Thanks or no thanks?

Terry

Should the thanks system remain in AH?

I say yes.

brianthebard

Yeah thanks are great.

MagicMarker

Yup.

biko

I don't care

Kiera

Can we not get rid of “yore ma” first?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I don't see why not terry... I vote yes

Iago

The problem with something like this in a public poll is the kind of users it attracts.

If someone really wants to get thanks, then they'll vote yes.

If someone doesn't care one way or the other, they may not even see the thread much less bother voting in it.

If someone wants the thanks system removed they'll vote for that, but in much smaller numbers than those who vote yes. Why is that? because there are far people who are insecure/lonely/internet keyboard warriors/seeking affection and acknowledgment than there are people that really don't care one way or the other. Especially on a board like After Hours.

I know where you're coming from Terry, but if the yes vote doesn't win by at least a factor of 9-10 I'd be absolutely stunned.

MagicMarker

I think we should introduce a ''thumbs down'' option.

Turd Ferguson

A Thanks whoring post Terry? I thought you were better than this :rolleyes:

stovelid

Voted don't care because it might stop some of the Yore Ma posts, but I like being able to thank people when they say something worthwhile or funny.

The_Minister

Yes, please keep thanks.

I understand why people may feel the need to get rid of thanks, since informative posts that try and enlighten people tend not to get thanked while worthless ****e does.

However, I would argue that giving people the ability to acknowledge a good post, without posting themselves, cuts out the redundant posts in a thread. It also allows people to see that a post is worth reading, as other people have seen fit to thank the post. And finally, if people spend most of their time thanking one-liners; larger, more intelligent and well written posts also get thanked, encouraging people to raise the standard of their posts.

I believe that the pros firmly outweigh the cons.

Mark200

The_Minister wrote: »

However, I would argue that giving people the ability to acknowledge a good post, without posting themselves, cuts out the redundant posts in a thread.

Thanks

Turd Ferguson

Mark200 wrote: »

Thanks

+1 :pac:

whiskeyman

MagicMarker wrote: »

I think we should introduce a ''thumbs down'' option.

Only if a 'meh' option is also introduced...

stovelid

The_Minister wrote: »

However, I would argue that giving people the ability to acknowledge a good post, without posting themselves, cuts out the redundant posts in a thread. It also allows people to see that a post is worth reading, as other people have seen fit to thank the post..

Actually, this hadn't occurred to me. It is handy to thank a post that basically says (but more articulately and wittily) what you would have said.

The_Minister

stovelid wrote: »

Actually, this hadn't occurred to me. It is handy to thank a post that basically says (but more articulately and wittily) what you would have said.

Indeed. You rarely see a "+1" post any more.

Quazzie

I concur.. Thanks for the masses*!!



*not church related

giggsy664

The_Minister wrote: »

Indeed. You rarely see a "+1" post any more.

+1

stovelid

The_Minister wrote: »

Indeed. You rarely see a "+1" post from anybody under 16 any more.

FYP.

towel401

why no atari jaguar option?

The_Minister

towel401 wrote: »

why no atari jaguar option?

Because this poll may have actual consequences.

towel401

The_Minister wrote: »

Because this poll may have actual consequences.

just like not having an atari jaguar option might?

The_Minister

towel401 wrote: »

just like not having an atari jaguar option might?

If you think it should there is the yes option, if not there is the no option, if you don't care.....you figure it out.

What negative consequences can occur from an atari jaguar option absense.

TPD

How about having an Atari Jaguar button on each post? If you dont care about whats being said, Atari that biz-nitch back to 1993.

Edit: I voted yes by the way.

Cuddlesworth

I say get rid of it, every new thread that starts up now on AH the first page of replies will be people trying to get witty one liners for thanks. And the majority of it is pure crap.

Sharpshooter

Yes, I like to thank a well written post, or one that makes me laugh.

Berty

Thanking somebody is saying something without wasting the time with another post unless you want a post count.

Also, is this thread a subtle way to get people to thank you. :mad:

brianthebard

whiskeyman wrote: »

Only if a 'meh' option is also introduced...

Maybe we should all rate the previous poster's efforts on a scale of one to ten?

dr.bollocko

I vote it stays. However I am gonna look at situations where people thank posters who are banned for their posts. The cheeky buggers. Hiding behind a thumbs up. I havent done that since college.

4zn76tysfajdxp

No tanks.

Terry

Berty wrote: »

Thanking somebody is saying something without wasting the time with another post unless you want a post count.

Also, is this thread a subtle way to get people to thank you. :mad:

No it came about through this thread.
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055441248
Last few posts.

javaboy

sharpshooterH wrote: »

Yes, I like to thank a well written post, or one that makes me laugh.

Me too. As for the Yore Ma jokes, they rarely get many thanks unless they are in context and actually funny so if anything, the thanks system might actually give these people the hint that it's not funny anymore.

You could look at it from the point of view that the thanks system has encouraged people to post anything they think is funny just to get thanks........ or you could look at it more optimistically and say that it encourages people to try harder and be funnier when their lame jokes fall flat.

I'm a glass half full kind of guy so I say let it stay.

Saibh

I think it should stay.

And, I never understood (or don't want to) the obsession some people have with "yore ma".

AckwelFoley

Thanks are given if some one agrees or is amused by a post.

i think lack of thanks if someone is whoreing looking for thanks should stop them. Obviously, they amused no one

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Why is mountainman tanking everyone? No offence but that type of crap makes the mods ask the question in the first place. It's needless.... pfft.

hullaballoo

I voted yes because I think it's useful to have the option to thank a post that's useful, interesting or entertaining etc. without having '+1' or 'lol' posts. Those postcount ++ or lol posts are what have been replaced by the thanks system.

I don't believe people are any more highly motivated to attempt humour simply because they want to get a lot of thanks than they were when there was no thanks system. People will always try and get lol posts etc. irrespective of the thanks system.

The other argument in favour of keeping thanks has been mentioned already: that users are getting good at spotting thanks whores and just don't thank the posts anymore. In that way, it's self-regulating.

A further argument is that it doesn't really make a difference to the useability or otherwise of the site. It's hardly intrusive and you have to really go intentionally looking in order to find out how many thanks a person has.

I also find the thanks filter on the main page useful to draw my attention to useful or funny posts, which I'd otherwise miss.

javaboy

Jenna Large Vapor wrote: »

Why is mountainman tanking everyone? No offence but that type of crap makes the mods ask the question in the first place. It's needless.... pfft.

Individuals can and have had their thanks facilities removed in the past for abuse of the system.

I think either Seamus or Ruu said months ago that obvious thanks whores would lose their thanks facilities but that may have only applied to Feedback thanks whore threads and was probably a hollow threat.

InkSlinger67

Ah sure a bit o' thanks never hurt anyone! Sure it might even put a bit of pep in yer step if you were a wee bit down!

As a prime example, if it wasn't for Frada's kindly offer of oral sex for votes I might not have gotten laid last night! You REALLY wanted that vote BADLY F!

My 68 year old wife, Noreen, thanks you. She's not up for it much these days! :pac:

AlmightyCushion

javaboy wrote: »

I think either Seamus or Ruu said months ago that obvious thanks whores would lose their thanks facilities but that may have only applied to Feedback thanks whore threads and was probably a hollow threat.

I've deleted at least one thanks whore thread here and I believe Terry has done the same for a few. It was one of the main worries CuLT had when introducing it, that there would be a slew of "Thank me" and "Make this the top thanked post" type threads. If I notice someone starting these types of threads too often (my current definition is more than once), then I'll mention it to CuLT and leave it his disposal.

The thanks system has been removed from a fair few people, and I'd say it will happen to a fair few more.

4zn76tysfajdxp

InkSlinger67 wrote: »

Ah sure a bit o' thanks never hurt anyone! Sure it might even put a bit of pep in yer step if you were a wee bit down!

As a prime example, if it wasn't for Frada's kindly offer of oral sex for votes I might not have gotten laid last night! You REALLY wanted that vote BADLY F!

My 68 year old wife, Noreen, thanks you. She's not up for it much these days! :pac:

*Stops brushing teeth*

I'm only to happy to help.

*Continues brushing teeth*

Sparky

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The thanks system has been removed from a fair few people, and I'd say it will happen to a fair few more.

It's only cos I broke it

>_>

I swearz

brianthebard

Jenna Large Vapor wrote: »

Why is mountainman tanking everyone? No offence but that type of crap makes the mods ask the question in the first place. It's needless.... pfft.

Why does it offend you? This is one of the ways thanks are good, instead of mm making a needless +1 to every post in a thread he can thank them if he needs to. I don't see why someone putting their name below another's post should garner so much ire.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I am not offended. I am not hurt or upset about it. But it is abusing the thanks system. Us it for what it is intended for. Not like MM has used it for. Using up his thanks to the first 10 people who posts. It't pointless.

I agree with the thanks system and it is great, but I don't agree with the abuse of the system, you know?

30txsbzmcu2k9w

any chance of getting a thumbs down system in place for 'your ma' jokes etc?

Overheal

Since Thanks came in when was the last time you saw a waste of a post used to say +1 or QFT? Thanks needs to stay.

any chance of getting a thumbs down system in place for 'your ma' jokes etc?

If terry wants MOTY he should add a anti-your ma policy into the charter.

Sam Vimes

Saibh wrote: »

I think it should stay.

And, I never understood (or don't want to) the obsession some people have with "yore ma".

i never understood the obsession with ... oh never mind

Hellm0

I am not a fan, the thanks system merely encourages people to ignore outside opinions and posters. Why read an entire thread when you can just read the same inane drivel that is always spout out by the resident clique who inevitably garner the most "thanks", usually from each other.

Sharpshooter

Hellm0 wrote: »

I am not a fan, the thanks system merely encourages people to ignore outside opinions and posters. Why read an entire thread when you can just read the same inane drivel that is always spout out by the resident clique who inevitably garner the most "thanks", usually from each other.

You know, you sound just like Bill Hicks .

brianthebard

Overheal wrote: »

Since Thanks came in when was the last time you saw a waste of a post used to say +1 or QFT? Thanks needs to stay.



If terry wants MOTY he should add a anti-your ma policy into the charter.

Its already part of the charter its just not enforced. Mod bureaucracy afaik.

FunkZ

An AH without thanks is like a Christmas without the X

Terry

Overheal wrote: »

Since Thanks came in when was the last time you saw a waste of a post used to say +1 or QFT? Thanks needs to stay.



If terry wants MOTY he should add a anti-your ma policy into the charter.

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=53864771