"Like" feature?

[Shane]

Jools,
Does the new software allow a "like" feature for postings? I am often torn between wanting to be supportive of someone's accomplishment and not wanting to clog the forum with 1-2 word postings of congrats, nice, good job, etc.

-Shane

[Jools]

No, it doesn't I don't think although I am fully supportive of the idea (and a dislike, both being anonymous, which allows balance and helps people get a sense of what other find useful and what they do not). I will check through the older suggestions as I seem to recall this has been suggested before.

There are only a handful of modifications (or extensions as they are now called) for the new software. I will check back to see if there is a like feature forthcoming.

Jools

[NCE12940]

One forum I'm on has this feature as well as showing the person who *liked* the post.

[Marc van Arc]

a like and a dislike, both being anonymous

I think this feature is rather useless (see FB), but if you are really going to do this, at least don't make it anonymous. Imo someone has the right to know who dislikes his/her posts - and why.

[bekateen]

I agree with Marc. I don't mean that a person who likes or dislikes a post needs to explain themselves, but that an anonymous like or dislike is rather meaningless and carries no weight.

[TwoTankAmin]

I am one who comes down strongly on the whole +/Like stuff. For the most part it is nothing more than a popularity contest and does more harm than good.

If you like what I posted and want to say so, then explain in a few words why you liked it. Similarly, if you disliked it, give a brief explanation why. Anything short of that seems to be a waste of time, imo.

If you wish to institute such a system of +1/-1 on the forum, please have a way that members can opt out of participating (that is having their posts rated).

If folks want to do +1, go to Facebook. (Speaking of which this is the best explanation I have seen for why I will never be on FB https://stallman.org/facebook.html )

[Jools]

I would caution against the comparison of Facebook as it is not what I envisage. Furthermore, I would take the council of people who have used (and moderated) on PlanetCatfish and Facebook for a few years as the best advisors on that IF I was going to do that. It's a very easy thing to dismiss, but a much harder thing to understand the deeper positives.

However, the kind of think I would look at (if I was going to build the feature from scratch) would be more akin to what's going on at stackoverflow.com. There is a particularly charming implementation over at this English usage site: http://english.stackexchange.com/questi ... il-journey.



Jools

[Shane]

I am not looking for Facebook or a popularity contest. Just a way to show people I have read their post and appreciate and respect their accomplishments without clogging up the forum. Agree it should not be anonymous. If Marc "likes" something I am doing with auchenipterids that would tell me I am on the right track.

I do not see any reason for a dislike. If someone is doing something wrong you need to take the time to explain why. A "dislike" with no context is not helpful.
-Shane

[bekateen]

I "like" Shane's post. (I.e., I agree with his points)

[Bas Pels]

Being supported by people who know about catfish would be very helpfull, but 20 anonymus likes would, as stated before, tell me next to nothing.

This can be solved 2 ways, I think. Either it could be possible to restict the goup who can like, or the likes are not anonymus.

I think the first is by far the easiest accomplished. But it would require maintenance - after all, someone will have to grant the like permission - that would most likely be Jools.

[Jools]

Not necessarily, for example, you may automatically get to like or dislike if you've posted X times, or have been on the forum for over Y months or have contributed Z.

Can I make the point that liking or disliking would be restricted to registered users - not everyone on the web or indeed limited as per my first sentence.

Likes, or dislikes, tell you that your post is good or bad. I am not in the school of thought that everyone at school race day should get a prize...

Also, and this is a key thing. Are we talking about +1/-1 on the first post on a thread or any post on a thread? I think a lot of you may be thinking it's the latter but I have taken Shane's original question to mean the former. The sites I linked to are about the same concept but applied to the answer.

Or, to put it another way are we:

a) +1/-1 on the first post, e.g. rating the question - useful in finding cool posts.
b) +1/-1 on any post, e.g. rating forum interaction - useful in crowd-managing forum users
c) +1/-1 on not the first post, e.g. rating the best answer - self evident

Any combination of some or all of the above is also possible but begins to get pretty complex.

Jools

[Shane]

Jools,
I would say "like" any post. This would be especially helpful on ID threads. Say I post "What is my moth cat?" and you answer and then HH and Medaka "like" your response. That is now an ID I know I can take to the bank. Maybe this is closest to C above, but would only include +1 responses.

Still not seeing the utility of "dislike." If HH dislikes your post to my ID question does that mean he disagrees? That is really not helpful to me getting an ID. If he disagrees with your ID he should post why so that everyone can benefit from his reasoning.
-Shane

[Jools]

Re dislike. It appears there is some confusion between like and dislike with agree and disagree.

Some examples. If a poster was regularly regurgitating knowledge secondhand rather than personal experience, or if they had an offcolour style then this would be a good use of dislike. OR USING CAPS! The idea being it aggregates and over time helps a regular improve.

Jools

[bekateen]

I can also see the not-anonymous, like-only (no dislike) of any post in a thread applied in a different context, not just as a vote of agreement to a fish ID or answer to a question. There have been many instances in the PC forum, at least one going on right now, where a fish keeper has been blessed or surprised with a new fish of theirs spawning and they want to share their good news and ask for advice. Usually several people will post short responses that say nothing more than "Congratulations" or "Good job." I too might like to commend the OP (even the the egg laying might not have been reported in the first post of the thread) and yet I might hesitate to do so because I don't want to make the thread that much longer with simply a congratulatory note. In that context, I'd like to be able to "like" the post in which the egg laying was reported in order to affirm/support the OP without extending the thread. And if anyone clicks on the number of "likes" that post has gotten, the names of the "likers" (I don't know what else to name the responding people who liked the post) would appear, or conversely the names of "likers" would be permanently displayed under, above, or beside the post (yes, I admit this is how Facebook operates).

This may sound like weird thinking, but after two or three other people have already said "congratulations," especially if someone along the way has already posted a more extensive reply with advice perhaps, I feel weird seeing the thread later and just saying something affirming.

[bekateen]

Some examples. If a poster was regularly regurgitating knowledge secondhand rather than personal experience, or if they had an offcolour style then this would be a good use of dislike. OR USING CAPS! The idea being it aggregates and over time helps a regular improve.

Jools, this is where I believe Shane's point about no dislike/disagree is valid. In a situation like the one you describe, I believe it would be best handled with a polite and grace-filled verbal response, rather than with a vote of dislike or disapproval. As I see it, if a person has a habit of posting like you describe, and they see nothing wrong with what they're doing, they would probably dismiss negative votes as coming from snobs, rather than accepting them and correcting their behavior.

Cheers, Eric

[dpm1]

I believe a +1 would be a good idea in agreeing with/liking posts without having to add anything more.

I don't however think a -1 feature would help at all. I am a strong believer in positive criticism and if something is wrong or disagreeable then something more than a simple 'no' or 'i disagree' should be posted. If I err then tell me where! If I offend then bring it to my attention. Should I post incorrect or misleading information I want to ensure its corrected or explained.

The example with id'ing is a good one.

+1means 'yes I think that too'...so no need to add anything if only repeating a name
-1 as a 'I think its wrong' doesn't help when standing alone. Does it mean 'I don't think it is but I can't find a more suitable alternative' or 'I disagree but simply won't be offering an alternative'?

[TwoTankAmin]

I think some salient points are being missed here. So let me offer an example. Most members eventually come to learn who the"resident experts" are on the site. It doesn't take a genius to discern who has extensive experience. So now lets suppose I write a post about breeding zebra plecos. I spend a lot of time and effort to write it.

Over the next week or two I revisit my post and I see that not one of the most respected members here have given my post a +1. Now this may not be due to their not liking it. Some may not have read it figuring they have the knowledge already or did not have the time. Some may simply not bother to +1 one it and some may dislike me enough never to +1 anything I say. Whatever the reasons, from my point of view a piece that I felt had good information etc. apparently did not and that my time and effort were basically wasted. So the next time I wont bother. And then how much time will it take before I might begin to feel there is less reason to visit and to participate? Ask yourselves how the avaergage member might react in a similar situation.

The problem with a +1 system is not just in who gets those +1s but from whom they get them. And failure to get them from the more respected members here would say just as much as getting them. When one has the right and ability to cast a vote for something and does not, that is a statement too. When there is no +1 system, this can never become an issue. And lets face it, the most experienced and expert members here do not have the time or inclination to read every single post. So if one's posts fails to garner a +1 from respected members, they have no way to know if it because their post is not worthy or merely not read.

It gets more convoluted when the topic in question is one on which there is disagreement. What happens when two of the site "experts" hold opposing, or at least clearly differing, opinions. Do the rest of the members stage a "+1 war" to support their own opinion of the topic, or worse, one author over the other based on interpersonal rather than topical considerations. It would be great if this was a simple and straight forward issue, but as we can see, it is not as simple as some want it to be.

So I will say it again, if you want to put in a +1 system, you should also allow any member the option to opt out. To me this is much like those FOTM and TOTM contests we see so often on general fish sites. The difference is that members have the option not to submit entries and not to vote on them either. The +1 system should do the same, imo, if it must be implemented. But I would still prefer in not be used at all. I may be the only one, but I would definitely opt out.

An observation about posting re an accomplishment and the use of +1 or a simple Congrats. The next time one of the fine members here notes they just got married, had a baby, became grandparents or celebrated a birthday, do we suggest all the congrats posted are redundant. Surely every member here would normally offer the same congrats and if those considered friends failed to add their congrats, might the OP not be offended (even it was just an oversight). Similarly, if somebody manages to spawn a difficult or rarely spawned catfish, should not similar congrats be forthcoming on a catfish site?

Aside from that- Happy New Year to all and may 2015 bring you all the fish happiness you desire

(edited to ad the letter k to make thin into think in the first line)

[dpm1]

Im a member of a forum that successfully uses the like/dislike function but doesn't use it as a scoring system.

A 'point' is awarded to your profile page and the awarder is offered the chance to add a comment.
On the main pages all you have is a simplified red/green system that runs from 1*red, though a blank, to 5*green.

Everyone will start blank.
A red mark isn't automatically awarded at the first dislike but after a set amount (by which time repeat offenders will usually have learned or been banned anyway).
Same with green marks.

It takes time to be awarded 'public respect' and isn't just a case of hitting +/-1 a dozen times to seal friendships or mark a grudge and if the person on the receiving end has issues then its easy to flag it for a mod to deal with.

You could even have +/-1 rewards time sensitive so people don't just sit on this backside once they earn a green tick. I don't mean wiping them off weekly but looking long term so people can spot a resident 'expert' is indeed resident not simply doing a Santa like once a year visit (it could be 2..3..5...years)

[TwoTankAmin]

dpm1 please help a poor old man out and explain to me how you know on this other site you know that the +/1 system works effectively. In particular, how do you count the posts it may have caused members not to make, how do you know how many new potential members who see the system and don't join because of it and how how do you know which current members reduce their postings or stop posting completely because of it?

And while we can debate all of these things here, in the end what really counts is not what a few of us post, it is how the rest of the membership which remains silent on the issue actually feel about it.

And as for having to arbitrate disputed + or - 1s, who is going to do this here? I am sure a lot of the senior folks have their hands full with other more site worthy business which is much more important to the operation of the site than dealing with such issues.

What one may want to ask themselves here is how many people you think have decided to join a site because it has a +1 or other rating system vs the number who have decided not to join or have left a site because of it?

[dpm1]

Specialist forums are a far cry from generic bragging sites like Facebook where number of 'friends' counts above all else. People who join niche sites such as PC don't come in to throw a few smilies to their mates so I'm fail to see how the like/dislike choice can be seen as a mere point scoring exercise.

New joiners won't care about throwing out +1 to every man and his dog, and if they do then chances are they won't be around long on such niche sites as this is hardly a 'yoof group'.

I fail to see why there is such negativity to a fancified 'thank you' system.

As for policing disputes, hopefully this is being done already though the '!' reporting system and the idea that a few -1's will produce any more hate mail than negative posting is in itself very negative.

[TwoTankAmin]

Well let me see-

I am a member here, which so far has no such system.
I am a member on Finarama, an expert wild anglefish site, and it has no such system.
I am a member on zebrapleco.com and it has no such system.
I used to be an active member on AquaBid and moderated their chat for a few years and they have no such system.
I am a member on EastCoastCichlids and they have no such system.
I am a member and article contributor on FishForums.net and they have no such system.
I was a member and mod at Tom'sPlace, now defunct, and it had no such system
I am an inactive member on MonsterFishKeepers and they have no such system.
I am an inactive member on AquariaCentral and they have no such system.
I am a long departed member on FishForums.com and they have no such system.
I was a member on Plecofanatics, but walked away from there as it did have such a system. That site folded because it tore itself apart.

PlantetCatfish has managed to become what it is today without having used such a system so far.

+1 type systems are never inaugurated as popularity contests, they simply degenerate into them sooner or later. And I am not willing to say say why people join specialty sites or any sites. Some probably join to learn, others to teach, still others to do a bit of both and many join just to read. Here is what I can say about the membership here.

There are 515 pages that contain the membership list. When sorted by post count from fewest to most, pages 1-23 are all 0 posts, page 24-133 are all members with only 1 post and pages 134-222 are members with just 2 posts. That means about 43% of the members have between 0 and 2 posts since they joined. I wonder why those people joined but never really participated? I do not pretend to know, but maybe somebody smarter than I does. Just please do not tell me it is because there is no +1 system here

Nobody joins because such a system is on a site, but they may not join or they will leave because of it, and that is the problem.

I grow weary of this discussion. I have made my points, folks can consider or ignore them as they feel fit.

[dpm1]

I count that as 10 sites that didn't use it, 1 site that 'tore itself apart'...but was it because of a 'like/dislike' system, or would it have happened even if it wasn't present? - and good mods should be monitoring for disruptive threads and users anyway, especially if there is a flagging system, so obviously they weren't doing the job of calming things down.

If its not used it cannot be judged as a success/failure only as untried. Is there evidence of it even being discussed?

Nobody joins because such a system is on a site, but they may not join or they will leave because of it, and that is the problem.

...And they may also not join, or leave for many, many other reasons.

If you read my suggestions I never said to use a simple points scoring system therefore removing the whole idea of 'I have more rep than you do!' arguments. I also said to keep the actual like/dislike comments on profile pages so it does not distract from the thread and posts.

Imo big posts over very little and nothing gained from it. Playing number games and dropping names doesn't win arguments in my book as I can do equal in return, except in choose not to. Instead I offered a way around the pure numbers game that Facebook 'friends' has turned in to.
...
Counting members vs posts is an odd argument to use and totally irrelevant in these days of ever sophisticated bots and people signing up to sites and forums to which they never return. I thought this site was supposed to be deleting the zero-post members anyway!

[Jools]

Judging by the PM conversations and the input above this is clearly a divisive subject. It is also clear that as dpm1 says, dis/like is much more than a point scoring exercise (and, while we are at it, the my cats/aquaria/blogs section of the sites are one of a real success story's and they most closely resemble social media models).

I might be picking this up wrong, but I seem to read that users of a like system (e.g. Facebook) have in this thread all said this is a good idea (or are neutral/haven't posted) and those who said it's not a good idea are not users of such a system.

The "yoof" are already past using Facebook and on to other things (wouldn't you? I mean all your parents are on FB and isn't it embarrassing when your Dad posts his latest candy crush score or Mom likes a dodgy 80's pop band?) but it is still used as a channel for reaching a wider base (e.g. relatives, products). Facebook's days might be numbered, but how we interact, socially, online has a much longer sell by date.

Also, to aid debate, here's a piece by the BBC on Facebook dislikes which also covers like farming - the latter is fortunately not a problem we are likely to have! We're rather unlikely to ever reach Facebook's ~1.5 billion active users or indeed have our accounts become close to online passports-lite.

Anyway, I wanted to make the point that a dis/like provides a potential much more than I think the average user initially understands. At present, I can track a users journey through the site. As with any website, I can tell which website you came from, where you go on this site, what you spend time on and I can look at data you've posted such as topics, my cats and so on. This is the same for any website, Facebook or not. And, if you're logged in, I can associate that usage with an account belonging to a person. Again, standard practice across the web these days. What I don't do much of, but should look at doing more of, is changing what the user sees at Planet based on that information. However, to my mind, that's a very careful design call as to many it can be a bit unsettling that when they return to a site, that picture of, say, Dave Rinaldo's syno that they've been drooling over recently, appears "conveniently" on the front page.

So dis/like functionality makes that covert presentation of your usage data back at you more transparent. If you and five others like a species or like a forum post, then I can begin to introduce features that show you species, threads or whatnot that interest you or others like you. It becomes logical to the user to like things that they want to see more of. In the context of Shane's original request, while it is useful for saying thank you/cool post while not posting a trivial reply, it also, as a very useful by-product, gives an insight into what people think is cool and good.

Jools

[dpm1]

I'll also point out there are much easier ways to play the 'oneupmanship' game on this forum if so desired than just a hypothetical throwing of like/dislikes around.

Number of posts - displayed on every mini profile on every thread. Simply post anything, anywhere.

Species kept - This is very much a trust based system as very few will ever be checked on in person, or even confirmed via posting images or through detailed information logging.

Breeders table - Again very much based on trust. Because its displayed as a points system there nothing stopping people adding false reports with minimal supporting information in order to simply work their way up the table. (I must update my log and check my score. Also check out exactly how the scoring table works anyway as my Entomocorus gameroi currently have 0 breeders logged and may be worth pushing up the queue for a 1st-breeder double points bonus (or however it works ))

[bekateen]

Jools, while I appreciate your points about custom tailoring content to fit a user based upon their past likes/dislikes or based on which pages they visit most often, I must say that I've never been a fan of that ability on-line. I've learned a lot about fish and fishkeeping here precisely because a bunch of fish I'd never heard of, haven't previously been interested in, and never owned were presented on the pages, esp. the front page, of this website. As I've experienced with other websites that customize content, I would fear that customizing PC would simply narrow what I see (at least, what is prioritized to me) and that would make me more of a monotone fish keeper than I'd want to be. I would like to reserve the right to filter what content I see by simply choosing what links I click on; I don't want a computer algorithm deciding what I don't think is important.

Cheers, Eric

[dpm1]

I'm with bekateen on disliking things too customised around my previois searches.

Some people may like to stick to one particular niche but I hover at the top of the forum tree and delve in to threads not just of they are about my 'wish list' but often simply if thy catch my eye with an interesting title, or something I haven't seen or considered before.

The site is already a niche within a broad hobby, personalising content will only narrow peoples views further. For example just because someone only looks at plecs should they only have articles about them aimed at their pages and thus potentially miss out on a myriad in non-pleco specific but equally relevant info from other sub-forums.

[Jools]

It would be a bit more sophisticated than just limiting what you saw, so the concerns above while noted shouldn't be a concern. Firstly, because the content shown will always be random to some degree and thus show you the unexpected things. Secondly, if you're a person with wide tastes / interested in new stuff, you will tend to interact with similar folks and so you will tend to get things you liked (i.e. unrelated / different stuff) back at you while also the "I keep corys and everything else doesn't exist to me" guy will get more of what they like. This stuff can be really quite complex and it's more about the implementation - if you guys tell me how you want it, I can serve it up.

We are a bit off of Shane's original request, I will get back to that soon but I have a couple of long PMs to respond to on this (which is good).

Jools

[TwoTankAmin]

Now Jools has me curious. I go to decent lengths to prevent the sort of tracking he refers to above. First, I wonder how he knows what site I came from since I do not do tabbed browsing. Almost every site I visit is opened in a new window. Further, I try to block tracking and 3rd party cookies and the minute I leave a site by closing its window, its cookie and the cache associated with that window are deleted/cleaned. Moreover, I mostly visit here without logging on. I only log on when I want to post. Finally, I use traker blocking software. For example, right now on this site I should have prevented the following tracking cookies from loading: Google Adsense, Google Analytics and VigLink. I have a PC cookie loaded which is permitted on a session basis and which will be deleted when I close the window. On sites with display ads, I use an ad blocker and ads in that area stop appearing forever.

But more than that I really dislike so called smart software which is designed to think for me. While a computer can do math faster than I can or can spell better, it cannot figure out what I want to see. I tend to disable "smart" technology in devices or to purchase older dumb devices to avoid it. I do not want targeted ads, I do not want pages pushed at me because an algorithm thinks they should interest me.

Here is why I would not like it on this site. I frequently use this site trying to help others. I will look at a good number of pages here which have no bearing on what I like or do. Rather they are viewed on behalf of somebody else. I am mostly a keeper of Hypancistrus species, I have never owned a clown pleco, nor any of the wood eaters, yet I have visited the pages for some of these fish more often than I have viewed zebra information. One I have little or no hands on experience with and will likely never keep and the other I have kept and bred for years. But based on my page views, an algorithm is going to shove information at me I have no desire to see for myself. So rather than a help, this sort of thing becomes an annoyance with no benefit for me.

When I use Google (or most other search engines) I really dislike having the first responses be local or online sites that want to sell me stuff. I take active steps to prevent this. My real issue is not so much that technology makes a lot of things possible, but that the programmers/designers think anything they make is good for everybody.

I am smart enough to find information on the net on my own. In fact, I think I am better at it than most. I know what I am looking for and how to get to it. So once again my request would be similar to the one I made about +1s. If you want to implement this sort of technology here, please also make it possible for members either to turn it off or to choose to continue getting completely random stuff as we do now.

This site has many great features, but using them or not is left up to users. Many folks like to post about spawning a given fish in the breeder area here. I have spawned every single pleco I have kept. It makes me happy, I sell or trade the offspring and I may post in a forum thread now and then about a spawn. However, I do not participate in the breeder reporting area here. I do not even read other folks breeding reports. That is my choice, however. Nor would I ever request that the breeder sections be removed from the site because I do not use them. Smart technology, to some extent, takes away that option and I consider it invasive as a result.

I know I am not the only one here who doesn't use social media. I doubt I am the only one who dislikes "smart" technology either. I have watched television all my life. I am not a real fan of the commercials. When they come on I change the channel or get up to grab a snack or go to the bathroom. On sites that push stuff at me, that option becomes leave the site. I do not have to turn off the TV program I am watching to avoid the ads, I just return to my program after the ads are done. But on a site if I leave and return, I still get the same stuff I don't want pushed at me. There is a difference between having a random cat picture show up with each visit and having things pushed at me that software has deduced I want to see. Algorithms cannot read my mind and I wish they would stop trying. It gives me a headache.

I drink Pepsi so I like it. Clicking +1 about drinking Pepsi would seem simple, but they use high fructose corm syrup to sweeten it. I buy the sugar sweetened Pepsi since it became available and will not buy the regular Pepsi any more. So now what should I click relative to Pepsi in general. I can argue for clicking both +1 and -1. Life is not so simple as to reduce things to single clicks or for smart technology to be as smart as people think.

BTW- if FaceBook wants to shoot itself in the foot, let it implement a dislike vote. Lets the wars begin. Please Mike Z., I vote for for it .

[Jools]

Good questions.

First, I wonder how he knows what site I came from since I do not do tabbed browsing. Almost every site I visit is opened in a new window.

If you always visit this site by opening a new tab manually or by launching a new instance of your browser then there is no site to track where you came from. Just checked and over the past 31 days, 16.39% of "visitors" to the site arrived this way.

Further, I try to block tracking and 3rd party cookies and the minute I leave a site by closing its window, its cookie and the cache associated with that window are deleted/cleaned. Moreover, I mostly visit here without logging on. I only log on when I want to post. Finally, I use traker blocking software. For example, right now on this site I should have prevented the following tracking cookies from loading: Google Adsense, Google Analytics and VigLink. I have a PC cookie loaded which is permitted on a session basis and which will be deleted when I close the window. On sites with display ads, I use an ad blocker and ads in that area stop appearing forever.

By blocking Google adsense and viglink you reduce the revenue this site makes when you visit, that said, you're a top tier donor to the site and I am quite sure the many donations you've made over the years well outstrip the revenue lost. Google analytics is what picks up all the data that's used for site strategy, the "smart stuff" we're discussing and also helps me understand what's hot and what's not.

But more than that I really dislike so called smart software which is designed to think for me.

I'd suggest my vision of same is more that it augments rather than replaces. I have zero desire to implement anything prescriptive. However, I would make the point with all that effort in blocking the things you mention, you will always have a crap "smart" experience because nothing is known upon which to make a call on what to augment what you normally see.

Here is why I would not like it on this site. I frequently use this site trying to help others. I will look at a good number of pages here which have no bearing on what I like or do. Rather they are viewed on behalf of somebody else. I am mostly a keeper of Hypancistrus species, I have never owned a clown pleco, nor any of the wood eaters, yet I have visited the pages for some of these fish more often than I have viewed zebra information. One I have little or no hands on experience with and will likely never keep and the other I have kept and bred for years. But based on my page views, an algorithm is going to shove information at me I have no desire to see for myself. So rather than a help, this sort of thing becomes an annoyance with no benefit for me.

Depends on the algorithm and if you've switched it on or not. We could switch it off when you visit [most of the dynamic content is controlled as such via your user profile], but we can't because you've blocked everything. That forces you to log in to have the stuff you don't want to see switched off.

My real issue is not so much that technology makes a lot of things possible, but that the programmers/designers think anything they make is good for everybody.

I would suggest that they think (or indeed know) that it's not good for everybody but is for the majority.

I am smart enough to find information on the net on my own. In fact, I think I am better at it than most.

But what of those that are great fishkeepers but not so hot on finding info? What if the majority have different views. My "job" here is to evaluate the experience for everyone. Perhaps those folks who posted once or twice came to the site with a question, got it answered, said thanks and left. If they got a few likes on their thank you, maybe they might venture deeper?

All of this, to bring it back to Shane's point (I've enjoyed the debate / slight wandering off topic), seems to me to be like Christmas presents. "Liking", as Shane described it seemed to be the pleasure of giving not receiving (and avoiding being overtly trivial).

Also, this is not likely a near term thing, I have a years worth of content to add to the site, I am unlikely to develop such a feature in the short term. It's useful to have this discussion though as it means I have plenty to think about in the meantime although I am still not hugely clear why adding "like" functionality means a site implodes..

Jools

[dpm1]

Will the smart tracking be an option or enforced?

If compulsary then opt in or opt out?

Would it be available for new profiles only, or for all eg option placed on individuals profile pages.
....
The issue for me isn't simply being against in-forum data collection, how it's implemented is the krux rather than it being yay/nay on the subject, however the idea the forum is tractkng where I came from and storing the data is surely borderline with regards tracking personal data.