# "Likes" and other site new features



## MickaelV

Hi there, sorry if this was discussed earlier but I have been off the site for a while and I need to understand the changes.
I found out there are trophies now, and some are connected to how many "likes" one posts get.
However I cannot find any "like" button or equivalent system here.
Am I missing something?
Thanks.
Mickael


----------



## M Mira

It's a feature in XenForo but not activated in WR. From my experience on other XenForo forums/fora, controversial/subjective topics tend to turn into battles of +/- which is not much of a contribution, so they're disabled totally or in certain sections.

I think it's for the better of this forum if we skip all the +1 drama and express disagreement with a post describing why.


----------



## MickaelV

I could not agree more with what you said and was just surprised they would be mentioned in the new trophies help section. I actually do not think trophies to be useful either anyway, the "new member", "member", "senior member" labeling does the job.


----------



## mkellogg

I am not so sure how useful the trophies are.  They are intended to help motivate new users to participate. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.

Likes are difficult. We are trying to find a good way to implement them so that they work well for us.

Welcome back, Mickael!


----------



## MickaelV

Sometimes I feel like I would like to show some respect or to acknowledge some good answer from someone without flooding the forum with off topic messages. Of course this can always be done through a private message, but I think as both a consumer and a supplier of answers, this could be good to get some simple feedback from the community. Maybe making the author of a post the only one able to see and receive "likes" could prevent negative aspects mentioned by M Mira, while allowing some feedback to be sent and received...
Thank you for the welcome back!


----------



## Encolpius

What is Xenforo? Xenophobic forum?  Is that here?


----------



## JamesM

(Assuming the question is a sincere one  ) If you look at the bottom of the page you'll see "Forum software by XenForo".   XenForo is the name of the company that makes the software and the name of the software itself.


----------



## Encolpius

Oh, Thanks, I see now. So that company has crated more similar websites but here it is not active.


----------



## JamesM

XenForo creates a sort of "template" for a website that can be customized.  Features can be turned on or off and the code itself can be customized.  Mike Kellogg used the XenForo software as the foundation for WordReference but he has customized it for our use.


----------



## LaVache

I hope this feature could be added to wordreference. I think it would help people choose which option is most likely the best translation of a word/phrase. If lots native speakers "like" a comment, then it has more weight.


----------



## london calling

If you implement 'likes' I will stop using the forum, I swear to God. This isn't social media.


----------



## TheCrociato91

london calling said:


> If you implement 'likes' I will stop using the forum, I swear to God. This isn't social media.


They have been implemented. But only in private conversations (not that I find this function useful, especially in PMs).


----------



## DiBaca

LaVache said:


> I hope this feature could be added to wordreference. I think it would help people choose which option is most likely the best translation of a word/phrase. If lots native speakers "like" a comment, then it has more weight.


Totally agree. It's hard and boring to read 10+ messages in a thread. I know websites like "ProZ" uses a like feature and it's very helpful.


----------



## Aliph

DiBaca said:


> Totally agree. It's hard and boring to read 10+ messages in a thread. I know websites like "ProZ" uses a like feature and it's very helpful.


Nobody is obliged to read all the messages on a thread. As for myself, I enjoy following a discussion and mostly learn something new. Adding likes reminds me of Facebook and other social media that I abhor.


----------



## Nickle Sydney

london calling said:


> If you implement 'likes' I will stop using the forum, I swear to God. This isn't social media.



Why so? I believe that's a great feature overall. For example, if you agree with someone you can simply press the "I agree" button instead of writing "I agree" or saying nothing at all (which is misleading, in my opinion).

Right now I can't see any way the function might be misused or abused by someone.

But at the same time I don't like the idea of highlighting the most popular response / message on a thread.
I personally do not find it tidious whatsoever to read all the messages (i mean an adequate number ) on a thread. and the fact that your message might be easily outweighted by someone else's is a little bit sad. It quite discourages you to make a contribution of any kind because there's a chance of it being ignored / neglected as someone's message has managed to more get likes or thumb-ups. (Maybe their message was posted way earlier?)


----------



## DiBaca

Aliph said:


> Nobody is obliged to read all the messages on a thread


Sometimes you're in a hurry and need a quick answer. I'm not saying it should become facebook, but there's way too many unrelated messages in posts sometimes.


----------



## london calling

Boris Tatarenko said:


> But at the same time I don't like the idea of highlighting the most popular response / message on a thread.



And that is exactly the problem. It's misleading. For example someone could make a suggestion which is incorrect but that loads of people 'like' which could lead learners of English to think it's ok!


----------



## Aliph

If someone is in a hurry he can look on certain apps like HiNative, surely handy but without any guarantee


----------



## Nickle Sydney

What can you possibly be looking for on this forum when you're in a hurry?  

"I'm gonna be late for work! But jeez I need to know how to translate this line from Greek to Turkish in an 17th century poem by an unknown writer!"


----------



## london calling

Aliph said:


> If someone is in a hurry he can look on certain apps like HiNative, surely handy but without any guarantee


No guarantee says everything. Those kind of APPs are worse than useless to anyone who really wants to learn the language. And as for Babel..!


----------



## DiBaca

Boris Tatarenko said:


> What can you possibly be looking for on this forum when you're in a hurry?


I’m not sure if you are aware of this but some of us work as full time translators and sometimes we are caught up with urgent translations that 
need to out immediately.
.


london calling said:


> And that is exactly the problem. It's misleading


Nobody said that, but a like button can highlight some responses.


----------



## london calling

DiBaca said:


> Nobody said that, but a like button can highlight some responses.


Why judge which response is better by 'liking' it? It's far better and more useful to SAY you like it and explain why. I'm talking about the language forums, by the way.


----------



## DiBaca

london calling said:


> Why judge which response is better by 'liking' it? It's far better and more useful to SAY you like it and explain why. I'm talking about the language forums, by the way.


And no body is saying we should not do that. All I'm saying is very simple, I'm not sure why is so hard for some to understand. Having a like button would make life easier for those who are in a hurry, and when we have time we can read ALL the details written in every response. what's so problematic about this?


----------



## machadinho

Liking is like voting. I vote on posts I like: witty, nice, funny, polite, elegant, clear, straightforward posts, not necessarily on posts that are true, as I don't know the answer. That is, I vote on posts for bad reasons. We shouldn't trust a post just because it got more votes. We shouldn't encorage others to do it either.


----------



## bearded

machadinho said:


> I vote on posts for bad reasons


Considering your statement, I would say you vote for the_ wrong_ reasons.  I hope you don't vote on the same purely aesthetic basis also on the occasion of political elections...


----------



## machadinho

bearded said:


> Considering your statement, I would say you vote for the_ wrong_ reasons.  I hope you don't vote on the same purely aesthetic basis also on the occasion of political elections...


Perfect. Thanks. That's where _your_ post would get more likes than mine.


----------



## Nanon

I don't like likes. Just voting on a post or raising a thumb does not explain why the reply given in that post is - or isn't - accurate.


----------



## machadinho

bearded said:


> Considering your statement, I would say you vote for the_ wrong_ reasons.


Nope. I say, in liking, I vote for _bad_, not just wrong, reasons. It would be simply for a wrong reason if I accidentally picked the right answer but for a reason having nothing to do with its truth or accuracy. But a bad reason is _misleading,_ as it can support a post that is either right or wrong, true or false, accurate or inaccurate.


----------



## DiBaca

machadinho said:


> It would be simply for a wrong reason if I accidentally picked the right answer but for a reason having nothing to do with its truth or accuracy


If you are afraid of voting incorrectly then don't vote at all. Votes should be encouraged only for those who are 100% sure about the answer being right.


----------



## machadinho

Yeah, how would you enforce this rule, though? By asking users to confirm if they're really really really sure? If they knew the answer to be true, they wouldn't be looking for an answer in the first place.


----------



## DiBaca

machadinho said:


> Yeah, how would you enforce this rule, though? By asking users to confirm if they're really really really sure? If they knew the answer to be true, they wouldn't be looking for an answer in the first place.


Have you ever used other sources besides WordReference? Plenty of them use a like feature and seem to not have any problems. Proz.com is a very good example. They have a +1 option to give a point to the best answer, now, I'm sure there's hundreds of people that use that website on a daily basis and the most likes I've seen in an answer is 15, and, I, myself, have only like like three answers in the past years. My point is this, not everyone is a psychopath that feels the need to give a like to everything they see. You only "like" something when you're sure about it and if you just give random likes than you got issues. It's all about common sense and human decency.


----------



## machadinho

But other resources seem to have run into problems. I used to contribute to a couple of sites under stackexchange.com where answers to popular questions could easily get from 1 to 1000 likes and more within an year or two. When some answer gets more than, say, 5 votes it will steadily continue to get more and more votes, even if a week later someone else posts a thoroughgoing and compelling refutation of it, or just a better answer. The wrong, or worse, answer gets momentum and keeps growing because basically nobody cares reading further answers and comments when one of them is already marked as The Best Answer.

Three years ago, I even suggested WordReference to implement a way of voting threads (not answers) up and down, which is a feature from stackexchange that I thought could be useful here.


machadinho said:


> Please, I beg, enable it. Just voting threads up and down. We don't need any silly reputation-point system such as in StackExchange.


Fortunately, WR didn't. Voting as truth criterion, not as political normativity, is just evil.

I left stackexchange precisely because of its Byzantine system of voting up, voting down, badges, reputation, gold, silver, bronze medals etc. It's evil. It makes us even more slaves of these companies than we already are.


----------



## DiBaca

machadinho said:


> It's evil. It makes us even more slaves of these companies than we already are.


We've clearly had very different experiences with voting. I think the best way to do it is if WordReference created a survey and see what the majority of people who use this site thinks. At the end of the day we're the ones that keep it alive.


----------



## london calling

Nanon said:


> I don't like likes. Just voting on a post or raising a thumb does not explain why the reply given in that post is - or isn't - accurate.


That is exactly what I am saying.

.


DiBaca said:


> If you are afraid of voting incorrectly then don't vote at all. Votes should be encouraged only for those who are 100% sure about the answer being right.


But that's not going to happen, is it? How for example does a learner of  English know if a post is 100% right? This is the issue here.


----------



## DiBaca

london calling said:


> How for example does a learner of English know if a post is 100% right?


Well, if an answer has a geat number of votes than it might be correct, right? Plus, the great majority of people that use this tool are translators or bilingual people.


----------



## london calling

'Might' is the operative word. And no, at least on the forums I take part in most of the members are learners (especially English Only). Not many of us in the Italian - English forum are bilingual either and only a few seem to be translators.


----------



## DiBaca

london calling said:


> English forum are bilingual either and only a few seem to be translators


Well, it looks like it all depends on the language pair then. In the Englih-Spanish forum the majority of the participants are translators.


----------



## Nanon

@london calling , I second what you said above.
Besides, some of the users are not only translators (professional or not). Many of them also have different areas of expertise. They are able to clarify technical details and nuances and to confirm which words and sentences are actually in use within their respective areas. For example, you may have a frequent translation or a post voted many times that just won't match in, let's say, a legal context, even if it works in most other cases. This cannot be detected by the number of likes: only reading through the posts will help.


----------



## DiBaca

Nanon said:


> This cannot be detected by the number of likes: only reading through the posts will help.


I don't think any of you are getting the real point of a "like" button. A like would only help filter out the most important responses in a post. A like button can prevent reliable responses to get lost among pointless comments.


----------



## Nanon

I think a vote button just adds bias. Furthermore, choosing the most voted reply doesn't mean that your translation is accurate. It simply means that you select the option chosen in most cases by your peers (cf. Proz), not that you select the option that best fits to context.
Do we want to do what Proz does? Or do we want to differentiate ourselves?


----------



## merquiades

I think likes are are a really bad idea.  I agree that liking by pure nation adds bias, and cheapens the forum to acquaint it more with social media.  Maybe some of the people who like so easily are not even that qualified to vote.   As someone said before you can't add a second question....  are you 100% sure this answer is the best based on your personal experience?  are you voting with no linguistic or personal bias whatsoever?
I use proz.  I used to check the answer with the most likes until I realized I often got more from the other answers.  Endorsements are always subjective.
Here we do differentiate ourselves.  Opinions are given with explicit comments with examples in context.


----------



## Peterdg

I'm not in favor of "likes" either (not to say I'm completely against it). The problem with it is that it does not give a reason for the "like".  One can give a "like" for several reasons: e.g. because

- a post was funny,
- a post looked impressive (but it actually was complete nonsense; I could give some examples),
- a post was actually a good explanation,
- a post is from someone you like
etc.

So, no "likes" as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## S.V.

If there are not gonna be little hearts ❤️, I will stay home, and just let the electoral college decide.


----------



## Rocko!

Peterdg said:


> One can give a "like" for several reasons: e.g. because
> - a post is from someone you like


Yes, yes, yes. Likes implementation would produce this cute nightmare.


----------



## london calling

DiBaca said:


> I don't think any of you are getting the real point of a "like" button. A like would only help filter out the most important responses in a post. A like button can prevent reliable responses to get lost among pointless comments.


You're the one who's missing the point. If 10 people like (for example) post 10 which is actually a crap answer and only 2 people like  post 2 which is the best answer and then a learner filters the thread on the basis of the number of likes, he may choose the crap answer.


----------



## Sowka

We have had the "Reactions" for some time now, and I have to say that I really like them -- although I was hesitant about them before.

I particularly like the "thank you" because I can express my gratitude -- without disturbing the thread  -- for a post that helps me as a non-participant in the thread.


----------



## bearded

Sowka said:


> I have to say that I really like them


 +1

.
Also for the attention of the Administrator:



Sowka said:


> We have had the "Reactions" for some time now, and I have to say that I really like them --


As you can see in #49, I share your opinion. However, some inconvenience is possible: e.g. you put an 'agree' on someone else's post, and after a while the poster edits their message by adding something you *don't* agree with. At present, your 'agree' sign remains valid for the whole post… (it happened to me a couple of times). Do you think  there would be a possibility to take back one's 'agree', or would that be totally unfeasible?


----------



## se16teddy

We are familiar with "liking" other people's posts on Facebook, to show that information was interesting, useful, amusing, etc. Is there any way WordReference could be tweaked to allow the same? I sometimes feel I would like to thank a contributor for information in this way, but feel that creating a new post, or sending a private message just to say that, would be burdensome to the reader.


----------



## DonnyB

se16teddy said:


> We are familiar with "liking" other people's posts on Facebook, to show that information was interesting, useful, amusing, etc. Is there any way WordReference could be tweaked to allow the same? I sometimes feel I would like to thank a contributor for information in this way, but feel that creating a new post, or sending a private message just to say that, would be burdensome to the reader.


They're currently being trialled in the German, Spanish/German, Arabic, Hebrew and Etymology forums, as well as least one other forum.  The ones we have so far are just "agree" and "thank you".  

The intention is or was to extend them to other forums eventually, depending on peoples' experience of using them.  From what I've seen, feedback so far has been very positive.


----------



## bearded

DonnyB said:


> The intention is or was to extend them to other forums eventually,


I hope that it will happen very soon.  After some months' experience - especially in the German forum - I must say that those 'Reactions' are a very useful and agreeable feature indeed. And an inconvenience, such as described in my #47 above, is extremely rare (and in any case, one's  'agree' can easily be deleted by clicking on the symbol once more).


----------

