can we have a 'LIKE' button on every posters post??

[nightshade]

sometimes i don't wish to comment but want to acknowledge that i like a mumsnetter's post or response. i keep going to click the like button, as on facebook but inevitably find that it is not there!!

A like button could only be in AIBU. _chat is for, well chatting and the other threads are for support/information and need explanations.Not just clicking a box.

I don't mind the like button idea in AIBU because it is by definition about opinions. On the rest of the site? Just why?

If you want to mix it up a bit Justine how about a brief sabbatical to Gransnet? Or a holiday? Or a new venture altogether?

Or a new venture altogether?

shaddap!!!!

Never forget what happened to the boards on ivilliage.com in the early naughties when the person in charge went off to new challenges.

You think a like button is bad, try waking up one morning to discover the entire fecking format just went "poof" and in it's place is clunkiest, least debate freindly, most twiddly, beisiged with widgets, bastard peice of unusable crap the online "I like a good argument me" world has ever been asked to endure.

Pop up hell, pop up to post, pop up to read whole response, pop up cos it felt like it ARGGGGGGGG!

RIP Ye Olde Current Debates Board. Still missed. Twas plain as plain could be format wise, and had more posts in a single day than today's equivilant can manage in a week.

Seriously, immagine leaving mumsnet one night (but with a flat or threaded view based on preference) and waking up to NMs while it is in the throes of a bad trip.

Lenin I agree about the 'views' counter. Depressing. Especially on a forum about something really awful, like terminal illness and you can see like 58 people have read your OP and not one has had anything to say about it...you feel kind of rejected, given the cold shoulder, or that people are getting some kind of fascination kick out of reading your story but wpn't actually help you.

I agree that the 'like' thing is great for lurkers, whom we don't really need to know the opinion of, if they can't be bothered to back it up with content - and trolls. Do we not have enough of a troll problem? REALLY?

Sorry but I really do think this is incredibly pointless and yes it is dumbing down. that doesn't mean those who like the idea are thick. It just means they see the site in a different way to those of us who don't.

Another point which may not be universally relevant is that I had a friend on FB who would 'like' EVERYTHING I put on my wall. Everything. Well almost literally everything.

It was horrible, really stalkery and so embarrassing. It felt like I had a little puppy who was licking my toes. And it made me feel as though everyone would think I ENJOYED it, which frankly couldn't have been further from the truth. I mean she was nice but I couldn't stand it.

I'm wondering if my Facebook is a totally different one from the one used by everyone else

None of the presumed negative outcomes should be dismissed.

But surely if the proposal is for a trial run of an opt in/opt put system that is to the benefit of the people who see flaws in the "like" widgit.

Becuase the trial will prove them right, MNHQ will knock the whole thing on the head at the end of the trial,period, and in the future when posters ask for a like button evidence can be provided as to why it is not a good idea on this site.

Instead of having to debate the merits of "trolly, MNQueenie accusations, big offence and upset WILL be caused people will be able to respond to future requests for post like/vote buttons with "trolly, MNQUeenie accusations, big offence and upset WAS caused on this site when it was trialed, ergo not a good fit with the sort of people who want to post here"

I personally could hapily live without a like button, I prefer to respond with a post to anything that really tickles my fancy.

I'm here for a chat, advice and a tussle, clicking a button does not scratch that itch.

But if a huge number of posters/lurkers who help keep the site going with their page views would be more inclined to keep reading even greater quantaties of pages thanks to an opt in/out widget, then fine, try it out... and dump it if it doesn't work or it goes down so badly that the people producing most of the content that generates the page views take umbrage and stop posting. Keep it if the worst of the predictions do not come to pass and it improves the attractivness of the site to lurkers so they keep on coming back and consuming pages/clicking on ads.

Although I still think any like button should definatly be anon and have "added value, restricted troll appeal" by limiting the number of posts a registered account can "like" in a week/month whatever.

I think taking it to the next level with tweaks rather than a stright importing of a basic function is more interesting. If you are not a tech. Just the person with the idea, living happily in a code free zone.

Thanks for such prompt response MNHQ. I know a lot of vociferous MN users are against this, but clearly they are equating this with only Facebook (I don't use it either) while not accepting there are many other websites which offer the facility.

It would be interesting to see (at monthly intervals after your trial has started) just what proportion of MN users decide to opt in to using this. I do hope you plan to give a realistic period - whether it be 6, 9 or 12 months - for the trial, and mention it in a sticky too.

nightshade - well done for starting a fresh thread. Yes, there's plenty of negative response but past threads (at 6 monthly intervals) repeatedly show an interest for this option.

How are you thinking of having the like?

Is it going to be like Facebook - where a status gets x amount of likes? I personally don't see the point in that (mind you, I really did not get on with facebook when I had an account for 3 months, so it may be me).

Will it be like netmums - where it has people's names at the top e.g. MaryH, HarrietY, KellyB and UnaS like this thread - because that (imo) is crap and makes the whole look of the thread look cumbersome (I don't like the design of the boards at all on netmums).

Or would it be like the daily mail where you have green and red flags, also anonymous.

I can understand that MNHQ want to update the site, however I would hope that they would listen to the views of their users who really like the plain, non flashy look of the site.

What other options are there networkguy? I have never used another forum, but have seen others and a lot of them look so cluttered. Is there a way a like button (and other modernisations I suppose) could be incorporated without buggering up the simplistic look of mumsnet?

KatieMorticiaton - "Interesting that MNHQ are entertaining the idea of a like button but not a hide poster option."

Think it is perhaps because there have been at least 5 previous threads asking for it. Not sure how many have asked about hiding posters (though I would agree that'd be a useful option too).

I am going to start a thread every few months asking that I be Queen of Mumsnet and get a twat button that only I can use.
Assuming that how often a thing gets raised determines whether mnhq consider it, that should do it.

what will be the bloody point of mn in the end?? i though the net was meant to encourage free speech - dumbing it down to expecting users to click a like or dislike button (at the most) is yet another way of encouraging lazy users - if you agree with something someone has posted it's so much more human and personal to actually type out a response rather than use the click button method.

i am against for that reason alone, could probably think of more.

GetOrfMo1Land - Feel sure there is enough 'space' for a couple of extra buttons and indicators to be displayed. MN already has quite wide display expectations for those not on mobile devices, so the blue heading for each post showing user, date, time... 'Add message' | Report | Message poster might be one place to fit some extras.

However the second 'option' I was mentioning was that of 'hiding' some poster. Some might not like that idea, and others might like to consider the automatic hiding of posts getting lots of negative feedback.

I've seen the last (where you can override to see the post if you wish) works quite well. If some 'idiot' posts and gets (say) 5 negative votes, their post will automatically be hidden from view. It's primarily on some technical discussions I've seen it but it certainly hides junk posts from view [when I have time I do check the hidden posts and then see that very often, the concensus is correct and the posting is better left hidden!]

hiding poster option is another daft idea. mn has always been about free speech, being able to listen to other's views however contrary

Pag - I have been asking for a twat emoticon for years. Justine said it was fly in the face of MN's anti bullying policy

PAH

TBH I think MN will probably trial a like button, I think the best thing is to lobby for how we would want that to look, despite being intrinsically against it.

I would like a hide poster button, but if you hide several prolofic posters it would bugger up how threads read. look at old cod threads - it is pretty impossible to keep up with a thread if a significant amount of posts are not visible.

I'm with Leningrad and Southeast on this one.....(see I don't need a 'like' button, I can type my agreement :) )

Quite understand the views of those against such an option. Given it won't be imposed on everyone, it's a lot easier to just ignore it as it won't be an "issue" !

Of course, there's a big cross-section viewing the site, so who's to say the majority are for or against at this point ? It has been expressed that such a mechanism will kill discussion but many who have a view will never be prevented from posting their views, so can hardly 'kill discussion'...

Oh that is a good idea if you can override the post to see what is there. But then wouldn't that contradict the need for such a function? If you have hidden a poster for being inflammatory, read a thread where everyone is going 'wtf?', you unhide the inflammatory poster to see what they have said - well it begs the point of having it in the first place.

Mind you I am of the feeling that nothing is hidden - I don't hide any topics. That is why I end up on weaning threads

5 negs and your post is hidden is another interesting idea, however that could cause no end of trouble here I think, what with all the accusations of cliques, bullying and troll hunting.

But that implies that consensus is the heart of a good forum. I am not sure it is at the heart of a discussion forum.

There is a hood chance that someone like Xenia would get lots of negative votes. I disagree with almost everything she posts but I can't see that her posts being swiftly hidden would help the nature of the site.

I just have visions of opening mumsnet, reading some arse has posted 'peeedos should be hung' and received 153 'likes' at which point I would want to shoot myself.
The debate is what makes mumsnet valuable to me. It would make discussion more adversarial and combative, which is a growing problem anyway. Any attempt to reasonably discuss a moderate views would diminish.

And those who say " well my fb isn't like that, we all chat in a witty and vivacious way' Facebook is self selecting. You have chosen who you are talking too.
This is an open forum and issues like Madeleine McCann attract the type of posters who will camp out with their pitchforks snd their finger on the like button.

Mark my words.

yes, you are right pag.

I am against it viscerally for all the reasons you say (if you want to have an aneurism have a look at the daily mail comment boards) but I think the writing is on the wall with this one.

It is the thin end of the wedge. If you have it as an opt in, of course you will never be able to see the likes/dislikes whatever. But naturally you cannot opt out of being liked, as the whole thing would never work if so. So in the end people who have opted out would probably get sick of reading about how many likes someone has got on a thread (without being able to see) so will opt in. To opt out would naturally end up making people feel excluded.

And I personally do not want to come on MN and have 'single teenage mums on benefits are scum who get pregnant on purpose to get a council flat' with 127 likes against it, I would hate it. And that is what would happen because some SOME NOT ALL people are inarticulate and/or don't want to actually put their names against the crap the believe, so will resort to the coward's option of like.

Oh Pag you are making feel so bad but I'm still with BIWI, fastweb and NetworkGuy (and Justine) on this one...

What harm can it do to just have a little trial and see if your wise words turn out to be true or not?

Just think, if you're right, nobody will NEVER EVER dare contradict you EVER AGAIN!

Getorf, I have faith that that won't happen.
And we WILL have a 'dislike' sort of button too, so we can always prove without any doubt where the sane majority lies

I really don't like the idea of posts being automatically hidden - who is to say what construes a negative post? And considering the way in which people post on here, with various witty and sarcastic retorts (amongst others ) then that sounds like a recipe for a huge nightmare.

Good point about FB being self-selecting, Pag. But I still stand by it.

And being a lazy arse, I will reiterate my earlier point about why I, personally, would like it/how I use it on FB:

"Sometimes when I'm reading a post I simply don't want to commit the mental energy to composing a reply. But also want to acknowledge the poster's wit/contribution. What is so wrong with that? It hardly makes me inarticulate, given the drivel many posts I make all over the rest of the site."

I'm too lazy to check but aren't many of the previous threads asking for a 'like' button from relatively new posters? Not newbie bashing at all, I just mean that if they've come from another forum they may feel they want to click 'like' because they're used to it - because of FB or DM or YouTube or Nethuns. Maybe they haven't all had the chance to appreciate the subtlety of MN yet .

I do think Bof's point about unnamed 'likes' encouraging posters to express more controversial views without either standing behind them or being asked to defend them is a good one.