PDA

View Full Version : 'Thanked' count rising, for no apparent reason.



ruy_lopez
February 25th, 2008, 08:33 PM
My 'Thanked' count is rising daily. But when I check the threads in which I've posted comments, I cannot find the thanks. What is going on?

notwen
February 25th, 2008, 08:36 PM
Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

ruy_lopez
February 25th, 2008, 08:40 PM
Are you suggesting the thanks I've received are 'ironic'?

Het Irv
February 25th, 2008, 08:43 PM
The thanks feature is still in beta and still has a lot of bugs in it. The Devs have some changes that still need to be put in

KiwiNZ
February 25th, 2008, 08:57 PM
That is because people are abusing the feature.

Maybe it should be disabled fot those that do so. Kiwi looks at some names in this thread.

Or turned off completely

Cloudy
February 25th, 2008, 09:01 PM
What, exactly, is the point of the feature? To me, it seems to be one of those "good in theory, not as good as we thought it'd be upon implementation" sort of things.

NightwishFan
February 25th, 2008, 09:04 PM
:( It was merely in jest.

I like the feature though. You can easily tell when you helped someone, and you get a thanks.

SomeGuyDude
February 25th, 2008, 09:05 PM
What, exactly, is the point of the feature? To me, it seems to be one of those "good in theory, not as good as we thought it'd be upon implementation" sort of things.

The idea is twofold.

1) You don't waste space on the boards by bumping a thread with "that worked, thanks!" and thus push down threads by people who still need help.

2) Post count (beans here, I guess) aren't necessarily a good indicator of who's knowledgable, since you can just bombard the non-cafe boards with asinine posts and your bean count goes up. But if someone has 500 thanks, you know they know their stuff.

Cloudy
February 25th, 2008, 09:08 PM
The idea is twofold.

1) You don't waste space on the boards by bumping a thread with "that worked, thanks!" and thus push down threads by people who still need help.

2) Post count (beans here, I guess) aren't necessarily a good indicator of who's knowledgable, since you can just bombard the non-cafe boards with asinine posts and your bean count goes up. But if someone has 500 thanks, you know they know their stuff.

In regards to point two, would thanks count not suffer from the same thing? You could easily just have someone go around thanking every post you make whether or not it's deserving and mislead people into believing that you're "knowledgeable" because your thanks count is high, you know?

mikewhatever
February 25th, 2008, 09:11 PM
That is because people are abusing the feature.

Maybe it should be disabled fot those that do so. Kiwi looks at some names in this thread.

Or turned off completely

That was funny. I guess those guys click on everything that's clickable on the page. :)

SomeGuyDude
February 25th, 2008, 09:11 PM
In regards to point two, would thanks count not suffer from the same thing? You could easily just have someone go around thanking every post you make whether or not it's deserving and mislead people into believing that you're "knowledgeable" because your thanks count is high, you know?

Yes, but the odds of that are MUCH lower than if I, say, went into the General Help board and echoed people's posts all the time and gave myself another 800 beans.

It's very, very difficult to get someone else to go around thanking all of your posts for no other reason than to boost YOUR thank count, as opposed to their own.

I mean, it's feasible that people would start to get a "quid pro quo" going where they thank each other just to boost everyone's count, but that could be abated by alerting a mod to it, who will notice that the same handful of people are incessantly thanking each other, since each post has a "users who thanked so-and-so for this post" section that lists everyone who clicked that little star.

It's transparent and doesn't bump, so I'd say it's a smart system.

ruy_lopez
February 25th, 2008, 09:13 PM
You could easily just have someone go around thanking every post you make whether or not it's deserving and mislead people into believing that you're "knowledgeable" because your thanks count is high, you know?

Even if thanks are genuine, it doesn't mean your advice will be helpful in the future. Maybe a 'dumb' count would help. Then again, 'dumb' would probably be abused even more than thanks, not to mention the effect it would have on the general tone of discussions. This is 'ubuntu' after all.

EDIT: I honestly haven't witnessed too much abuse of 'thanks'. The occasional 'ironic' thanks should be tolerated.

Tristam Green
February 25th, 2008, 09:17 PM
That is because people are abusing the feature.

Maybe it should be disabled fot those that do so. Kiwi looks at some names in this thread.

Or turned off completely


:( It was merely in jest.

I like the feature though. You can easily tell when you helped someone, and you get a thanks.

same thing here, actually. it is a great tool.

forrestcupp
February 25th, 2008, 09:19 PM
About the original question, though. I think they have planned on our being able to search for a users thanked posts, but they don't have it implemented yet. The option to search is there, but it doesn't actually work yet.

People may still be thanking you for support posts you made long ago. A good user will do a search before starting a new thread, so your old posts can actually help people for a long, long time.

I will be glad when they get that search feature working, though.

LaRoza
February 25th, 2008, 09:20 PM
That was funny. I guess those guys click on everything that's clickable on the page. :)

Whoops! I accidently click on the infraction button...

(Not really)

There is a sticky in the Forum Feedback and Help which explains the Thanks feature.

LaRoza
February 25th, 2008, 09:25 PM
EDIT: I honestly haven't witnessed too much abuse of 'thanks'. The occasional 'ironic' thanks should be tolerated.

I have. When ever someone makes a thread on the Thanks feature, thanks are freely given.

I made the sticky to help stop such threads and such abuse.

(Anyone who thanks this post for whatever reason shall face my wrath! Don't do it!)

Het Irv
February 25th, 2008, 09:25 PM
You cannot be thanked for posts that were started before the Thanks feature was implemented. I do hope that the site developers decide what they want to do with the feature though, I haven't heard a consensus yet.

ruy_lopez
February 25th, 2008, 09:26 PM
There is a sticky in the Forum Feedback and Help which explains the Thanks feature.

A sticky: that's proof people don't click everything.

aysiu
February 25th, 2008, 09:29 PM
There's no perfect system for validating users.

If the user validates herself (by posting and earning beans), then she can abuse the system by just posting a lot of not-quite-helpful/not-entirely-offensive posts in the support areas.

If another user validates her, then the other users could have prejudices for or against the user ("Oh, I like so-and-so, I'll thank her" or "Oh, I hate so-and-so, she's annoying, so I won't thank her" instead of "So-and-so's post was helpful--I'll thank her").

Likewise, if we had a thumbs-up or thumbs-down system a la Digg or Slashdot, anti-Linux folks would tend to get thumbs-down a lot, even if they're making valid or helpful posts.

The real problem is that anyone in the world who has access to an internet connection can sign up for these forums and make posts or thank people. People could even violate the forum rules and create multiple accounts and use those accounts to thank each other.

The only validation I could think would be reliable would be validation by moderators or administrators. This wouldn't work either, though, since moderators and administrators aren't numerous enough to make a thanks or post-validation system meaningful. Only a smattering of posts would be marked.

I think we just have to accept that you have to make imperfect judgments of posts and forum members based on whatever information is available to you.

LaRoza
February 25th, 2008, 09:32 PM
A sticky: that's proof people don't click everything.

+1

Thank you to those that do take the time to read the stickies. You are doing yourself and the forum a favour.

popch
February 25th, 2008, 09:43 PM
I have. When ever someone makes a thread on the Thanks feature, thanks are freely given.

I made the sticky to help stop such threads and such abuse.

(Anyone who thanks this post for whatever reason shall face my wrath! Don't do it!)

Thank you very much. At long last someone is telling it as it is. Why do I have this unbearable itch in my clicking finger?

Het Irv
February 25th, 2008, 09:45 PM
Why do I have this unbearable itch in my clicking finger?

Yes, alas I had the same urge. I found it went away after posting on the bump thread. (see sig if you don't know where to find it.)

Forrest Gumpp
February 25th, 2008, 09:56 PM
This thread is worthy of being moved to the Forum Feedback and Help area.

Posts on the matter of the 'thanks' feature and its visibility in that sub-forum have recently provided examples of apparent widespread failure to read 'stickies' and use search tools before posting. It would therefore be wise to expect some degree of sensitivity at Forum administration level with respect to this feature, but in so doing be aware that other issues may be the real cause of this apparent sensitivity.

SomeGuyDude's point with respect to 'thanks' being a means to avoid bumping and board clutter seems a very relevant one. It would be a pity to see this feature disabled before forum members have gotten over the novelty of it.

As for selectively disabling it for only some users, who in Forum administration would get the thankless task of identifying those worthy of being the subjects of such distinction? Would those who had been made officially 'unthanking' have the right/obligation to have the word 'ingrate' displayed beneath their userID?

No 'Thanks'? No, thanks.

Besides which, you get no beans for thanks, so why would you abuse the feature? Just imagine the indignity of being able to be called a 'low bean count thanker'!

popch
February 25th, 2008, 10:01 PM
This thread is worthy of being moved to the Forum Feedback and Help area.

Too late, too late.

(thinks 'thanks')

ruy_lopez
February 25th, 2008, 10:27 PM
SomeGuyDude's point with respect to 'thanks' being a means to avoid bumping and board clutter seems a very relevant one.

The amount of bumped "thanks" is still quite high. Changing the icon, so it explicitly says [thanks] (like the quote button) could help reduce the number.

LaRoza
February 25th, 2008, 11:01 PM
There is way too much thanking in this thread.

The sticky addresses everything.

Please do not abuse the Thanks feature by diluting its meaning.

Thread Closed.

If you have a comment on the feature, read the sticky. If it isn't in the sticky, find the existing thread that comments on the sticky.

Don't thank anyone in the process, especially me.

jrusso2
February 25th, 2008, 11:07 PM
In regards to point two, would thanks count not suffer from the same thing? You could easily just have someone go around thanking every post you make whether or not it's deserving and mislead people into believing that you're "knowledgeable" because your thanks count is high, you know?

Or you could be knowledgeable but the new users you helped don't even know about the thanks.