Is the Thanks function really necessary?

SilverScreen

I know the Thanks function is intended to give credit to those who make good posts but am I the only one who thinks that it's having a negative effect on the site rather than a positive one? I feel that it effects the quality of posting in a way. Some people seem to have an urge to post random crap, inside jokes and general smart-alec posts in order to get as many thumbs-up as possible instead of making a worthwhile contribution that actually deserves credit. It seems like a good idea in theory but it doesn't seem to work in practice.

I visit a few other message boards and they function perfectly fine without a feature like this and have no desire to implement such a feature. What way do you guys see it?


P.S. I know someone is going to thank this just to be smart

Insect Overlord

It was brought in to stop loads of people from posting "+1/QFT/quoted for epic justice, etc" in response to stuff they agreed with. The in-jokes and random crap were always here.

SilverScreen

That makes some sense I guess. But it should be up to the mods to discourage posts like that instead of having to introduce a system like this I don't mind a bit of random fun but I don't like when people overdo it and takes away from the whole point of a thread.

It works on some sites and not on others I guess.

Overheal

Inane posts with regard to your ma, far preceded the introduction of thanks. as did lolcats and several other memes. Blasting people with piss is just what the new pubescent crowd came up with to help define their generation. It has little to do with thanks

Ickle Magoo

The bottom line is I don't think anyone should be dictating what people "should" be thanking or (barring forum charters) what makes a quality post, for that matter.

I thank posts because they are a good point well made, a point I agree with, something that made me laugh, something I thought was quite clever or even an opposing point well made...and the small space that the thanks on even the post of the day gets is nothing compared to scrolling thru the reems of +1s, QFT's, etc to find any contributions worth reading...

Zaph

Thanks are very handy in something like the Spammer thread in this forum, as it indicates that an admin has seen the report and taken action where appropriate. So it serves as more than just a means of acknowledging posts you agree with, found interesting or amusing, etc.

El Weirdo

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

The bottom line is I don't think anyone should be dictating what people "should" be thanking or (barring forum charters) what makes a quality post, for that matter.

I thank posts because they are a good point well made, a point I agree with, something that made me laugh, something I thought was quite clever or even an opposing point well made...and the small space that the thanks on even the post of the day gets is nothing compared to scrolling thru the reems of +1s, QFT's, etc to find any contributions worth reading...

^This

OldGoat

El Weirdo wrote: »

^This

.

stovelid

I think there has been more soul-searching threads about Thanks than thnaked posts at this stage.

Overheal

El Weirdo wrote: »

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

The bottom line is I don't think anyone should be dictating what people "should" be thanking or (barring forum charters) what makes a quality post, for that matter.

I thank posts because they are a good point well made, a point I agree with, something that made me laugh, something I thought was quite clever or even an opposing point well made...and the small space that the thanks on even the post of the day gets is nothing compared to scrolling thru the reems of +1s, QFT's, etc to find any contributions worth reading...

^This

+1

gemma188

Would it not be a better idea to give a person the option of allowing thanks when they are originally creating a thread?

jonniebgood1

Overheal wrote: »

Originally Posted by El Weirdo View Post
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ickle Magoo View Post
The bottom line is I don't think anyone should be dictating what people "should" be thanking or (barring forum charters) what makes a quality post, for that matter.

I thank posts because they are a good point well made, a point I agree with, something that made me laugh, something I thought was quite clever or even an opposing point well made...and the small space that the thanks on even the post of the day gets is nothing compared to scrolling thru the reems of +1s, QFT's, etc to find any contributions worth reading...

^This

+1

+2

OhMSGlive

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Ickle Magoo wrote:

The bottom line is I don't think anyone should be dictating what people "should" be thanking or (barring forum charters) what makes a quality post, for that matter.

I thank posts because they are a good point well made, a point I agree with, something that made me laugh, something I thought was quite clever or even an opposing point well made...and the small space that the thanks on even the post of the day gets is nothing compared to scrolling thru the reems of +1s, QFT's, etc to find any contributions worth reading...

+2

+3

Not to be condescending or anything, OP, but do you see what we mean? This is taking up more room than the thanks bar underneath.

Sarky

El Weirdo wrote: »

^This

OldGoat wrote: »

.

Overheal wrote: »

+1

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

+2

OhMSGlive wrote: »

+3

I hate you all so much right now.

Nody

Sarky wrote: »

I hate you all so much right now.

Would it help if you got that long awaited MS paint picture of (I think) a duck and hitler?

Sarky

... Maybe.

TheZohanS

Well it's not as necessary as the 'search' function.

Bottle_of_Smoke

A lot of disadvantages alright. However on balance I think its better having than not

Sacksian

Could someone "thank" the OP on my behalf, please?

Thanks.

Jemmaa

Sarky wrote: »

I hate you all so much right now.

Didn't say +1 just thanked your post

Apart showing respect or support "thanks" is a very useful tool for spotting interesting links so I can easily find em later

My name is URL

Without the thanks feature how is one expected to determine what is funny in the YLYL thread?

Insect Overlord

My name is URL wrote: »

Without the thanks feature how is one expected to determine what is funny in the YLYL thread?

Go back 3 or 4 days on Reddit and see how the same pictures fared there.

_AVALANCHE_

Overheal wrote: »

Inane posts with regard to your ma, far preceded the introduction of thanks. as did lolcats and several other memes. Blasting people with piss is just what the new pubescent crowd came up with to help define their generation. It has little to do with thanks

"The Origins of Blasting People With Piss"

A Steven Spielberg Film.:o:p




Search results has The Master as first to say it, with Admiralofthefleet and Sykk seemingly having it as a shortcut on their keyboards for awhile after.

-Corkie-

_AVALANCHE_ wrote: »

"The Origins of Blasting People With Piss"

A Steven Spielberg Film.:o:p




Search results has The Master as first to say it, with Admiralofthefleet and Sykk seemingly having it as a shortcut on their keyboards for awhile after.

Lolcats..

Dudess

Zero1986 wrote: »

That makes some sense I guess. But it should be up to the mods to discourage posts like that instead of having to introduce a system like this

Not really workable in AH, which in fairness is the only forum the stuff you speak about happens in - and was going on long, long before Thanks was introduced.
People go on and on and on about thanks-whoring and I do wonder how much of that is actually happening or all in their heads. Why not just ignore what you perceive as thanks-whoring?

El Weirdo

Dudess wrote: »

People go on and on and on about thanks-whoring and I do wonder how much of that is actually happening or all in their heads.

To be fair, it does go on. Hell, I'm as guilty of it as anyone.

The thing is, when you take out the terminally dull and clichéd "yore ma" and "blast it with piss" posts, some of the wittiest and real laugh-out-loud posts on this site are those "thanks-whoring" first few posts in a thread on AH.

Long may it continue, I say. And long may the thanks feature continue to enable me to show my appreciation for such posts.

slowburner

Thanks whoring, Blasting with piss :eek:
Surely the thanks function is one of the few features capable of inducing a good vibe?
It's essential.

xsiborg

i started reading this thread and found myself agreeing with the OP in their post, because i suppose where im coming from is that i frequent a lot of technology froums where the "reputation system" is used for upvoting helpful posts, but then as i read through this thread, i can see that a reputation system wouldn't work on boards...

Beruthiel

Zaph wrote: »

Thanks are very handy in something like the Spammer thread in this forum, as it indicates that an admin has seen the report and taken action where appropriate.

I use the Thanks for the above ALL the time, whither it's in the spammer thread or reported posts forum.
It is indispensable and I don't believe we could do without it.

P. Breathnach

The thanks function can have a minor entertainment value. A poster thanked one of my posts; then he and I had a minor skirmish on a different thread; he removed his thanks.

Ickle Magoo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

The thanks function can have a minor entertainment value. A poster thanked one of my posts; then he and I had a minor skirmish on a different thread; he removed his thanks.

Yeah, you also get the odd (in every sense of the word) lurkers who hang around forums they never post in to thank troll posts/posts that are infracted and the like...but in general, the positives far outweigh the negatives.

Steve

Is there still a limit on thanks or is that gone?

_AVALANCHE_

Steve wrote: »

Is there still a limit on thanks or is that gone?

Start Thanking all my posts and see if it stops you.:)

slowburner

'Thanks whoring' - what next - 'You're welcome buggery'?
I don't get this at all. Is the thanks option not simply an expression of goodwill/courtesy?

_AVALANCHE_

RopeDrink wrote: »

Been so many threads in FeedBack questioning the merit of the Thanks System.

I've posted many a response to each thread and have done so AS someone who actively hates said system... But never said anything bad about it, ironically.

Thanks Whoring? So what - There's little to no benefit from posting something riddled with Thanks apart from maybe the "Most Thanked" or "Thanked By" system on profiles.

Some have made fun claims of the more "Sarcastic" or "Trolling" methods to thanking posts etc etc

Personally I don't give a rats anus who thanked a post, why it was thanked or some such - Seeing a post with an immense eye-sore of an Orange Blob at the bottom of it (1000 Thanks) doesn't draw any added attention from me other than thinking it makes the post look like a right mess.

At the end of the day it stops all the (Admittedly WORSE) "LOL", "+1", "kk", "Agree", "[Insert Other Useless 1-Word Response Here]" posts to something people just agree with... Considering there are new parameters on Boards where post-count may matter (Such as Sigs etc), then putting a stop to, or discouraging, spammy useless responses is beneficial.

Me, personally, I wouldn't bat an eyelid if the system was nuked tomorrow for no worthwhile reason - I simply don't care for it.

I rarely use it, myself, but when I do it is merely to thank someone, beit for posting something I myself was meaning to say (Or couldn't say better), for being helpful - Hell I'll thank a post from someone if they point out a flaw in my Moderation or making valid debate / points against me, regardless of wether I actually like or dislike the poster or the point being made.

It's just 'handy', thats about it.

Now, I estimate it'll be one month before we then get another "Well, why not a 'NO THANKS' Button" thread.

*sigh*

So to summarise this.....

I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's rubbish but it's handy.

Thank my post! sigh

dr.bollocko

I just reposted a few pics from you laugh you lose back to reddit.

Let's see how they like it.

pickarooney

Steve wrote: »

Is there still a limit on thanks or is that gone?

I was trying to figure out the other day if there had ever been a limit on thanks or if I was mixing it up with karma.

pickarooney

RopeDrink wrote: »

Personally I don't give a rats anus who thanked a post, why it was thanked or some such - Seeing a post with an immense eye-sore of an Orange Blob at the bottom of it (1000 Thanks) doesn't draw any added attention from me other than thinking it makes the post look like a right mess.

Kind of like your username :pac: And orange? What kind of crazy skin has orange thankseses?

John mac

whats QFT ?

El Weirdo

John mac wrote: »

whats QFT ?

Quoted for truth.

Insect Overlord

"Quoted for truth".

John mac

thanks.. 10 years on here and this is the first time i have come across it

slowburner

What does 'quoted for truth' mean?

El Weirdo

slowburner wrote: »

What does 'quoted for truth' mean?

This.

Insect Overlord

slowburner wrote: »

What does 'quoted for truth' mean?

It suggests that the quoted text contains a point of exemplary merit, rendering all arguments against it invalid, false, void.

slowburner

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It suggests that the quoted text contains a point of exemplary merit, rendering all arguments against it invalid, false, void.

Nicely put.

pickarooney

I used always think it meant 'quite ****ing true'. I still prefer that to 'quoted for truth' which just cockbaggery.

Steve

pickarooney wrote: »

I was trying to figure out the other day if there had ever been a limit on thanks or if I was mixing it up with karma.

It was limited to 20 per day when it was first introduced, that was increased at some point to maybe 50? per day, dunno, was just wondering if there are any current constraints, I'd be hard pressed to read 50 thankworthy posts in a day.
It was (and still is afaik) limited to accounts that have more than 10 posts.

slowburner

pickarooney wrote: »

I used always think it meant 'quite ****ing true'. I still prefer that to 'quoted for truth' which just cockbaggery.

A new acronym: ARIV - arguments rendered invalid, void, false (shorter than 'quite ****ing true')
Make up a statement, stick it in quotes, add ARIV to the end - you win the argument, indisputably.
e.g.
'Oliver Cromwell led the Irish navy in the first assault on Hadrian's wall in 1641' ARIV

pickarooney

slowburner wrote: »

A new acronym: ARIV - arguments rendered invalid, void, false (shorter than 'quite ****ing true')
Make up a statement, stick it in quotes, add ARIV to the end - you win the argument, indisputably.
e.g.
'Oliver Cromwell led the Irish navy in the first assault on Hadrian's wall in 1641' ARIV

You're saying your own statement is invalid and void? Or is it like that ultimate mark of the jizzbundle: /thread ?

sunflower27

stovelid wrote: »

I think there has been more soul-searching threads about Thanks than thnaked posts at this stage.

yeah, right.