Is DakkaDakka going down hill?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Just Dave**

I've not been using Dakka for too long although I have come to love and appreciate it. I have to agree with what many have said and my own observations, in that as more and more people use DakkaDakka, there is less and less [quality] content and more and more 'drivel' and 'noobs'.
I don't blame Dakka, it's inevitable. It's what happens when it's good, it attracts the masses and the masses spoil it. To be honest, I think it will continue to get worse (although I'm impressed it's been noticed and potentially combated) until it loses popularity and then the 'regulars' can return at it'll rise in quality again. Like a cycle of life. Or lack of a life as the case may be.

When I first joined there was nothing but quality content and willing and helpful people. Yes some could be harsh or very down-to-earth, but if you gave them the respect they deserved and cooperated then it was an absolutely great place to be. These days there are a higher amount of posters and a lower level of IQ, I reckon it to be inevitable but a problem none-the-less. You get ridiculous questions and posts such as those continually dragging something off topic or asking if a Space Marine has a willy.
Ultimately, DakkaDakka was flawed by its own quality.

Yes, I don't believe Dakka is as good as it once was. I do believe however that the moderators/people running this site are still doing a helluva job and that there's nothing really that can be done.

A rating system in which players rate each other (thumbs up/down) could be a good idea for quality control, ensuring the 'good' or expecienced opinions are those that are valued most and the opinions of the less helpful are neglected. EDIT: I TAKE IT BACK, SEE ELMODIDLY BELOW FOR MORE SENSE...

Yes it's not as good as it used to be. But that's because it used to be so, so good. It couldn't exactly improve any further and its quality attracted the masses. It happens with all sorts of things.

On a personal note, I find to ask if people want help to be a good solution. For example, I've got a thread in tactics where people can ask for help (and my article) whereby I can actually contribute to those who want it rather than those who ignore it.

**Elmodiddly**

I don't think that a rating system is valid because it immediately gives some people a score card in which to obsess over and get their friends to +1 them whenever they fart. Some websites have regular thread locks because of the emergence of threads asking for +1's. It also immediately gives people a view that those with less than average scores means their viewpoint is not as valid as others. It serves no purpose other than to pander to the insecurities of those who wish to feel superior over other members.

People tend to get recogised for the quality of posts, relevant topics, good insights and structured discussions rather than having 10K points of 10K posts.

**Just Dave**

Good Point actually, I quickly came to recognise the quality opinion of some by seeing them post myself or hearing about them. For example, Hulksmash and UlholyMartyr are the only people I'd personally go to for Space Wolf advice, but I guess the newer people to the forum don't notice, but live and learn I guess.

I take the support for like/dislike (edit).

I really think when it comes to the problems in tactics/army lists people should say WHY they should take such and such advice, not that they simply should.

**BloodThirSTAR**

So basically what you are saying is you want to be able to erase any posts you don't like. Why should you have this power over anyone else here at Dakka?

Dashofpepper wrote:
Heffling wrote:

I am also of the opinion that any posts that meet the following criteria, as determined by a moderator, should warrant the poster getting an immediate one week (or longer for multiple offenses) suspension:

1) Personal Attacks
2) Implying the author of or respondant to a post is lacks intelligence
3) Inference that their idea lacks intelligence
4) Obvious attempts at trolling or inciting negative emotional responses

If only. =p

My only real beef with the moderator team is that when you report a personal attack, it doesn't get deleted or modded out, they just add a post that says, "Modquisition now on" or "Cool it with the personal attacks." So that personal attack sits there, libel or slander that it may be. I probably have people jumping on me as often as anyone else here does (or more) and from posting trends, I can see when someone has been suspended or banned (including myself from time to time).

When someone writes, "Dash, everything you write is drivel, go back to your lame life and stop polluting the internet," my instinctive reply is, "Amazing contribution you're making to Dakka yourself there. I would encourage you to stop posting until you have something useful to say. FYI, I'm not holding my breath, I'm not expecting much."

Typically, I report the post. 50% of the time, a moderator posts "Moderation now on, cut the personal attacks" or something, and that's it. 30% of the time, a moderator messages me and says, "It wasn't that bad" and that's it. 15% of the time, nothing happens. 5% of the time, the offending post is edited out and the personal attacks attacks are removed.

Its pretty damn hard to NOT respond to someone calling you out specifically and attacking you. It would be easier if moderators removed offending content instead of simply saying, "Moderation on now." 100% of the posts that I write that people take offense to are in response to a personal attack. If personal attacks were removed and not just noted....posts that I write that are potentially offensive would disappear. Seriously. If someone punches me below the belt, I'm going to stomp on their head until they are dead. Here on Dakka, where the fights are verbal, I'm expected to not retaliate....but the instigation isn't removed, just noted.

I'd be a happy camper if that policy changed. Hell, me being a moderator would *also* make me a very easy to get along with kind of guy. I wouldn't ever have to be acidic with someone, because the personal attacks I'm responding to would just get deleted as inappropriate. Then I could freely go back to bringing content to Dakka without fear of my name getting dragged through the mud, my efforts denigrated, and people calling me names because I could just zap out that crap.

**Kirasu**

IMO one of the main problems with the 40k tactics section is simply the game itself right now. A lot of the big tournament players posted their tactics long ago and.. the same tactics still apply because nothing has changed in like 2 years

Space wolves are a solid list no doubt, I use them in 'ard boyz but its nothing new.. Just your generic shooting + counter assault list that you used to be able to build with the 4th ed marine book. Whats the tactics? Same as before.. deploy units in firing lanes then assault whatever gets past your guns

IG has dominated for years.. nothing new. All you see are like hundreds of threads about the same stuff. Yes if you use artillery + vets you will win.. if you use storm troopers you wont, moving on

Basically its just a severe case of repetition. Perhaps dark eldar will alter the meta game by a LARGE degree and force people to actually play the game differently. Or they'll be a gimmick army and suck, we'll see. Until SW and IG are knocked off their throne do not expect the tactics section to be any more useful, its all been said

**AvatarForm**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Kirasu wrote:Id like a "reputation" system like other forums have.

Reputation or popularity?

There should be a difference, but usually isn't one.

This is true. On WAU we tried a Modelling thread contest where readers could vote for who had the best thread for the month... it turned into a popularity contest where someone with 3 rubbish pics and barely any explanation won cos he got his buddies on to vote. Popularity does not equal quality.

Shadowbrand wrote:Honestly dakka is growing and with growth comes trouble. At least their are SOME rules here.

These are all what comes with success.

Growth = trouble?

Sounds like the attitude of some of the close-knit gaming groups who stare at new members like they have 2 heads or something... As for rules, the Mods seem very fair here, inlike Whineseer where if you break wind while reading a thread you get a warning.

ph34r wrote:A bit worse than it used to be perhaps. That comes with getting more members, it seems.

Again, afraid of change?

Reecius wrote:Those are some good suggestions, dude. I think loosening up on the moderation will help a lot. We need a little drama to engage people! If it's all smiles and politeness it's boring as hell.

Agreed. Try criticising someone on P&M and watch them have an emogakfit

**Chibi Bodge-Battle**

Agreed. Try criticising someone on P&M and watch them have an emogakfit

Thought the role of the P&M forum was to allow for a discussion or critique of work. Not to criticise the person.
Not sure if that is what you intended but that how it comes across.

**AvatarForm**

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:
Agreed. Try criticising someone on P&M and watch them have an emogakfit

Thought the role of the P&M forum was to allow for a discussion or critique of work. Not to criticise the person.
Not sure if that is what you intended but that how it comes across.

Last time I heard, critique involved criticism. Its all about the attitude of the OP. If you cannot handle criticism of your work, dont post it.
If you think it was perfect, you do not need the feedback of an Internet forum to confrim this.

Though I did not intend my post to read 'person' (literal), but the person's work (associative).

**Chibi Bodge-Battle**

Okay, thanks for clarifying
FWIW don't think many would disagree
The word "criticism" carries negative connotations which can be misunderstood.
Critique as far as I understand it implies dialogue and constructive comment.

**Just Dave**

AvatarForm wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Kirasu wrote:Id like a "reputation" system like other forums have.

Reputation or popularity?

There should be a difference, but usually isn't one.

This is true. On WAU we tried a Modelling thread contest where readers could vote for who had the best thread for the month... it turned into a popularity contest where someone with 3 rubbish pics and barely any explanation won cos he got his buddies on to vote. Popularity does not equal quality.

You tell that to 50 Cent. Oh...

AvatarForm wrote:
Shadowbrand wrote:Honestly dakka is growing and with growth comes trouble. At least their are SOME rules here.

These are all what comes with success.

Growth = trouble?

Sounds like the attitude of some of the close-knit gaming groups who stare at new members like they have 2 heads or something... As for rules, the Mods seem very fair here, inlike Whineseer where if you break wind while reading a thread you get a warning.

ph34r wrote:A bit worse than it used to be perhaps. That comes with getting more members, it seems.

Again, afraid of change?

Without trying to sound Elitist, it's not so much that growth = trouble, but generally the more and more popular something gets, the more its quality begins to fall. This is even more true when the content is not controlled (eg. Public Forum).
If more people use the site then there will inevitably more 'drivel' that comes with it, I and many other members (hence this topic) have witnessed the gradual decline in post quality as the popularity of Dakka has increased...

Once again, without trying to sound elitist, but if you have more participants in University Challenge for example, then the more the average score and quality will drop.

As Reecius said "Dakka is a lot nicer of a place now, for which there is something to be said, but it is also so much less useful in those regards than it used to be." and he's right, Dakka is a lot more polite and is a lot more 'widespread', no longer is it dominated by certain individuals who are seen as almost celebrities (eg. Stelek). However it appears that alongside this, the members who's opinion should be valued have lost influence and as such you get anyone claiming to know best rather than someone actually being respected as a generally good authority on the subject. For example, when I first joined Sanctjud was a great source of advice on Chaos Space Marines and I truly respected and valued his opinion as such, and so would many others. However, as more people have joined, Sanctjud has lost influence and now there is no longer an almost 'authority' on certain subjects.
People have a lot more say, but this means the listeners have a lot less worth listening to IMHO.

Whilst I don't believe a ranking system to be the solution as it would - as some have said - quickly become a popularity contest and/or inaccurate, I wonder whether something along the lines of the 'reputable traders' section in the Swap Shop would work for helping quality control in Tactics and Army Lists?
This could HOPEFULLY mean that people who post good quality help and advice are given recognition for it and then people will often know where to go for such advice... I'm not sure, it's just a thought but I think it should be considered.

**phantommaster**

How exactly is it going downhill?

**H.B.M.C.**

phantommaster wrote:How exactly is it going downhill?

We're on page 18. Try reading some of the other 17.

**Just Dave**

I just read through a fair bit of the thread and figured I'd post/quote what I believe should be listened to if we are to gain anything from this thread...

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:
olympia wrote:Some of the most prolific posters, I would wager, are also the most prone to hit the "report post" button. Surely the mods must have the statistics on users who report the most posts. Perhaps some sort of counseling forum could be made available to these sensitive souls.

There is some truth in that.
However it may be that they are using a larger part of the forum than 'regular posting' users and are finding where problem posts are.

However the more prolific posters also generate a good percentage of the reports from other users.

Most astonishingly the people who most often shout loudest in threads like this one (as has been said earlier a thread like this pops up every few months) are often the ones who have the biggest user case files, and generate a largenumber of reports against them.

To be honest I want robust discussion. I think it is also alright to not want to give a big hug to every dakka user. It is also to be expected that as new users arrive (and dakka has been, for the last year or so the fastest growing wargaming website in terms of true user numbers) there will be the same posts that appeared back when I joined in 2000 and then reappeared every few months ever since. Which is why I often don't reply to them unles sthere is something profound or the rules/background changes have put a new perspective on things. Also why I do 90+% of my posting in the DCM mosh pit where despite being able to discuss anything except users who don't have access to the forum we end up discussing little man-dollies.

I love this site.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:It's not the same as it used to be, although I'm not sure if that is bad, good or a bit of both. I'd probably plump for the latter.

I certainly remember some of the flame fests on the old Dakka when two (or more individuals) disagreed with on another, although, it was often funny. Not because I laugh at people in anger, but rather, often there was this cool wit between the two rivals, an arsenal of put downs that would make me chuckle. Almost some kind of gentlemanly combat of ideals, obviously it could turn nasty, but I remember more of the half serious put downs and comments more than anything else. I still see that often today, and several posters have a habit of making me chuckle quite heartidly in OT and around the boards.

Of course to new users, that may seem overly hostile, but I don't think it was as bad as some folks think it was, as I probably wouldn't have stuck around this long if it had been. The Mods have always been good here in my opinion, and I have a lot of respect for them.

*snip!*

More members means more problems, and I think thats the issue, thats not really a negative issue though, as it stimulates more conversation overall. You're going to get excellent new posters, as well as poor ones, and you just need to be more willing to accept you will see the odd thread you wish you hadn't opened. I'd rather have increasing numbers than decreasing for certain though, as even the vets among us can sometimes decide todays the day and hang up the gaming boots. New blood is always going to be important, and I think we just need to adjust to an evolving gaming populace.

The odd polite nudge in the right direction now or then couldn't hurt em mind.

Reecius wrote:Yes. Some of the good stuff is still good.

YMTD, WIP Blogs, Tournament Discussions, News and Rumors, all still great.

Tactics and army building has some of the worst advice you could ever have the misfortune of reading. [Not quite THAT bad...]

Dakka is a lot nicer of a place now, for which there is something to be said, but it is also so much less useful in those regards than it used to be.

That though, is only this one man's opinion of course.

Shadowbrand wrote:Honestly dakka is growing and with growth comes trouble. At least their are SOME rules here.

These are all what comes with success.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Once upon a time if you posted something stupid, you'd get called on it. These days, if you call on someone for posting something stupid, you get a warning.

Ketara wrote:I don't understand why people feel the need to be rude to get their point across.

If the noob in question isn't going to take your advice, he's not going to take your advice. It doesn't matter if you're polite, or offensive, or type it out, gift wrap it, and mail it to him. I mean, does anyone here really think being offensive to someone is more likely to make them come around to your point of view? Really?

Will someone please very slowly and carefully tell me how posting to someone that their idea is 'friggin stupid' in any way contributes to helping someone's tactical capabilities develop? Because there's clearly something I'm missing here.

neil101 wrote:only being in dakka a few days , but i find it both relaxed mature , reasonable , educational friendly and inspiring , which are qualities you will rarely find on any forum let alone one to do with competetive battles

Nurglitch wrote:JohnHwangDD:

No, not like Stelek. Kind of the opposite, really. It wasn't his rudeness or ego that bothered me so much as he didn't bother explaining his reasoning so that people who disagreed could gain any insight or explanation for why he held that opinion. He was simply willfully inarticulate.

[Thought for the day: Saying WHY you are right means you are right. Saying you simply ARE right means you are wrong...]

Kilkrazy:

Except we're not strangers, randomly meeting in a shop or on the street. We've specifically come to this forum to participate in written discussion. We're here to read each other's opinions, not mutter niceties as we try to go about unrelated business.

Nurglitch wrote:Maybe it's my philosophy background, but I'm used to being able to tell someone "Your ideas sucks, and here's why", have them reply in kind, and then go get a beer and continue the discussion once the conference particulars are done for the day. I'm used to casual rudeness so long as it's concerned with building better ideas. Being rude because someone thinks it's funny or because you want to take someone down a peg, to insult someone, that's obviously not okay.

MajorTom11 wrote:It is longtime people most likely to be dissatisfied though... They are the one's who will have seen it all/been there, done that, and will be a lot more annoyed at repetitive/crappy posts, as well as rowdy new-comers. This is the group that would be hardest to please.

Brand new peeps get to look at everything like it's new, open a 'where are the missing primarchs' thread with great interest, likely be impressed and fascinated by the tutorials and p and m blogs... they will also have an easier time adjusting to the way things are as they have to adjust anyways, and will learn Dakka as it is, not as it was. Old timers are like married couples ten years in, you still love your spouse (hopefully), but the thrill and surprise period is over, now it's down to your friendship, patience and a lot of hard work, because it isnt the adrenaline rush it used to be. Still rewarding and apprciated? Sure, but easy to be in a good mood 24/7, not nearly as much as it used to be.

This is gonna sound like rampant ass-kissing, but I really think the mods do a great job, put in a lot of time and in general do what is best for Dakka as whole, despite what the elite may want. Solving the problems mentioned in this thread is difficult at best, and frankly they are problems that arise in just about any social system, micro to macro.

I still think it is more than worth talking about how to improve things, if only because it demonstrates to the powers that be that we all care, but at the same time, let's not lose site of everything Dakka does right while we examine what it does wrong.

Group hug!

Manchu wrote: One point that keeps coming up is that if users want better quality, only users can supply it. I don't know if the causal relationship is accurate, but since these threads have come up at least of few of the "cranky old vets" have created extremely good threads in tactics that have elicited extremely good responses. I think that we can continue brainstorming to good effect here as long as people continue to be committed to addressing their concerns. But, yeah, it'll slow down because griping is easy and dealing with gripes is less easy.

**Chibi Bodge-Battle**

Blue wall AAARGH

But those are only opinions Dave.
Whilst they may or may not be valid, it would have been more useful to collate the more constructive ideas proposed into a summary imho

Will let someone else do that!
Just to be clear am not volunteering!

**Just Dave**

True, but opinions lead to ideas and ideas lead to solutions.
Providing they're valid that is...

**Chibi Bodge-Battle**

We probably don't need to start discussing the same opinions again, but a consolidation of possible solutions could be useful.
There are 18 pages of opining. A distillation of the the (possible) solutions would save having to wade through the entire thread to see what people have come up with already to address the issues.

**AgeOfEgos**

Not to beat a dead horse here...but I really feel the Like function would help alleviate some of the issues.

At least, reflecting on the thread I see users discouraged on spending time posting quality content, when it is quickly bumped off the page by numerous other threads. Regardless of how altruistic we might all imagine ourselves to be, there is always ego in the need to share/show & tell online. We post not only to get feedback but to also feed that need for recognition. Again, the Like function can help high quality threads maintain durability and encourage such content.

If that incentive is not present due to a flood of content pressing your modeling/tactic advice off the page....well then you can't simply tell users to provide better content....they'll simply start a blog where they can control the content. Inversely, I think the Like function would serve as motivation to share within the Dakka community.

In the end though, I love Dakka with or without a Like feature. I get modeling inspiration here, threads that make me chuckle over my coffee and great feedback from the DCMs. I consider my DCM donation and any time spent posting to help others an absolute steal for what I get back.

**wuestenfux**

Well, I generally enjoy English forums over the egocentric forums here in Germany.

**MeanGreenStompa**

AgeOfEgos wrote:Not to beat a dead horse here...but I really feel the Like function would help alleviate some of the issues.

At least, reflecting on the thread I see users discouraged on spending time posting quality content, when it is quickly bumped off the page by numerous other threads. Regardless of how altruistic we might all imagine ourselves to be, there is always ego in the need to share/show & tell online. We post not only to get feedback but to also feed that need for recognition. Again, the Like function can help high quality threads maintain durability and encourage such content.

I can't go for the 'like' button, simply because I don't put it past certain weirdos to make multiple sock puppet accounts and/or fill their self-aggrandising/begging sigs with 'I'm trying to make 40k a great game, please please please remember to 'like' all my posts!!' or other needy and somewhat creepy stuff.

I'm not in favour of a popularity contest, given that many would just vote for 'characters' rather than content. Certain spamming posters (or 'prolific' if you want to be polite) would suffocate us even further with their squalid attention seeking. It smacks of bread and circuses to me, appeasing the masses and driving up a tickbox counter, at the potential cost of quality.

I do entirely agree with you about the DCM forum though, it's a community within the community and as Dakka gets larger, keeps a few names and faces in good contact as a sounding board for each other.

**Kanluwen**

You know what would potentially alleviate some of the issues with the "Like" button?

If only the admins could actually see how many times a post was liked, and get an exploded view of who opted to like it.

**Polonius**

One reason I favor a "like" feature is that it allows for positive feedback of quality posts that don't necessarily need comment.

I concede the point that the feature could be abused by the more attention seeking, but let's be honest: those posters are already about as obnoxious as possible. I don't care how many people "like" a thread about which Primarch would make the best lathe operator; I care how many people like my threads.

Giving the like feature will allow the silent majority to give kudos that I think a lot of great posts don't get.

**Chibi Bodge-Battle**

There is that aspect Polonius
For eample rather than posting this meaningless reply a +1 on the old thumbs up would do.
The way you see it is a very responsible approach and would be fine if that could be guaranteed.
However, being somewhat of a cynical old geezer, can't help feeling some of the concerns that have already been expressed.

Not that big a step from clique to click.
Must apologise for a dreadful soundbite.

**AgeOfEgos**

Well, in addition to disagree with Stompa for a moment and agree with Polonius, you could easily weight the Like button on whatever factors you feel would remove Like spam. I believe Lego mentioned something similar earlier in the thread. For example;

Post Count
Gallery Votes
DCM Status
Article Edits
etc.

So essentially you would make those whom contribute to Dakka weighted more whereas multiple accounts or non-contributing Like spammers would have little weight. You could also make it exponentially harder to acquire Likes on a thread;

Thread Rep
1-10 Likes bumps up the rep one for each Like
10-20 Likes bumps up the rep one for each 2 Likes
20-30 Likes bumps up the rep one for each 3 Likes
etc.

Just throwing ideas around and of course those numbers are just examples.

**Magc8Ball**

Generally, if a discussion forum gets a 20-page discussion on whether or not it's going downhill... it's not. It's when you just have, like, three replies that you have to worry. That means that people don't care and aren't visiting the site. The only measure by which anyone could tell if Dakka is "going downhill" is to look at the unique visitors statistics from the sitelogs. If there is a significant decrease in the number of visitors, then the site is losing value as a resource. If not, then it might just be losing value for you.

There have always been useless posters, pointless threads, and dumb arguments on Dakka (not to mention the entire bloody internet). People in general just have a tendency to notice them more when they're more mentally invested in a site than they may have been before (in other words, the more you post and read the more likely you're going to see the crap). As an example, I haven't been all that active the last couple of years, so I don't really have a negative opinion of Dakka's current crop of active posters. I'm sure, though, that if I dug around I'd just be of the opinion that it's pretty much the same level of noise as there was back in the old days when DakkaDakka was still actually a store.

One of the first skills anyone should learn on the internet is how to mentally filter out the crap without having to rely on ignore lists or a moderation team. I barely even notice idiots anymore, since they almost universally have great big red flags in their posts that I can recognize practically subconsciously. My mind just skips over those posts.

So If you're of the mind that the quality of Dakka is declining, take some time to think as to whether it actually is, or if you just care more now than you did when you were a new poster. It might simply be the case that you're more familiar with the site, so the noisy posts jump out from the background more, rather than blending in with all the "new".

**kronk**

Manchu wrote:Does anyone think there is a legitimate reason to allow the posting of polls in tactics? It seems to me that any tactical question should be answered with at least a couple of sentences rather than by voting.

I'm a few days late to respond, but not past the statute of limitations, I imagine.

I posted this poll in the tatctic thread last week because I don't have a lot of experience with Codex: Space Marines and wanted feedback before I did something silly with my Mark III armor figures.

I didn't want to make a sternguard loadout that sucks and in a year be: "Man, those are sweet-looking Sternguard. Too bad you never use them...because they suck...and you're dumb!'

However, I put in the "please explain" next to options 2 and 3. Did everyone explain? Not if you go by vote counts. But it did generate very useful discussion (IMHO). Would a thread that said "Please help me with my sternguard loadout" have helped me as much? Not sure.

Edit: Polls like this one are better suited in 40k General, IMHO.

**Elmodiddly**

Nah, a "Like" feature is just an ego trip for those who regularly post and need gratification. Those with lower like scores would be ignored by those who favour the score system, believing those with lower scores to have a lesser opinion, as inferred by some here, which goes some way towards elitism and arrogance.

This is supposed to be a community and by adding a like feature it instantly becomes a segmented society.

Serious question; Why do you need to know how many times people have liked your posts?

**Polonius**

Elmodiddly wrote:
Serious question; Why do you need to know how many times people have liked your posts?

Serious answer: many of my posts are lengthy and require actual effort. It'd be nice to know I'm not wasting my time.

**Kilkrazy**

Polonius, you aren't wasting your time when you post.

You'll know if you're missing the target when people don't bother to write an intelligent reply.

**Kanluwen**

Polonius wrote:
Elmodiddly wrote:
Serious question; Why do you need to know how many times people have liked your posts?

Serious answer: many of my posts are lengthy and require actual effort. It'd be nice to know I'm not wasting my time.

I'd say the number of views should let you know you're not wasting your time.
Would you rather have people throwing you a thumbs up everytime you post something?

I mean, I don't know about you...but I don't want people to just post incomprehensible rubbish in reply to my posts that I've spent such a length of time crafting. Sadly, given that this is the Internet and the level of maturity exhibited on said medium...I'd far prefer silence from the huddled masses of inept text messaging tweens/powergaming spankers, with a few thoughtful posts every so often who point out a mistake or something that could be altered to make my post/suggestion work better.

Kilkrazy wrote:Polonius, you aren't wasting your time when you post.

You'll know if you're missing the target when people don't bother to write an intelligent reply.

I wouldn't say that, because there's a certain kind of poster who flatout refuses to post intelligent replies, and just posts for the sake of posting.

The amount of "+1" posts lately should tell you that it's sadly not the case.

I mean, really how hard is it to type out "I agree with the sentiments that <Insert Name Here> put out. Well done!"

**Polonius**

I guess, like most writers, I value feedback. Giving people the ability to tell me that they like my work, or agree with my points, without necessarily having them write a post in response is appealling to me. It's also appealing to be able to show appreciate for a thread where I can't really contribute, but I'm enjoying all the same (the current Nid tactics thread is a great example).

I mean, I love intercting and discussing my posts, and maybe I'm idealizing a concept that won't work well in practice, but I the like button could legiimize the practice of providing support while eliminating the "+1" posts.