I agree button

cyclonebri1

Would it not make sense to have an "I agree" button when replying to posts?, many forums do.

It avoids the inane hitting of thanks when the post hasn't helped the replier, but they agree with what has been posted.
It can also reduce traffic simply saving ":T:T I agree with you"

Apologies if this has been pooh poohed before.

Mandelbrot

Yes, it would be best from a user point of view.
But not from the point of view of the website, where it is best if they can point to lots of 'thanks', implying that this is perhaps more of a helpful site than it perhaps is. (It can be very helpful of course.)
And yes, the idea has been suggested and pooh poohed before.
But no harm in trying again ...

cyclonebri1

Thought as it was common sense it probably had:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

It does cut out a load of carp though, and separates flannel from fact, but if commerce rears it's head...................................;)

Atidi

Perhaps we need an 'unhelpful' button then

T_T_2

I think it is universally accepted that the 'Thanks' button has multiple meanings, the correct meaning can usually be inferred by the context of the post they are 'thanking'.

If someone says 'That Jimmy Saville is a bad lad' and gets 10 thanks, it's fairly clear that they aren't thanking the OP for having the courage to say it, but instead are agreeing with the statement.

Slowhand

Atidi wrote: »

Perhaps we need an 'unhelpful' button then

...and a 'I disagree' button as well?

Mandelbrot

T_T wrote: »

I think it is universally accepted that the 'Thanks' button has multiple meanings, the correct meaning can usually be inferred by the context of the post they are 'thanking'.

Yes. But only 'univerally accepted' because we know that there aren't buttons provided to signify what we really want to indicate.

There are many times when I want to thank someone for a well-writen and/or amusing post, but I disagree with a lot of it.
I then would normally refrain from clicking, because I didn't want to possibly imply I agreed with the comments. (If it's really amusing, I'll click on 'thanks' anyway and let others think what they will ... )

cyclonebri1

T_T wrote: »

If someone says 'That Jimmy Saville is a bad lad' and gets 10 thanks, it's fairly clear that they aren't thanking the OP for having the courage to say it, but instead are agreeing with the statement.

My mate delboy is doing a roaring trade in "Jim'll F... It" tee shirts this week.

Agree or thank???


Hope you get my drift and aren't offended.?

fivetide

It would essentially be the like/dislike buttons on YouTube. Bit harsh to anyone on the recievign end of a lot of dislikes.

however, it might stop abuse of the spam button which is what I believed happened ont he parkign board this week. The people involved might have had good intentions but bad advice is not spam and the board should be good enough to deal with it politely without a group of people all whaling in to say the same thing and/or be more sarcastic than the last.

Lets face it, hardly anyone uses the thanks button properly anyway. You have wee cliques that all thank each others post no matter what and no end of people that post exactly the same thing as someone else just further down the thread. The number of 'echo' posts around here is amazing all because each and every one thinks that as they have an opinion they need to vocalise it rather than just agree with someone else.

rant over!

cyclonebri1

fivetide wrote: »

Lets face it, hardly anyone uses the thanks button properly anyway. You have wee cliques that all thank each others post no matter what

That is truly the essence of my post, improper use by friends or cliques. It's an aid to trolling.

Slowhand

Do away with the thanks button completely...please...what actual purpose does it's serve? There's multiple instances on MSE of the same people thanking the same people and each other in return on the same thread as a matter of rote.