.

Generally speaking, the history of the last 12 years of this forum from a development/tech perspective has been one of us developing things that automates what people naturally want to do - it's about user experience. Over there years, periodically some people have asked for a like facility. Clearly lots of folk also don't want it.
The solution we think is to offer it for those who want it with an opt out for those that don't.

I don't think it will lead to a deterioration of the user experience of Mumsnet but we will give it a try on Chat and see. If it does we'll lose it. In the meantime you don't have to see it or know about it.

(NB about 7 years ago we had almost exactly the same debate/ concerns about starting a chat topic)

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 18:17:11

There was an official vote too wasn't there? Rather less comprehensive than the other...?

Anyway... as for the chat topic, I'm sure AIBU seemed like a good idea at the time...

KateMiddIeton Mon 05-Dec-11 18:20:12

It's true. I went feral. Renagrade. I was being a pita Maverick.

But wasn't there a proper MN vote at one time too?

<pie charts still available>

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 18:23:01

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo

Fastnet has been posting some interesting stuff on the other thread, presenting the business reasons for having a like button. (I have even wondered whether Fastnet is, in fact, a Mumsnet staffer.)

If what Fastnet says is true, why did you not present these arguments to us in the first place? You have attempted to give us the illusion of having some say in the way MN looks and works - after all, without the posters there would be no MN. I feel thoroughly patronised.

No Fastnet isn't a Mumsnet staffer - we don't do sockpuppets (those days are long gone smile)

There is no particular business case for having like on MN that I can see, although I think Fastnet's point about drawing in lurkers is a good one.

There is, I suppose, a business case for having like us on Facebook because it spreads the MN word and broadly that's good for us a business and (I'd argue) for the health of the site.

But as I said the real point is that we generally do try to automate things that people are doing manually.

(NB in that vein we will certainly look at adding a MyTopics list as per the mobile version of Mumsnet)

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:23:17

Don't you think though Justine that there is a valid argument that it will reduce the MN experience and make it similar to the Daily Mail comments?

At the moment, if someone wants to contribue, they actually have to say something. Hence the significant number of MNers who post 'long time lurker, have delurked to post this...'

They actually contribute. What contribution is clicking a 'like' button? It's just a numbers game, and adds nothing really of any value, I don't think.

Plus, don't you think it is a little banal? Like the proliferation of people who post 'I am going to buy some cakes today' on FB and then a proliferation of dull people click like. What does that add to anything?

Plus, it will not work (imo) as a opt-in, it will create a two-tier mumsnet.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 18:23:25

KateMiddIeton

It's true. I went feral. Renagrade. I was being a pita Maverick.

But wasn't there a proper MN vote at one time too?

<pie charts still available>

Not that I remember...

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 18:24:27

I remember the discussion about Chat (or _Chat as it became).

The difference then was that most of the prolific posters were for chat (as far as I remember). Because they wanted to yatter on grin. There were relatively few old gimmers against.

Now it seems most of the more prolific posters (or at least the names I recognise) are very strongly against. I bet if you held a vote where only posters with more than, say, 500 posts, or even registered more than, say, a year, it would be about 90 or 95% against.

Hence the wondering whether there is a strong commercial reason for including a like button. Because if there is, then fine, it isn't up to me to object to you making money grin.

KateMiddIeton Mon 05-Dec-11 18:25:18

I only remember because everyone said how much better my survey was... wink

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 18:26:55

Get0rf

Don't you think though Justine that there is a valid argument that it will reduce the MN experience and make it similar to the Daily Mail comments?

At the moment, if someone wants to contribue, they actually have to say something. Hence the significant number of MNers who post 'long time lurker, have delurked to post this...'

They actually contribute. What contribution is clicking a 'like' button? It's just a numbers game, and adds nothing really of any value, I don't think.

Plus, don't you think it is a little banal? Like the proliferation of people who post 'I am going to buy some cakes today' on FB and then a proliferation of dull people click like. What does that add to anything?

Plus, it will not work (imo) as a opt-in, it will create a two-tier mumsnet.

No I don't particularly - I think it's a different way of contributing and will encourage easy participation from those who are a bit shy of adding more.
And no I don't think it's banal and more than saying "I agree with that" is banal, although I agree that it is possible for people to use it banally - ie I must be right because 74 people like it.

People opt in and out for lots of things as it stands - Classic and New version, unlimited messages on thread or pagination, AIBU in active or not. It customises Mumsnet - not everyone's mumsnet needs to be exactly the same does it?

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:27:16

I would have assumed that there was a strong commercial reason, and as someone said that it is something the advertisers have requested.

If so, I wouldn't complain, this is a business after all and evidently the owners wnat it to be as successful as can be. That would be a strong and valid reason.

Just because a minority of people have requested it I don't think is really a strong reasoin for intriducing a change which will materially change the site.

Mind you, as Justine says, she has been here before with other site changes, I can't imagine why people would have protested against chat (before my time).

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 18:27:51

There are so many fine arguments against a like button.

Versus so little in the 'for' camp.

I just don't understand the desire. Genuinely flummoxed.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 18:28:30

But if we opt out, can we opt out of being liked, as well as liking, iyswim.

Otherwise people are going to think we are really rude, if they like us and we don't like them back.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:29:04

Re the opt in - I think it is a little different than customise view (and I am one of those peolple who is evangelical about having MN new with pages, far better than classic btw).

If you opt out of the 'like' presumably you opt out of both (a) being able to click like agaimnst someone else and (b) have someone else click like against you. It wouldn't be comprehensive.

KateMiddIeton Mon 05-Dec-11 18:29:22

I still haven't made up my mind yet. I find myself going "oh yes, that is a fair point" to almost everyone.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 18:29:57

Maryz

I remember the discussion about Chat (or _Chat as it became).

The difference then was that most of the prolific posters were for chat (as far as I remember). Because they wanted to yatter on grin. There were relatively few old gimmers against.

Now it seems most of the more prolific posters (or at least the names I recognise) are very strongly against. I bet if you held a vote where only posters with more than, say, 500 posts, or even registered more than, say, a year, it would be about 90 or 95% against.

Hence the wondering whether there is a strong commercial reason for including a like button. Because if there is, then fine, it isn't up to me to object to you making money grin.

No I don't think that's accurate - as I remember it the old regulars were anti, and the new regulars (Edcarcat?) were for. No there isn't a strong commercial reason I just think that we ought to be able to accomodate different versions of Mumsnet, as we always have, as clearly some people do like like buttons.

<must rush because am late to pick up kids but will be back on later>

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:29:59

x posts maryz.

This is an important point.

I don't particularly want people to 'like' me.

<oh this is like school when in my Morrissey phase grin>

KateMiddIeton Mon 05-Dec-11 18:30:07

Maryz will be so disappointed in me sad

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:31:13

I like these philosophical chats about mumsnet.

Thanks Justine for taking the time to talk to us about it - I really appreciate it, even if I disagree with the proposed changes. smile

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 18:31:28

That was NOT a passive aggressive smiley, btw.

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 18:32:52

Why is MN encouraging people to lurk anonymously and just click a Like button? Why? What benefit?

If you want to be a MNer, just join in FFS.

This subject annoys me irrationally and I'm still a newbie! I just think lurkers should be discourages and comment/debate encouraged.

If you cut me, I will have "No to a Like button" written through me like a stick of rock <not true>

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 18:33:32

grin Katie.

I don't want people to "like" me either GetOrf just in case there is anyone out there who would , especially if "liking" a post has some way of linking that particular comment straight to facebook in some way [worried].

I'm a bit confused by Justine's comment "There is, I suppose, a business case for having like us on Facebook because it spreads the MN word and broadly that's good for us a business and (I'd argue) for the health of the site"

I hope there isn't going to be a direct link between liking on here and liking on Facebook [paranoid]. I avoid Facebook like the plague. I know anyone can come across my posts on here by accident, but I'd be a bit wary about my particularly profound thoughts being catapulted across the web by virtue of a lot of "liking lurkers".

I do sound paranoid, don't I blush.

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 18:35:02

There was an official survey about something because the losers whinged that it wasn't publicised widely enough or something... wasn't there?? Lord knows what it was for then.

(ah... dear old EdgarCat... reminisces... [arf])

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 18:35:26

I have even wondered whether Fastnet is, in fact, a Mumsnet staffer

Fastweb can barely hold down a job as a self emplyed TEfler due to spending too much time arguing the toss on the internet

And anyway I live in Italy.

I am torn between being deeply offended at being called a sock puppet and massively flattered that anybody thinks a high profile business would employ me for the purposes of espionage.

Going for massively flattered. Half glass full and all that jazz.

<practices looking sultry and menecing in true spy style>

<fails, due to tomato stains on shirt>

SoupDragon Mon 05-Dec-11 18:37:45

I agree - if someone doesn't opt into the whole Like nonsense, it shouldn't appear next to their post

MarshaBrady Mon 05-Dec-11 18:40:17

Yep I agree. Much better if we can completely opt out.

If I opt out will I get a banner traily thing against my username?

BeerTricksPotter - Is Unlikeable

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:36:26

<likes> BTP wink

[Paddington Stare]

Actually, can we have a Paddington Stare button? For when someone says something that's not worth dignifying with a reply?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 19:39:51

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus

Why is MN encouraging people to lurk anonymously and just click a Like button? Why? What benefit?

If you want to be a MNer, just join in FFS.

This subject annoys me irrationally and I'm still a newbie! I just think lurkers should be discourages and comment/debate encouraged.

If you cut me, I will have "No to a Like button" written through me like a stick of rock <not true>

smile some people are just shy though....

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:40:12

I would die happy if we had a Paddington Stare button.

I thinks I'd Paddy-stared at alot

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:40:56

[Paddington Stares] at Justine

<runs>

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 19:41:46

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus

[Paddington Stares] at Justine

<runs>

Oooh I've gone all wibbly

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:43:16

<buffs nails on collar>

You knows it.

I'm shy! You wouldn't believe how shy I am in rl <hides in kitchen, disconsolately sipping wine>

It's silly to be shy of an Internet Forum where you have made-up names.

Er, at parties, I meant. Not all the time. blush

<challenges Pinot to a Paddington Stare Competition>

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:50:33

Ha @ you in t'kitchen. Hey we could have a right old goss chat if we were at a party togevver. As I always say, if you've got nothing nice to say, come stand by me [wunk]

Hold on, I know where they keep the Secret Pringles. See you by the Aga in 20 wink

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Mon 05-Dec-11 19:54:02

grin wine wine

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:00:04

I still don't get it. So you're shy, you see a post you like, but you can't, through your extreme shyness, manage to post "I agree" under a pseudonym, yet you consider it sufficiently important that your opinion be registered in some form to want a "like" button?

If lots of people say they want tickers, will you trial that too?

<channelling inner Picard> "I will not sacrifice the Mumsnet. We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far and no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!"

See, Lurkers! It's easy! I am pretending to know someone with an Aga now and no one gives a stuff.

Gerrin, get posting! grin

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:02:51

Is it a pretend Aga?

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 20:04:59

What would happen if someone opted in and out of like-ability? Would their likes all disappear from both themselves and the posts they had liked?

And does the like relate to specific posts, or to the MNer who is being liked?

And will there be both like and dislike, or just like?

I don't like like (have I mentioned this before <sulk>) because it's like posting YABU/YANBU and not explaining why.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:06:02

In some ways it's no worse than the flaming biscuit icon, mind.

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 20:08:20

It's silly to be shy of an Internet Forum where you have made-up names.

Well I'm silly then.grin

Cos it took me a fair old while to break into posting.

I was a refugee from a site redesign that led to a mass flounce, that led to a new "owned by us" forum, that led to an OutBreak Of Hostilities as a power struggle commenced, ending in a nuclear winter as the tattered remenants of the brill debate/yak forum we once had ...died from constant further sub division and things that could not be unsaid.

Years of belonging, followed by The Widerness Years, then happening upon you lot.

I was well chuffed, finally felt like I'd found a good fit, wanted to join in but it was rough feeling like the new girl again, not knowing anybody and feeling quite shy at what felt like breaking into conversations at a party where everybody else already knew each other.

I can see how a like button might help some people get over a similar "shy" hump and dip their toe in the water to test the temp and speed them up to the point where they take a more active part in the site. It's like a handy, non threatening, baby step between lurking and participating.

I personally detest the idea of "named" liking (scars from CabalGate from former home on the web run deep and I can see named liking potentially setting off the MN Royalty issue from time to time), but can actually see how it would give LikingLurkers a less cold start becuase their names might ring a bell.

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Mon 05-Dec-11 20:11:42

If MNHQ are into automating what posters do manually, then let's think up a few more buttons.

How about

LeaveTheBastard
LoosenYourJudgeypants
FOTAD
NotAllDisabilitiesAreVisible

What else?

it would give LikingLurkers a less cold start becuase their names might ring a bell.

That's like having a Spreadsheet of 'People Who Agree With Me', which I'm not keen on.

I understand what you're saying about a certain reticence when you join a new site, but personally I think it's only an internet site and nothing of great import rides on your initial posts. You just get a feel for a place and decide if you want to hang around.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 20:22:40

"In some ways it's no worse than the flaming biscuit icon, mind."

I LOATHE the biscuit as well.

I would not want anyone to like me - I think that is part of the opt out (or should be).

I want to be the Millwall of Mumsnet - 'nobody likes me, and I don't care'

grin

CalatalieSisters Mon 05-Dec-11 20:28:20

Yes, it would be good if there could be just two or three catch-all, fully automated posts that the software could just generate for us a few times a day. Then we could all get on with what we are supposed to be doing.

One of them could be "There is at least some truth in what you say, if read charitably enough. It was a funny post, either in virtue of me laughing with you, or in virtue of my laughing at you."

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:31:58

"I can see how a like button might help some people get over a similar "shy" hump and dip their toe in the water to test the temp and speed them up to the point where they take a more active part in the site. It's like a handy, non threatening, baby step between lurking and participating."

I don't really see how it is a step - you're not actually "doing" anything under your own name/pseudonym, so posting directly is surely just as big a leap?

RustyBear Mon 05-Dec-11 20:32:16

Gosh, what a lot happens when you go off to clerk a Goverrnors' meeting.

Doing a very rapid catch-up, so sorry if anyone's already made this point:

"People opt in and out for lots of things as it stands - Classic and New version, unlimited messages on thread or pagination, AIBU in active or not. It customises Mumsnet - not everyone's mumsnet needs to be exactly the same does it?"

True, but none of those things changes other people's Mumsnet, do they? Which a 'like' button would do....

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:34:21

The thing about MN is that it appears that people all know each other, but you can end up bantering very quickly with someone you've never "met" before, quite easily.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:36:40

Oh, yes, good point, Rusty.

(that wasn't hard)

Also, what's to stop trolls/sockpuppets screwing someones likeage stats, so that lurkers think that everyone thinks they must be a tosser, in an inverse Emperor's New Clothes style?

I'm not sure that made any sense.

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 20:49:09

I started this thread. But after reading the arguments against liking I can see what the disadvantages would be.

CalatalieSisters Mon 05-Dec-11 20:51:53

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 20:53:29

OOH we have converted someone grin. Welcome to the dark side insert.

I think pinot's post is a very good one. Pinot has only been here since about March, yet she joined in and soon became a well known and popular poster. I uremember when I first got to know her on the kittens thread, I thought that she had been here years.

I don't think that she would have had any benefit in pressing a like button for a couple of weeks before she got started.

Why pander to the lurkers? Just bloody well join in. You can either take my route (post rather dull posts and get ignored for 6 months) or be a bit braver (start an AIBU to think that lazy people buy ready-made pancake mix) and be flamed to death. Either way, at least you are part of the community, and not a bystander.

SuePurblybiltbyElves Mon 05-Dec-11 20:54:49

Converted WITH OUR WORDS wink

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 20:55:15

I may even capitalise wine

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:56:24

Steady now. You don't want to give away all your power at once.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 20:56:52

I've just noticed I'm not capitalised. I'm sure I used to be.

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 20:57:31

I don't really see how it is a step

I know that. But just becuase you don't see it as a step, or feel it would work in transitioning you, doesn't mean that other people would have the same reaction or fail to be eased into transitioning into active participation.

Webmaster DO use it as a step for the express purpose of transitioning lurkers into posters. Some with not inconsiderable sucess, which is why it is one of the more common suggestions when the thorny topic of getting lurkers to post comes up.

That's like having a Spreadsheet of 'People Who Agree With Me', which I'm not keen on.

It probably works more on the basis of a name having a low level, fuzzy recognition. In the sense that people may recognise it, but couldn't say with any certainty from which threads.

and nothing of great import rides on your initial posts

Nothing of great import rides on you jumping in the shallow end of the pool. But some of us dither at the edge, because the anticipation of being cold and wet is way worse than actually jumping in. I don't think the setting of being a forum is that important. That's just the context. The hesitancy is human, and not that unusual online or off.

Liking is like dipping your toes in. Some will toe dabble for ever more, some will think sod this my tootsies are going blue and stomp off with their towel, others will toe dabble while looking at everybody else having fun and having aclimatised toes at least is enough to convince them to make the leap sooner rather than later.

How that will translate into numbers, content produced and bun fights or not...have to wait and see. If it is limited to one area and you can toggle it off, even if it doesn't turn out to be a good fit for the site it should be easy enough to dump and use to slap down any future requests for like buttons. On a BTDT didn't work basis.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 20:59:44

Isn't it better to force people to post though, if they hadn't got any other option?

This thread has got 240-odd posts. How boring if it was less than 100 with several of the posts having a load of 'like' ticks next to it.

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 20:59:57

Ha!

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 21:01:06

Using your pool analogy fasweb, I am afraid I am of the ilk of jumping straight in at the deep-end, flicking people with cold wet towels, and pushing strangers shrieking into the pool. grin

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 21:02:48

"It probably works more on the basis of a name having a low level, fuzzy recognition. In the sense that people may recognise it, but couldn't say with any certainty from which threads."

How does clicking like make you recognise a poster more?

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 21:04:22

I mean, beyond the act of thinking "I agree".

What does BTDT mean, by the way?

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:07:35

Been there done that. You don't recognise other posters more if you like, they recognise you more.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 21:09:45

Oh, now I'm all confused - so you click like, and then the poster sees that you clicked like? How does this look on the page if 150 people click like?

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:14:32

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:09:45

<Witty comment>

150 people liked this comment (hover to see their names) (or not)

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 21:18:04

Isn't it better to force people to post though, if they hadn't got any other option?

if memory serves, that was the trend for while, yonks ago, enforced registration to even view, massive registration forms etc. on the bais that the effort required to get in would commit people to posting. Lots of exhortions to introduce yourself, moderators calling out the names of new posters in an intro thread .....giving poor new member a small heartattack.

But by and large people found it reduced traffic and the lack of heads through the front door resulted in less new blood which meant natural wastage became an issue.

I am afraid I am of the ilk of jumping straight in at the deep-end, flicking people with cold wet towels, and pushing strangers shrieking into the pool

But are they the toe dabblers?

Or the ones who come hurtling through the turnstile and barely stop long enough to kick beach volley sand in a small kid's face, dump their towel on a prime sunlounger without paying for it and then dive bomb the deep end with a bombastic AIBU? I THINK NOT! sending unsuspecting dog paddlers in all directions in a Tusnami of umbridge ?

with Justine and co blowing their whistles with gusto from the life guard chair

Not all new comers will be a welcome addition, but I don't think potential toe dabbling newcomers need to viewed with quite so much suspition.

Hey you got me! grin

<skuttles off before being buried alive under hurled floating aids labled>

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 21:21:19

Oh, ok, thanks.

(I really want to know where fastweb goes swimming. Sounds awful fancy)

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 21:25:00

How does clicking like make you recognise a poster more?

Their name rings a bell.

BTDT

Been there, done that.

How does this look on the page if 150 people click like?

Usually... there is a the poster name and date stamps and next to it an abbreviated list of whom like it.

So Habbibu 17:45 | Joebloggs, WtfamIDoing and...7 other posters liked this post.

Or similar. Sometimes if you click you can see all the names.

One reason why I don't like named likes is cos my big beef with like buttons in general is screen clutter. The named kind can be really quite cluttery if not done tidily.

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 21:35:59

I really want to know where fastweb goes swimming. Sounds awful fancy

Here, I like the whirpool bit, cos it is no effort swimming. It's not expensive, but was one hell of a shock after Milan's tiny little pools

The water is really cold though. Much non commital toe dabbling goes on while people snicker about "Da Mozzarella".

They will have a wifi hotspot there next year. So I can see toe dabbling being swopped for MNing under pine tree.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 21:38:34

Wow. That is quite something.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 21:39:54

Oh, we've converted InsertCleverUserNameHere (doesn't she look absolutely beeeeeeyooootiful capitalised, don't you all think?) smile.

Do you think if we all carry on being very reasonable we might convert Justine as well [hopeful].

I would like to know how much having a like button influences opinions on threads. I think we get a glimpse of it in AIBU - if someone posts AIBU and the first dozen replies are all YABU, then it seems to become open season, and loads of people pile in. Whereas if the first replies are YANBU, the thread tends to continue down that road.

So two similar AIBU threads can go different ways, depending on the first few replies.

Surely if one side of an argument is "liked" by the firstcomers to a thread, then people will be reluctant to post the alternative view, and so discussion is quashed hmm.

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:42:38

Maryz why don't you try posting a reasonable and unreasonable rant? I'm sure your can find 15 or so volunteers to rig it.

ExitPursuedBySanta Mon 05-Dec-11 21:45:49

So - If 176 people liked a post, would MNHQ still delete it if it contravened the rules? How many likes would a post have to have before it couldn't be deleted? Or would the post go, and the likes still remain, hovering in the ether?

I still think it is a shite idea.

If newbie's are a bit scared, they can do what I did - post, upset, namechange, post, upset, namechange, until you settle in and get comfy.

Nobody is any the wiser.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 21:47:06

Erm, that sounds a bit like hard work [lazy].

I just complain about things, ICUNH (is that shortened version ok?), I don't actually do anything about it grin.

Maryz Mon 05-Dec-11 21:48:48

That would be fun, Exit.

Imagine a post "Message Deleted by Mumsnet".

And because all the people on the thread know it was a post saying "Fuck the fuck off to Fucksville, and when you get there fuck off some more" to some gobshite who was spouting racist crap, for example, they might all "like" it regardless shock.

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:50:41

Maryz ICUNH is fine. Looks a bit rude though!

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 21:53:26

Surely if one side of an argument is "liked" by the firstcomers to a thread, then people will be reluctant to post the alternative view, and so discussion is quashed

It doesn't seem to work that way on CiF.

If it did swing the other way and lots of people decided to like instead of say more or less the same thing, you could argue that a couple of posts expressing one slant, liked by several others, can be seen as less intimidating than 17 posts, one after the other all taking the same (and a tad strident) view when it comes to posting a different perspective.

insertcleverusernamehere Mon 05-Dec-11 21:55:12

Fastweb the vast majority of CIF readers have the same political leanings.

fastweb Mon 05-Dec-11 22:04:14

Another possibility is the standard 17 posts all being very much on one side getting precious few likes, and one then tiny nervous post demurring tagged on the end, getting a lot more likes in comparison.

Which might stimulate a more naunced argument at an earlier stage of the thread as people venture out of the woodwork or come back to restate their earlier (really quite strident) case in less off putting, more fleshed out terms.

Possibly.

Who knows.

We shall see.

Fastweb the vast majority of CIF readers have the same political leanings.

And yet they still manage to argue themselves hoarse fighting each other, recommend button not withstanding.

I've had some right bun fights very vigorous debates on CiF about HE, mental health, Italy/Italian issues and parenthood stuff. Shared politics only gets you so far when there are loads of diverse topics to argue the toss about discuss.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 22:46:35

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo

What would happen if someone opted in and out of like-ability? Would their likes all disappear from both themselves and the posts they had liked?

And does the like relate to specific posts, or to the MNer who is being liked?

And will there be both like and dislike, or just like?

I don't like like (have I mentioned this before <sulk>) because it's like posting YABU/YANBU and not explaining why.

It's categorically not about a poster's like-ability - it's about liking or not liking a specific post. If you opt out you won't get the option to like a post or see whether a post has any likes.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 22:48:04

ExitPursuedBySanta

So - If 176 people liked a post, would MNHQ still delete it if it contravened the rules? How many likes would a post have to have before it couldn't be deleted? Or would the post go, and the likes still remain, hovering in the ether?

I still think it is a shite idea.

If newbie's are a bit scared, they can do what I did - post, upset, namechange, post, upset, namechange, until you settle in and get comfy.

Nobody is any the wiser.

The rules is the rules.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 22:49:32

"If you opt out you won't get the option to like a post or see whether a post has any likes."

But would opting out mean that nobody would be able to click 'like' against your OWN posts?

LardyLardyLardyLardy.

There's a requset for this in AIBU now.

It's not big and it's not clever and it's not wanted.

<<sigh>>

I like MN as is.

<<stamps harder than Justine>>

I like being unlikeable.

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 23:05:54

I still haven't seen any cogent argument as to why it's necessary for MN at all.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 23:20:49

RustyBear

Gosh, what a lot happens when you go off to clerk a Goverrnors' meeting.

Doing a very rapid catch-up, so sorry if anyone's already made this point:

"People opt in and out for lots of things as it stands - Classic and New version, unlimited messages on thread or pagination, AIBU in active or not. It customises Mumsnet - not everyone's mumsnet needs to be exactly the same does it?"

True, but none of those things changes other people's Mumsnet, do they? Which a 'like' button would do....

Well, in a way yes they do - by virtue of opting out of a topic and not posting you are changing it (albeit in a passive agressive kind of way smile). And you could opt out of the like, so it doesn't have to change yours...

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 23:22:07

habbibu

I still haven't seen any cogent argument as to why it's necessary for MN at all.

It's not "necessary" but some people would like to try it. Bookmarks aren't "necessary", nor are festive hats on smilies but some people rather, dare I say, like them.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 05-Dec-11 23:24:27

Get0rf

*"If you opt out you won't get the option to like a post or see whether a post has any likes."*

But would opting out mean that nobody would be able to click 'like' against your OWN posts?

Truth is I dunno yet - we haven't actually fully specced anything out yet. But whatever we come up with, will be up for review, testing, feedback etc...

habbibu Mon 05-Dec-11 23:24:51

Well, yes, but bookmarks and festive smilies don't tend to have lots of people up in arms - I just think if you're planning on introducing something which many people argue will have a detrimental effect on the site it is surely worth considering whether there's a good reason to do so.

ChippingInNeedsSleep Mon 05-Dec-11 23:28:31

Justine

Did you see this post?

insertcleverusernamehereMon 05-Dec-11 20:49:09 I started this thread. But after reading the arguments against liking I can see what the disadvantages would be

& did you read Rusty's post?

People opt in and out for lots of things as it stands - Classic and New version, unlimited messages on thread or pagination, AIBU in active or not. It customises Mumsnet - not everyone's mumsnet needs to be exactly the same does it? True, but none of those things changes other people's Mumsnet, do they? Which a 'like' button would do....

ChippingInNeedsSleep Mon 05-Dec-11 23:30:35

x-posted with your reply to Rusty. However, it has to be said your reply is odd confused

ChippingInNeedsSleep Mon 05-Dec-11 23:32:24

A few people want it - many people don't. Opting out is not the same as not having it. I don't understand why you are so determined to have something that has (according to you) no commercial value & which your most prolific posters (ie those adding to threads) don't want??

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 23:34:07

Justine - I only know MN as I have never used another forum, but do you have an example of where a like facility is used in an intelligent seeming way, and adds to a forum?

I am just thinking you have seen something somewhere and liked the look of it, hence why you are so open to the idea of intriducing it here.

Get0rf Mon 05-Dec-11 23:35:24

I agree with chipping - opting out is not the same as not intriducing it at all.

And it will change MN - there will be references to the amount of likes a poster has, in fact it will be a hot topic imo, and if you can't actually see it, you will be restricted from a form of debate. So it will change MN.

RustyBear Mon 05-Dec-11 23:54:05

"Well, in a way yes they do - by virtue of opting out of a topic and not posting you are changing it (albeit in a passive agressive kind of way )."

But people could, and do, refrain from posting in topics they don't like anyway, whether they were able to actually opt out of seeing them or not, being able to hide them is just a convenience in decluttering their active convos. For example, I don't post in camping but I've never actually hidden it, so being able to hide it doesn't make any difference.

"And you could opt out of the like, so it doesn't have to change yours..."

But as people keep pointing out, it would change our experience of MN, because it would change how other people interact with us.

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 07:14:51

<<clicks "Like!" next to Rusty's post>>

[snigger]

Blackduck Tue 06-Dec-11 07:21:26

Is it me, or is MNHQ being, well, obtuse? Clicks Virtual like button against rustys post a gzillion times....

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 07:48:23

If you drop the whole Like! idea I'll make a tray of chocolate gingerbread and send to to MNHQ.
[bribery]
[hopeful]

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 08:38:30

Counters SoupDragon bribe with homemade (in Italy) Tiramisu.

Or even better ....the "not homemade by challenged English reluctant kitchen user" Tiramisu from our artisan desert shop/bar.

They have a brill semi freddo version.

<dribbles on iPad as tastebuds relive the memory of the last family sized container I lugged home and absolutly did not eat all by myself>

A trial will reveal which predictions of doom or joyous jumping in pool are spot on...or not. Tweaking, full site intergration or dropping of the idea can then follow.

I am not that invested in like buttons for their own sake, but I am not pro trials of new options being veetoed on the basis that people don't want even a temp/limited change cos their predictions are all totally true and everybody else's are utter bollocks....cos they say so. 

Mainly because IMO that would create a basis for forum stagnation. 

Stagnation leaves established sites at risk of whippersnapper sites snapping at their heels, which often prompts frantic "we must DO something" panic based, sweeping changes which offers a high risk of seriously fucking things up in haste and killing off the site.

I have no desire to go through a second bout of The Wilderness Years thanks to that scenario happening  where I have made my web nest ..again.

Trials of user controlled funtionality are an excellent tool in terms of future proofing my right to be gobby on a site that suits me this illustrious enterprise.

<dangles spoon of lucious Italian goodness>

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 08:45:56

It is a shit idea.

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 09:03:36

Good summary by Pagwatch there smile.

I wonder how much a trial will cost. The techy input to have a "like" button", to run it, to keep running totals and to allow some posters to opt out will surely be difficult and expensive to introduce.

I suspect the easiest way will be to have the option to hide it on Classic only, which won't please the anti-likers who have moved to new hmm.

I understand the idea of a trial, but if there is no benefit, why bother trialling? If there is a perceived benefit, for heaven's sake will someone tell me what it is confused.

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 09:07:24

I really thought about it, wanted to get it just right.

SanTEEClaus Tue 06-Dec-11 09:07:28

Blackduck I would say they are being stubborn rather than obtuse 'we've decided to do it and we're going to do it and won't back down.'

Kind of like my toddler last night who had a strop, wanted a cuddle after but couldn't bring himself to admit it until I told him he was more than welcome to climb on my lap.

::holds arms out to MNHQ::

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 09:13:09

The thing is, fastweb, that a lot of people feel strongly about not having it, not because they are old gimmers and just don't want change, but because they have seen the disadvantages of like buttons on other sites.

The regular accusations of royalty, of friends piling in, of people attacking/ignoring newbies; all these have the potential of being worsened by a like button. Any time someone "likes" their "friend" while ignoring an unknown poster who has made the same post, for example. Or every post by Pagwatch or Hecate being automatically "liked" by everyone who wants to be in with the cool kids .

It will make Mumsnet less egalitarian, with some posters more "liked" and thus more important than others.

Because on a site with recognisable poster names, no matter what anyone says, there is always going to be an element of "liking" the poster, not just the content of the post.

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 09:20:15

I agree totally with that Maryz.
It could be the one thing that would make me change name and start again, which I would hate tbh.
And then someone posting ignorant toss about sn or race and getting thirty 'likes' would make mn feel like it was hostile and thick.

ISawPINOTSnoggingSantaClaus Tue 06-Dec-11 09:25:45

Oh I disagree heartily with Justine's point that opting out won't change my MN experience. It will as it will be referred to on threads, which will annoy me. Then after a while, I'll get nosey and opt-in just to see, then I'll get used to it and... MN will have had their way, by stealth.

I think MN are using the slowly slowly catchy monkey approach <nods>

Would "Well, IrritatingGobshite has more Likes than you, BTP, --so piss off!--" type posts constitute a Personal Attack?

Or posters on the Like string being challenged as to why they like IrritatingGobshite's post? That's not going to make Lurkers feel comfortable, is it?

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 09:37:35

And some poor bugger that has opted out will post 'my ds just got into his chosen primary. We are so happy' and will get twenty 'likes' but no replies and will think no one gives a shit

If people can't be bothered to type a few words into a message box I don't think they do, in fact, give a proper, well-rounded shit.

ChippingInNeedsSleep Tue 06-Dec-11 09:46:36

I don't understand why MNHQ aren't listening to the majority & indulging the minority sad

Pag - why would you change name, what would that achieve?

<channels Beyonce>

If you Like it then you shoulda put a [ grin] on it

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 09:54:03

I can understand a bit why Pag might change her name - it would be horrible for her to not know whether people are just liking her because they are afraid not to (for fear of the wrath of all the Pag-admirers) or because of what she is saying.

And BeerTricks' point about people saying "nyer, nyer, I must be reasonable because 28 random anonymous lurkers have "liked" my post even though they are can't explain their agreement with words " shock. That would really piss me off.

SanTEEClaus Tue 06-Dec-11 09:55:51

I think Maryz just pinpointed the real problem with having 'like' here. It's a false sense of 'rightness.'

Example: My 3 month old is watching us eat so I gave her jelly and ice cream today! WIBU?

100 posters say, well, it's not good for her at that age, she's not developed enough to digest it.

200 posters 'like' it.

Who is the OP going to listen to?

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 09:57:54

Chipping.
I already get jibes about 'you only get agreed with because of your mates/you are royalty etc' .
If I did post and did happen to get lots of likes it would make that snarking worse. It is really dull to be on the end of all the time, a cheap shot.
I think I would just leave or become a regular name changer...recognizable only because of my awful spelling and fucking auto correct.

And if mn bring it in you would have to opt in because otherwise the site would make no sense and you would endlessly have the feeling that you don't really know what is going on.

Although I am a bit concerned that my objections all focus on having a poor opinion of some mners. But there are wankers on here - I just don't want to make mn more user friendly for the faceless, anonymous shit stirrer. I think like buttons do that.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 10:20:23

But Maryz it could also work in the opposite direction.

Accusations of royalty and popularity stakes can be countered by pointing to posts from unknowns or not popular posters that incur as many likes as posters percived as popular.

A trial may also restrict the potential for people to feel ignored and invisible, and dampen a rush to a sense of quiche and resentment, becuase a handful of likes here and there vaccinates them against feeling their thoughtful and carefully written occasional posts get utterly overlooked. I think most people expect long time posters to be more visible and garner more appreciation, but having the assurance that they are not effectivily talking to themselves can be enough to aviod upset setting in.

If some people have the hump that they consistently don't ever get a single like, but other newbies/not well known posters do, then it can be pointed out in quite tangible terms that perhaps their lack of "recognition" has less to do with their status, and more to do with what they say and how they say it.

We won't know unless there is a trial.

What if someone posts something revoltingly racist/disablist? Will the Likers of that post also get an MNHQ email pointing out the Talk Guidelines? Or will they get away with supporting such posts as they didn't have the courage to make an actual post about it?

SanTEEClaus Tue 06-Dec-11 10:30:19

I am finding it interesting that there is only one person on this thread who wants this...

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 10:33:10

But there are wankers on here

But the like button not restricted to their use only.

Wanker: Ne nah ne naa nar, so and so got more like than you, nobody thinks you have anythingmworht saying.

This post was liked by Wanker2, Dickhead and 3 other posters

DecentMNer: This is not a plauground. This a forum for grown women. You are not showing yourself in the best possible light <insert pithy comment, that is funny, cutting but not a PA all at the same time.

This post was liked by Fastweb and 7 squillion other posters

It works both ways the like button thing.

And if the like count were the pther way around I for one would appreciate the head up that the amount of wankers seriously outnumbers the reasonable posters. Cos I'd rather be in The Wilderness than swimming with pond scum.

Oh bloody hell, back in the pool again.

I don't even LIKE swimming that much for goodness sake.

<likes everyone's posts>

<fucking awkward>

Blackduck Tue 06-Dec-11 10:34:04

SanTEEClaus - this is exactly what happened last time. Lots of vocal NO, but in a poll lots of yes, which kinda sums it up really.....

It WILL fundementally change my experience of MN whatever MNHQ say and this is where I think they are either being obtuse, stubbon or disengeguous.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 10:37:37

I am finding it interesting that there is only one person on this thread who wants this...

And just think, if there was a like button you'd be even better able to work out how much of a minority I was in. Or not

<ducks>

And as it happens I am not that invested in a like button. I have screen clutter issues and may well turn it off cos otherwise my ability to read posts might suffer. (I think my eyes have some kind of concentration disorder).

But I am invested in the concept of trialing functionality and changes. For reasons previously stated.

ChippingInNeedsSleep Tue 06-Dec-11 10:39:14

Pag - you're a popular person - deal with it.

grin

Seriously, people become popular posters because of their well thought out posts or witty replies - whatever, there's nothing wrong with that at all. Ignore the twats that say your posts/view is only accepted because you are popular - they have it the wrong way around.

Fastweb - ['disagree' button]

See ^^ - it will just make it easy to agree/disagree and not actually say why or enter any kind of discussion. Absolutely bloody pointless addition to MN that most posters do NOT want.

insertcleverusernamehere Tue 06-Dec-11 10:40:29

[Likes that my thread is so active even though I'm a relative newbie]

habbibu Tue 06-Dec-11 10:42:03

But why should people who cannot be arsed posting (and thereby contributing constructively) to the debate have their wishes heard over those who can?

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 10:48:53

I agree with that fast web, but you missed my point a bit.

It isn't the 'ner ner ner , you got fewer likes' etc as described in your excellently illustrated scenario that bothers me.

It was the bet bit I wrote - that the like button is an easy tool for the kibd of shit stirrers who won't raise their head above the parapet to post but, when some shit head post something about (for example) people on benefits are scum and the wankers can all post 'like'

It may be reassuring to you that you would know that there are 65 people on here who agree with that but I think it would make me view mn as more thick and bigoted than it actually is.

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 10:53:48

And actually you illustrated your view of how the wankers get negated through posts

If the witty articulate mner has to retort to

"retards are funny looking" - this post has 65 likes"

What is witty articulate miner supposed to post?

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 10:54:34

grin at witty articulate miner...

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Tue 06-Dec-11 10:59:03

" I just don't want to make mn more user friendly for the faceless, anonymous shit stirrer. I think like buttons do that."

Hear hear!

And I don't want either a quote function or a like button to make it easier for me to agree with you, I want to say so myself. If I care enough about it I will post.

Of course, I'm only agreeing with Pag because she is royalty

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:01:56

that the like button is an easy tool for the kibd of shit stirrers who won't raise their head above the parapet to post but, when some shit head post something about (for example) people on benefits are scum and the wankers can all post 'like'

It's also an easy tool for the people who DON'T think mental illness is an excuse, but are not keen on being at the bottom of dogpile, to like a post expressly contesting the seventy squillion posts that claim it is.

And to be honest a like button reveals that MN is infested with members who tend towards frothy, knee jerk, mean spririted conclusions and demonstrate that they point blank refuse to consider other perspectives, then I'd rather know than not.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:11:10

What is witty articulate miner supposed to post?

Exactly what she would have posted had there been no like button.

The existance of people who agree with a shitty post does not take away anybody else's ability to respond exactly as they would have done before it was introduced.

Why is it assumed MN readers are most likely going to be horrible nasty little shitstirrers ?

All sites will attract trolls and buggerlugs, but if you are required to have a membership to hit like and can only like a single post once (and my preference, a limit on how many likes you get to give in 24hour period, just to encourage judicious use) why are those scenrios of mass unpleansant views assumed to be such a huge risk, rather than thinking the bulk of peole who read here are might be more likely to like the posts they think are thoughtful, or funny or clever ?

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 11:12:44

I want to believe it will show the non posting masses to be the dignified silent majority. I am just not sure it will.
And mn being a place where you have to justify your position is it's virtue. It is articulate, often minority posts that form my view - not how many people can be arsed to push a button with a thumbs up on it.
You can go anywhere and just have to vote.

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 11:14:45

Maybe you are right. Maybe it will all be just as it is.

Fwiw I don't think the majority are wankers. I just think that a like button will be a wanjer magnet. There's a big difference.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:19:33

I am finding it interesting that there is only one person on this thread who wants this...

<braces self for round two of MN secret service sock puppet accusations>

I don't think it was meant like that, fastweb. I took it to mean that any thread on this Topic shows an overwhelming majority against the idea.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:32:27

I want to believe it will show the non posting masses to be the dignified silent majority. I am just not sure it will

I think that is where we differ. I'm realtively confident that MN membership is comprised mainly of women who hold diverse views, but are interested in challenging those views to some extent via reading the tussle of debate and a basically reasonable people who can bring a modicum of intelligence and maturity to bear when clicking a button.

And if they are not then I see no benefit to my living in ignorance of that. Cos I'll have to up my game if I want to make any difference on the issues that I hold dear when faced with a hostile audience.

Yes a like button can be a boon to trolls, wankers and idiots. But unless they seriously outnumber the decent people their impact ismlimited.

Especially you limit the number of likes a single member can make in a 24 hour period.

Which I think is a good idea, cos it increases the mindfulness of the activity and actually works better at involving the lurkers cos they are more engaged with the process of selecting and evaluating which posts they want to like.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:37:54

don't think it was meant like that, fastweb

I reserve the right to be over sensitive given yesterdays comment.

I recognise I am being over sensitive, but there is no choccie in the house I can duvet my hurt feelings in.

ExitPursuedBySanta Tue 06-Dec-11 11:48:52

Limit the number of likes confused.

If I don't want to use any of my allocation, will there be a black market?

<shifty>

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 11:52:35

<immagines much meeting behind of MN bike shed for illictic like trading>

I'll sell mine for a small bar of Cadburys (inc postage to Italy in bag that prohibits melting)

ExitPursuedBySanta Tue 06-Dec-11 11:55:45

Are you in Italy Fastweb? Has it snowed in th'Alps yet? DD going skiing next week and heard there was no snow.

Irrelevanting. Sorry.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 12:03:33

I have peered out of my bathroom window especially for you.

I can't tell, there is a big lump of cloud sitting on Monte Rosa and her neighbours, but I'd guess rain not snow. My lillac still has most leaves, much less cold than normal Dec.

Knowing my luck big cloud will rumble down the valley, charge accross the plain and catch me on the hop cos I still haven't fixed the sumbergible pump in the well uet.

<amends to do list and places well pump on urgent status.... but carries on MNing anyway imstead of moving>

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 12:04:59

I have a weather app for all regions, I can check and see if snow is forcast for the next 2 weeks if I know more or less which bit of the alps she is interested in.

ExitPursuedBySanta Tue 06-Dec-11 12:10:18

She is going to Prato Nevoso - wherever that might be.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 12:16:46

"Snowy Field" is not looking very snowy.

Dpesn't seem to be qny snow there atm. Temps are getting higher, so by the the 17th it's 2 degrees max and -2 degrees minimum, but cloud and rain predicted so.....things could change with just a small temp drop

I will keep an eye on it for you and PM if there seems to be anything snowlike on the horizon.

Is bloody unpredictable Italian weather. One minute you are assured it will be sunny and then next thing you kmow you are womanning the pumps.

So snow could well pop back on the menu.

ExitPursuedBySanta Tue 06-Dec-11 12:20:54

Eek - is that what Prato Nevoso means <thick>

Thanks ever so.

Thread hijack over.

<likes fastweb's helpfulness>

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 12:22:09

"A trial will reveal which predictions of doom or joyous jumping in pool are spot on...or not. Tweaking, full site intergration or dropping of the idea can then follow."

I don't think a trial will prove anything though.

I think the only way I can see it adding value is if it automatically quotes the "liked", adds "I like this but am too lazy to say so " on the end and automatically posts it under the button clicker's name.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 12:23:00

I think it does.

If I have mistranslated I am going to feel like a right berk.

It's in Cuneo.

Good house porn to be had on casa.it for Cuneo.

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 12:23:52

The only way a simple "like' bout adds value is if you also have a "dislike" option. As see on (god help me) the DM comments part. Seeing that 65 people "liked" a comment is meaningless if 469 disliked it.

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 12:24:47

"bout" is "button, obviously. Even a Macbook has fecking autocorrect.

randommoment Tue 06-Dec-11 12:29:14

I'm not too bothered about like or dislike, but I would like to be able to respond to a particular part of a thread right by it. For example, in a thread originally about how often do you wash up, I asked if anyone knew how to clean bits of rice out of dishwasher rotating arms. A very helpful reply appeared about twenty posts later, and another about 15 after that. The only other place I post regularly on has this feature and it really helps to keep the conversation easier to understand.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 12:32:22

I don't think a trial will prove anything though

I said reveal, not prove.

I'm pretty sure if the doom laden predictions are as accurate as people believe them to be we will notice the awful malise afflicting MN.

From a mangement perspective Stats would show any significant posting/membership dropping off, so any outcome should also have tangible data to show how posting is being affected. Add in stuff like an increased need to moderate, increased floods of cross emails to MNHQ etc etc, and they should be able to interpete the connection with the like button without too much of a problem if those aganst it are on the money.

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Tue 06-Dec-11 12:43:47

Fastweb, it wasn't meant as an insult. I deliberately did not use the term 'sock puppet'.

Everyone else, including me, was posting with great emotion. You were the only one presenting a cool business-focussed view. Many of us feel very strongly about our involvement with MN. Very few stop to think that for MNHQ this is a business, and needs to be considered in a cool and business-focused manner, however emotional they feel about it.

Pagwatch Tue 06-Dec-11 12:44:55

Fastweb,

I am obviously not expressing myself well today. I am stuck at home with dc with chicken pox so I am also cantankerous.

I don't think the vast majority of the mn population are wankers.

The current number of regular posters is small compared to the number of members. I don't think that will change

But I think a like button will encourage a disproportionately high response from people who do not want to post but want to make a point. And I think the ppn of wankers amongst those, who want to weigh in but without engaging, will be high.

So I don't doubt the membership. I doubt the impressions those who enage through a like button will create.

<<doubts that is any better>>

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 13:09:55

Fastweb, it wasn't meant as an insult

Not using the actual words sock puppet doesn't change what you were saying here

Fastnet has been posting some interesting stuff on the other thread, presenting the business reasons for having a like button. (I have even wondered whether Fastnet is, in fact, a Mumsnet staffer.)

The implication is that I may not be the ordinary bog standard poster I say I am. That I am not putting forward my POV, but that of MN.

Dishonest in other words.

Not sure how leaving off the term sock puppet is supposed to make me feel any better about the idea there is an air suspition about my personal character and the identity I present to other posters.

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 13:33:55

Fastweb, I think that was a tongue in cheek remark. We are all constantly accusing each other of being mumsnet sockpuppets - we don't mean it, really smile.

And I can't believe no-one has questioned your use of the sentence:

"the sumbergible pump in the well uet"

I stared at it for ages trying to work out what the fuck was a well uet blush.

The last set of "likes" I looked at were the ones on the article about the racist/mentally ill woman on the tram youtube clip. Sadly some of the most racist posts had the most likes sad. I don't think they had dislikes, so the likes couldn't be counteracted.

fastweb Tue 06-Dec-11 13:43:19

Maryz

It wasn't TIC love. There were zero markers used to indicate less than seriousness. And I am not part of a group that knows each other well enough to josh around without being explict about the jokey nature.

I understand why somebody being more "technical" may have precipitated it. I understand that it probably doesn't feel like a big deal when you are. I also know that any other week it would be water, duck, back roll for me.

No harm intended, no foul.

But I just slammed into the realisation that perhaps I'm not best placed at the minute for the hearty rough and tumble of debate.

I hope the like button thing works out for the best, whatever happens.

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 13:55:43

Ah, now, don't go away - this has been interesting, and your input has made it a discussion rather than a load of us just generally whinging and repeating ourselves.

You have to be accused of trolling or sock-puppetry at some point in order to become a "regular" - it has happened to us all (even me, believe it or not grin). Not that I think PrettyCandles meant that - as she said above your posts were more thought out and measured that most on that thread. I, for one (and I suspect a fair few others on this thread) are fairly technically ignorant, so I'm always impressed by technical knowledge and techy posts.

Mostly I just go on and on about how I like it as it is [old gimmer emoticon].

Blackduck Tue 06-Dec-11 14:15:01

Fastweb I have found your contributions to this debate most helpful and they have made me think about the whole trial/like etc stuff. Sorry if you feel you have had a rough ride and hope you are feeling better soon.

Acanthus Tue 06-Dec-11 15:10:19

Opting out won't solve anything at all, because you won't be able to see everything on a thread if you have opted out. So you won't know how many have liked <ugh> and the thread won't make proper sense. There will have to be an "acanthus is unlikeable" marking against a poster's name otherwise those of us who have opted out will be posting non-sequiturs and the rest on a thread won't know why. I must say I would find it quite amusing to be marked as unlikeable.

Get0rf Tue 06-Dec-11 17:23:40

"There will have to be an "acanthus is unlikeable" marking against a poster's name otherwise those of us who have opted out will be posting non-sequiturs and the rest on a thread won't know why. I must say I would find it quite amusing to be marked as unlikeable."

Hear hear.

I agree with all the very valid points raised by pagwatch.

I also think it is a bit disingenuous to state that this is a trial, and if people don't like it they will revert to normal. That patently will not happen - MN will not spend £x on developing this facility just to trial it, and then withdraw. It is the thin end of the wedge, and once here, the facility will stay.

PrettyCandlesAndTinselToo Tue 06-Dec-11 18:06:18

Fastweb, I have never IIRC come across you before. I do not know who you say you are or who you present yourself as. You are an unknown person posting on a website that I use, and I would no more choose to insult you than I would to insult any other unknown person sharing a facility with me.

As for wondering whether you are a MN staffer, given that you are unknown to me, why shouldn't you be one? What's insulting about being a MN staffer? It's not dishonest - why shouldn't they be Mumsnetters themselves, and engage with the rest of on the same level and with the same degree of anonymity?

Come back to the debate. You know who you truly are - the rest of us can only speculate.

And, as I have no intent to offend, sorry.

SoupDragon Tue 06-Dec-11 18:15:23

I'm happy to have "acanthus is unlikeable" next to my name but can't see how it would help.

Acanthus Tue 06-Dec-11 19:17:33

grin soupy

Maryz Tue 06-Dec-11 19:21:35

We could all have "Acanthus is unlikeable" in our rollover labels grin.

And I agree with Getorf - that's what I was trying to say earlier, but didn't put so well. This is going to be expensive. They won't run it in chat for three months, and then decided "oh the old fogeys regulars don't like it, let's get rid".

MrsMicawber Tue 13-Dec-11 14:56:13

Well Chaos I couldn't capitalise, that would be too much like defeat. so I namechanged :smile:

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now