# Thanks Button?



## Roll_Bones

I am a member at two other forums.  Both have a "thanks" button for each post.
Its an easy way to let the person posting know you are in agreement, or to thank the poster without having to make a new post.

The forum controls look to be the same as these other forums and it seems a "thanks" button might be a nice addition to this forum.

Just a suggestion.


----------



## taxlady

Roll_Bones said:


> I am a member at two other forums.  Both have a "thanks" button for each post.
> Its an easy way to let the person posting know you are in agreement, or to thank the poster without having to make a new post.
> 
> The forum controls look to be the same as these other forums and it seems a "thanks" button might be a nice addition to this forum.
> 
> Just a suggestion.


Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.

What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.


----------



## pacanis

taxlady said:


> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.


 
I've never liked the Thanks button. I thought it replaced a well working system and like you said, now we get a PM. Half the time I get Thanked I'm opening a PM that doesn't even say anything (no message from the "thanker"). 
I'm on a VB forum that has a Like button (hidden, you have to mouse over it) that lets anyone know you liked the post and lets the poster know, too. Without taking up PM space. And like our old system, your Likes are kept tally of. Also how many times you Liked.
Not a big fan of our Thanks button.


----------



## Roll_Bones

taxlady said:


> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.



Yes. I have used the existing thanks button before. But its more a PM than a thanks button.  I think it should be removed personally.

A "like" button is basically the same thing as a "thanks" button.  This is what I mean by a thanks button.


----------



## Roll_Bones

taxlady said:


> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.



I should have used "Like" instead of "Thanks" in my title. Since we already have a "Thanks" button that is actually a PM button....

*Maybe a moderator could make this change for me?  *


----------



## GB

The thanks button is not just a PM button. Click on User CP to see a list of your thanks.


----------



## PrincessFiona60

Moderators cannot make those kinds of changes.  That needs to go to the "Help Desk" so IT sees the request.


----------



## taxlady

PrincessFiona60 said:


> Moderators cannot make those kinds of changes.  That needs to go to the "Help Desk" so IT sees the request.


I *think* RB meant a change to the post title.


----------



## PrincessFiona60

In that case, report your own post so the Mods can see the request.


----------



## pacanis

A change now will affect a post or two addressing the title.
Just sayin'.


----------



## Rocket_J_Dawg

There's a thanks button?  It must be on the PC site because there isn't one on the tablet application. I'll have to go fire up the computer and have a look.


----------



## Janet H

The Thanks button is not available on the mobile version.  It is intended to be interactive and not a reputation or "like" button.  We've found that the thanks message is more important to a poster than the score keeping aspect of the like button and it's one of those little things that makes DC a little different than most sites.  You can use the thanks button without sending the PM - just don't fill in the box...


----------



## Somebunny

Since I most often use the mobile ap, I am missing thanking people.  I feel bad about that, I don't want anyone to think I am a snob or not thankful for their comments.  So all of you consider yourselves thanked!


----------



## pacanis

Janet H said:


> The Thanks button is not available on the mobile version. It is intended to be interactive and not a reputation or "like" button. We've found that the thanks message is more important to a poster than the score keeping aspect of the like button and it's *one of those little things that makes DC a little different than most sites. You can use the thanks button without sending the PM - just don't fill in the box...*


 
Are you sure about that?
I get "Thanks" PM's that have no text written by the person doing the thanking. I assumed they simply clicked on the Thanks button without typing anything into the field.

After I post this I'll click the Thanks button on your reply. See if you don't get a PM notification that you have been thanked. And if I remember correctly you won't even know what post was thanked without clicking the link within the PM.


----------



## PrincessFiona60

pacanis said:


> Are you sure about that?
> I get "Thanks" PM's that have no text written by the person doing the thanking. I assumed they simply clicked on the Thanks button without typing anything into the field.
> 
> After I post this I'll click the Thanks button on your reply. See if you don't get a PM notification that you have been thanked. And if I remember correctly you won't even know what post was thanked without clicking the link within the PM.



That's how it works, everyone thank Janet now


----------



## taxlady

PrincessFiona60 said:


> That's how it works, everyone thank Janet now




It took me a minute, well, part of a minute.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

pacanis said:


> ...And if I remember correctly you won't even know what post was thanked without clicking the link within the PM.


Actually, you can find out. The title of the thread appears as the left-most entry on the line. If you click on the title you go directly to the post that generated the "thanks" from your fellow DCer. TaDa!


----------



## pacanis

PrincessFiona60 said:


> That's how it works, everyone thank Janet now


 
Thanks. 
The way she worded that I thought that perhaps there was a way to say thanks without generating a PM. Or maybe a setting on the recipient's end to re-direct the Thanks somewhere other than a PM. I'd rather have the Thanks sent to my profile comments.

oops, you're right, CG.
I meant you did not know what post they were thanking.
Back in "the day", when we had karma instead, when you looked at your karma list you could see the sender and the specific post they Karma'd.

ahhh, days gone by...


----------



## Alix

You can turn off PM notifications for Thanks. Its in your User Profile.


----------



## taxlady

Alix said:


> You can turn off PM notifications for Thanks. Its in your User Profile.


But then you don't see any of them until you go looking. You don't see the ones with something typed in them either.


----------



## GB

Doesn't it all show under User CP? That is where I go to see my "thanks" and there are messages typed there.


----------



## Roll_Bones

I guess Janet said no to a "Like" button?

But, I do not get the score keeping aspect of it.
How could this button be abused?

Put simply, if one likes a post or agrees with a post and they want the poster to know and the rest of the forum to know, a quick click on a "like" or a "thanks" button seems logical.

The forum format lends well to simple one click thanks or like.


----------



## GB

RB, years ago we did have that system in place, but because point were associated with it there were "issues". For some, it turned into a competition. Others felt slighted that they did not have many points. It actually accomplished the opposite of what was intended.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> RB, years ago we did have that system in place, but because point were associated with it there were "issues". For some, it turned into a competition. Others felt slighted that they did not have many points. It actually accomplished the opposite of what was intended.



GB, you still get points for "Thanks" just not as many.  One difference is that points are private where karma (the old system) was shown on your posts for a time.


----------



## GB

Andy, where do you see the points? I do not see that anywhere.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> Andy, where do you see the points? I do not see that anywhere.



Go to USER CP the points are in the header to the right of "Latest Thanks Received"


----------



## GB

If I am reading that header correctly, that is just the number of times you have been thanked. Not really a point system. I can also see how many PM's I have, but that is not how many points I have based on PM's.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> If I am reading that header correctly, that is just the number of times you have been thanked. Not really a point system. I can also see how many PM's I have, but that is not how many points I have based on PM's.



The counter increments one for each "Thanks" as opposed to thousands of karma points for an old style thanks.  It's still score keeping but with a different point system.


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> RB, years ago we did have that system in place, but because point were associated with it there were "issues". For some, it turned into a competition. Others felt slighted that they did not have many points. It actually accomplished the opposite of what was intended.



I see.

The "thanks" button I am using elsewhere has no points attached to it.
When you click the "thanks" button at the bottom of the post, your name appears as the one who thanked it.
There is no record keeping.  The only place you can see the "thanks" is at the bottom of the thanked post.
Now a good post may have a quite  a few "thanks" at the bottom.

I am on  sports forum that does count "likes" or "thanks".  You see the thanks in your messages. But still no points are attached.

I am a bit surprised a forum like this could generate any negative from a button like this, when other forums with way less respect do just fine using one.


----------



## pacanis

Roll_Bones said:


> I see.
> 
> The "thanks" button I am using elsewhere has no points attached to it.
> When you click the "thanks" button at the bottom of the post, your name appears as the one who thanked it.
> There is no record keeping. The only place you can see the "thanks" is at the bottom of the thanked post.
> Now a good post may have a quite a few "thanks" at the bottom.
> 
> I am on sports forum that does count "likes" or "thanks". You see the thanks in your messages. But still no points are attached.
> 
> *I am a bit surprised a forum like this could generate any negative from a button like this, when other forums with way less respect do just fine using one*.


 
Well, like Janet said, it's one of those things that makes DC a little different.


----------



## pacanis

Andy M. said:


> The counter increments one for each "Thanks" as opposed to thousands of karma points for an old style thanks. It's still score keeping but with a different point system.


 
Agreed.


----------



## GB

Andy M. said:


> The counter increments one for each "Thanks" as opposed to thousands of karma points for an old style thanks.  It's still score keeping but with a different point system.


I am not sure i would call that a point system. It is a running tally just as your post count is a running tally. I guess it could be argued either way. I don't see that as points though myself though. I just see that as the same post count or PM count or things like that. I can see how some would see it as a point system though.


----------



## roadfix

To me a 'thanks' or 'like' mean the same thing.  
Instead of PM's a thanks/like indicator at the bottom of the post would be better served, IMO.


----------



## taxlady

roadfix said:


> To me a 'thanks' or 'like' mean the same thing.
> Instead of PM's a thanks/like indicator at the bottom of the post would be better served, IMO.


It would save us from having to post "+1!!"


----------



## Andy M.

The current THANKS system is kind of cumbersome.  

1. click on the THANKS button
2. click on "Send Your Thanks" with or without comments
3. click on OK when the "Your Thanks Has been sent" message appears.

I'd prefer a THANKS button that you click.  Then a note appears on the post saying you have thanked this post.  I expect it would only appear to the thanking person.

This would parallel the LIKE system on other forums.


----------



## pacanis

taxlady said:


> It would save us from having to post "+1!!"


 
I'm pretty sure that was Timothy's original intent when he joined the forum and said we should change the karma to a thanks/like system instead.


----------



## Alix

I concur. I would prefer a "Like" button. The one I have seen shows how many likes a particular post has at the bottom of that post. It also shows WHO liked it. No points involved. Less cumbersome than thanks. I think that the PM function works well as a way to send private thanks to an individual, the Like function would be quicker and more public.


----------



## roadfix

Exactly.  Thanks or Likes given to posts should be visible to everyone.   Why restrict them?


----------



## GB

roadfix said:


> Exactly.  Thanks or Likes given to posts should be visible to everyone.   Why restrict them?


There are times when people want to thank someone else, but do not want it to be public. I can think of a number of reasons this happens. I am not saying I agree or disagree with it, but there are legitimate reasons.


----------



## roadfix

GB said:


> There are times when people want to thank someone else, but do not want it to be public. I can think of a number of reasons this happens. I am not saying I agree or disagree with it, but there are legitimate reasons.


Yes, I can see a few instances where someone might feel that.  But in those instances they can easily send a personal thanks to the poster via PM.

I'm sure more than a good majority wouldn't mind their thanks being displayed.


----------



## GB

For the record, I would be all for a "like" system like other sites have. I like that a lot more than the way we have it here (not that I really care much one way or the other actually). But to your post yes you can send the poster a PM, but that is not the same as a "thanks" the way we have it set up. A PM is generally seen as a conversation, while a thanks can be more of a one sided thing. Say your thanks and that is the end of it as opposed to (some people) feeling an obligation to respond.


----------



## Roll_Bones

I found this. An example of another forum with the "Thanks" button in use.

So sorry about the screen shot quality.  If you click on it, you can see it much better.


----------



## Roll_Bones

Maybe this is a better screen shot?  Nope. No better. Sorry folks.
Keep in mind I was not logged into this forum. so the actual "Thanks" button is not shown.  Just the members that have used the "Thanks" button.


----------



## roadfix

I like the 'thanks' format used in another forum thread linked below.  Very simple, and to the point.  Hope it show up without having to log in for the rest of you.

New York Strip Steak - SV style - The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS.


----------



## Roll_Bones

roadfix said:


> I like the 'thanks' format used in another forum thread linked below.  Very simple, and to the point.  Hope it show up without having to log in for the rest of you.
> 
> New York Strip Steak - SV style - The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS.



Looks good.  Very similar to what I was trying to post.


----------



## taxlady

roadfix said:


> I like the 'thanks' format used in another forum thread linked below.  Very simple, and to the point.  Hope it show up without having to log in for the rest of you.
> 
> New York Strip Steak - SV style - The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS.


It shows the thank yous, but doesn't show how someone did the thanking.


----------



## roadfix

taxlady said:


> It shows the thank yous, but doesn't show how someone did the thanking.


Oh, ok, there's a "Thanks" button on the right bottom corner of every post.  I guess you need to be logged in to see that.


----------



## GB

I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.


----------



## CraigC

I see it, because I am automatically logged in there.


----------



## taxlady

GB said:


> I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.


Roadfix had it right. If you want to give a reason, you can quote the post or send a PM.


----------



## GB

Thanks Taxlady.


----------



## pacanis

One of the forums I am on the Like button stays hidden unless you scroll over it. It is within a member's post. If you Like the post it will say, "You, name, name and 4 others like this". You can click to see who all liked it. After you Like a post you have the option to Unlike it, too. In that case it is not hidden.
And the best thing is no PM's are sent. You see a notification bar when you log onto the forum. If you click on it it might say, "You received three likes". If you click again that is when you actually leave the page and see the member who Liked your post and a few lines of the post. Otherwise you can simply ignore the Notifications bar and click on it when you feel like it. No annoying pop up either. The Notifications is highlited in orange.


----------



## GB

OK so I just tried to give you "thanks" taxlady and I got a popup that said "this post has not received any thanks. you have x number of thanks" with x being the amount of time I have been thanked. Weird.


----------



## roadfix

I just gave myself a thanks.  Most other forums will not let you do that, not that it matters.....


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.



No reason.  No typing.  Just click "thanks" and your name appears along with anyone else that has "thanked" the post.

GB. Click on my attempt above and you can see what is presented after someone thanks the post.


----------



## GB

RB I completely understand what you are saying. I am a member of probably over 50 forums. I am very familiar with the system your are talking about. My comment (which is irrelivant anyway since it was not what Taxlady was talking about) is saying exactly what you are saying. That under that system it just lets the person know they are thanked. It does not (like our current system allows) let the person being thanked know why they are being thanked.


----------



## pacanis

GB said:


> RB I completely understand what you are saying. I am a member of probably over 50 forums. I am very familiar with the system your are talking about. My comment (which is irrelivant anyway since it was not what Taxlady was talking about) is saying exactly what you are saying. That under that system it just lets the person know they are thanked. *It does not (like our current system allows) let the person being thanked know why they are being thanked.*


 
That, IMO, is the best way.
A person can click one more time, first on the member's username then the PM button, and type until their heart's content if they have anything to say.
This way the Thanks recipient isn't receiving (basically) blank PM's like it's set up now.


----------



## GB

I dont receive any PM's for thanks as it is right now let alone blank ones. I only see thanks when I click User CP


----------



## Andy M.

pacanis said:


> That, IMO, is the best way.
> A person can click one more time, first on the member's username then the PM button, and type until their heart's content if they have anything to say.
> This way the Thanks recipient isn't receiving (basically) blank PM's like it's set up now.



+1

The system needs to be simple and quick.  If a personal statement is important to you, then make the extra effort to send a PM.  Otherwise, just click one button and you're done.


----------



## GB

Right now it is just 2 clicks Andy. Click "thanks" then click "send your thanks". The personal message is optional.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> Right now it is just 2 clicks Andy. Click "thanks" then click "send your thanks". The personal message is optional.



...and a third click on OK when the forum tells you your thanks have been sent.


----------



## Addie

Remember dear, dear, Margi? The globe traveling member? She really abused the "Thanks" button. Everyone go a Thanks! It got so bad that I just quit opening them.


----------



## GB

Wait, it is bad when someone thanks you?


----------



## Addie

GB said:


> Wait, it is bad when someone thanks you?



No, but she did overdo it quite a bit. She would send a Thanks for when you stated your score on the Jeopardy quizzes.


----------



## pacanis

GB said:


> I dont receive any PM's for thanks as it is right now let alone blank ones. I only see thanks when I click User CP


 
Maybe I should disable mine like Alix mentioned. I just don't want it to affect any other notifications. I'm always getting "blank" PM's. I say "blank" because they aren't actually void of text. Just void of text that's not forum generated like a form letter.



Addie said:


> Remember dear, dear, Margi? The globe traveling member? She really abused the "Thanks" button. Everyone go a Thanks! It got so bad that I just quit opening them.


 
We have a running joke on another forum that just because you received Likes from [name], doesn't mean you are a popular member. That one guy will pick a thread and run through it Liking every post in it 

BUT... since it's not a PM it's no big deal. I can receive a dozen Likes from him a night and my PM box won't be affected.


----------



## GB

Addie said:


> No, but she did overdo it quite a bit. She would send a Thanks for when you stated your score on the Jeopardy quizzes.


Point taken. I guess I would just take that as a nice thing though. Someone cared enough to thank you for something even if you did not see the need for thanks.


----------



## FrankZ

roadfix said:


> I just gave myself a thanks.  Most other forums will not let you do that, not that it matters.....




Can you try this again, I tried and it behaved as I would expect.


----------



## Aunt Bea

When I do it I get a message telling me that my post has not received any thanks yet.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

pacanis said:


> ...oops, you're right, CG...


Of course I'm right! I'm ALWAYS right!  Except when I'm wrong...

*******************************

I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?"  In my opinion, oh heck no. Why? Sometimes I think the purpose of a "like" button is to make the OP feel liked. Guess being popular or liked never really mattered to me so I don't really see a useful purpose of a like button for me. Obviously others' opinions differ. In the past it has also seemed like some posters made "Posts: #" a competition. Um, why? To show that you excel in verbosity?  For me, that's my job in real life. 

Personally, I prefer having the "thanks" button to use when I want to send a quick note about a specific post to the person who made that post. Much easier than composing a PM and it doesn't affect their PM limit. As I explained to pac, if you want to know which post it is that you're being thanked for you can see that in one click. And it's not a whole lot of trouble to click on the sender's name so that you can continue the conversation if you choose. As far as using the "thanks" button as if it were a FB "like" button, I could probably count the number of times I've done that on one hand. Guess using that "thanks" button shows I'm pretty good at verbosity myself.


----------



## pacanis

Cooking Goddess said:


> Of course I'm right! I'm ALWAYS right!  Except when I'm wrong...
> 
> *******************************
> 
> I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?"
> 
> Yes. Apparently. Other than the Baking thread being broken apart I have never seen the admins act upon one new member's request so fast.
> Like you must have read, there was really nothing wrong with the old system.
> 
> In my opinion, oh heck no. Why? Sometimes I think the purpose of a "like" button is to make the OP feel liked.
> 
> Not exactly. It is a way for one person to make one click and agree with, or "Like" the post, without anything further being said.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Personally, I prefer having the "thanks" button to use when I want to send a quick note about a specific post to the person who made that post. Much easier than composing a PM and it doesn't affect their PM limit.
> 
> How is it easier than composing a PM? You can't even see your full sentence in the small Thanks window. Just a few typed words at a time.
> And maybe it doesn't affect your PM  limit, but it does mine
> Are you sure?
> 
> As I explained to pac, if you want to know which post it is that you're being thanked for you can see that in one click. And it's not a whole lot of trouble to click on the sender's name so that you can continue the conversation if you choose. As far as using the "thanks" button as if it were a FB "like" button, I could probably count the number of times I've done that on one hand. Guess using that "thanks" button shows I'm pretty good at verbosity myself.


 
Just sayin'


----------



## Cooking Goddess

Which is why I also said "Obviously others' opinions differ." my dear pac. 

If it happens I'll be indifferent to it. Unless no one likes my posts.


----------



## pacanis

Cooking Goddess said:


> Which is why I also said "Obviously others' opinions differ." my dear pac.
> 
> If it happens I'll be indifferent to it. Unless no one likes my posts.


 
no, no, no... that's why I broke it down.
Maybe the forum work differently for you. Are you using a PC or tablet/phone device? Because I can't believe your Thanks aren't counting against your fifty allowed PM's... They sure are mine.


----------



## GB

Thanks dont affect my PMs either. I neither get nor send PM's for thanks.


----------



## pacanis

GB said:


> Thanks dont affect my PMs either. I neither get nor send PM's for thanks.


 
Interesting. I just clicked on my PM's Inbox to make double check and it's full of "You have been thanked!" subject lines.


----------



## GB

To everyone who sent me thanks in this thread, thank you back. And yes I did get the thanks (without any PM's being sent or received from my side). 

We truly live blessed lives in that one of our biggest concerns is that we are have to debate the best way to thank out fellow members. I think that right there says a lot about this place


----------



## Aunt Bea

GB said:


> To everyone who sent me thanks in this thread, thank you back. And yes I did get the thanks (without any PM's being sent or received from my side).
> 
> We truly live blessed lives in that one of our biggest concerns is that we are have to debate the best way to thank out fellow members. I think that right there says a lot about this place



I would've hit the like button on this one, but I couldn't find it!


----------



## Roll_Bones

Cooking Goddess said:


> I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?"



You would be incorrect. No one wants it to be anything like facebook. Especially me.  
Did you take a second to view the examples?  If you did, you would see a "thanks" button like pictured and linked are nothing like facebook.  Nothing like it.
This is why I recommended a true simple "thanks" button.
Click "thanks" and be on your way to the next post.

When I first joined this forum, I clicked on the "thanks" button a few times. Once I realized what it was, I quit using it.
Now I have to post my agreement or like the others say +1.




Aunt Bea said:


> I would've hit the like button on this one, but I couldn't find it!



There are times everyday I am on this forum I would have loved to be able to just click "thanks" and be done with "thanks".


----------



## GB

Roll_Bones said:


> Did you take a second to view the examples?  If you did, you would see a "thanks" button like pictured and linked are nothing like facebook.  Nothing like it.


I looked at your example. In the example when you click thanks it shows the person who did the thanking. How, exactly, is that not the same thing as clicking "like" on Facebook which then show who clicked like on that post? Other than one being called "thanks" and the other "like" just what exactly are these differences that make you say the two are nothing alike?






Roll_Bones said:


> There are times everyday I am on this forum I would have loved to be able to just click "thanks" and be done with "thanks".


Why can't you do that now under our current system? OK so it is 2 clicks instead of one, but it is really that much more out of your day to click a button one extra time?


----------



## CatPat

I just realized I haven't thanked so many of you who have been so kind to me!

I'm not a good member when I forget to do that. I'll try to be better.

I belong to a political forum also, and I think there should be a "Dingbat" button there.

With love,
~Cat


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> I looked at your example. In the example when you click thanks it shows the person who did the thanking. How, exactly, is that not the same thing as clicking "like" on Facebook which then show who clicked like on that post? Other than one being called "thanks" and the other "like" just what exactly are these differences that make you say the two are nothing alike?
> 
> Why can't you do that now under our current system? OK so it is 2 clicks instead of one, but it is really that much more out of your day to click a button one extra time?



My point was that this is not an attempt to make this forum like facebook.  I was responding to the insinuation that "some" are trying to turn this into, or like facebook.

But I have used both facebook "likes" and my other forums "thanks" and they are not the same.  
Liking something on facebook opens up a can of worms, uninvited comments from people I have never met and solicitation from companies selling something.  
The "thanks" button does not provide these unwanted extras.  They are night and day different.

The current system on DC is not even close to the thanks button I use on the other forums.  
No box pops up and no text can be entered.
Besides why should the thanks be hidden from the rest of the forum.


----------



## roadfix

CatPat said:


> I just realized I haven't thanked so many of you who have been so kind to me!
> 
> I'm not a good member when I forget to do that. I'll try to be better.
> 
> With love,
> ~Cat



Please thank me later....as my mail box is full right now.  So if you thanked me now I'll never find out...  Or just wait til we switch over to the simpler "thanks" system...so others can see you've thanked me big time....


----------



## GB

Roll_Bones said:


> My point was that this is not an attempt to make this forum like facebook.  I was responding to the insinuation that "some" are trying to turn this into, or like facebook.


if it had nothing to do with what they looked like on the surface then why did you ask the poster if they even looked at the attachment you posted. The only information that could be gleamed from that is visual. 



Roll_Bones said:


> Besides why should the thanks be hidden from the rest of the forum.


Because sometimes people want their thanks to be private. Why should they be forced to have it public? It is 6 of one half a dozen of the other.

You also never answered why you can't click thanks and be done with it under the current system. No one is forcing you to write a message. It even says "optional" right on it so there is no ambiguity.


----------



## CatPat

There is a text box in which you can type your thanks when you click on it. I just sent you thanks, Roll Bones.

There is a grammatical error here in DC, I think. When you send your thanks, the pop-up says "Your thanks HAS been sent."

It should say, "Your thanks HAVE been sent." Thanks are plural, yes?

Or am I wrong? English is so hard.

With love,
~Cat


----------



## GB

Thanks in this case is singular CatPat. You are not sending someone thank.


----------



## roadfix

I think 'thanks' is singular.  'Thank yous' are plural.


----------



## Dawgluver

GB said:


> Thanks in this case is singular CatPat. You are not sending someone thank.





You "thank" someone by sending them "thanks".  Yes, it is confusing.


----------



## GB

Dawgluver said:


> You "thank" someone by sending them "thanks".  Yes, it is confusing.


We drive on parkways and park on driveways. Confusing for sure!


----------



## CatPat

Thank you!

I wondered of this. I trip and fall over English so much one would think I need to begin paying a gravity bill.

With love,
~Cat


----------



## Roll_Bones

CatPat said:


> There is a text box in which you can type your thanks when you click on it. I just sent you thanks, Roll Bones.



You will need to explain how I find this "thanks" CatPat.  I don't see any thanks.


----------



## GB

Roll_Bones said:


> You will need to explain how I find this "thanks" CatPat.  I don't see any thanks.


Are you on a mobile version of the site or are you on a computer?


----------



## CarolPa

I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.


----------



## roadfix

CarolPa said:


> I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.


Yeah, but that's posting.  .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...


----------



## Rocket_J_Dawg

CarolPa said:


> I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.



That's the only option I have as I don't have a "thanks" button.


----------



## Andy M.

Janet H said:


> *The Thanks button is not available on the mobile version...*




Here's the answer


----------



## GB

roadfix said:


> Yeah, but that's posting.  .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...


Yeah but we all know you have never gotten 100 thanks in one thread. 80 maybe but not 100


----------



## dcSaute

GB said:


> GB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-23-2014 01:59 PM
> Thanks Button?
> 
> I am a member at two other forums. Both have a "thanks" button for each post.
> Its an easy way to let the person posting know you are in agreement, or to thank the poster without having to make a new post.
> 
> The forum controls look to be the same as these other forums and it seems a "thanks" button might be a nice addition to this forum.
> 
> Just a suggestion.
> 
> taxlady 03-23-2014 02:07 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353283)
> I am a member at two other forums. Both have a "thanks" button for each post.
> Its an easy way to let the person posting know you are in agreement, or to thank the poster without having to make a new post.
> 
> The forum controls look to be the same as these other forums and it seems a "thanks" button might be a nice addition to this forum.
> 
> Just a suggestion.
> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.
> 
> pacanis 03-23-2014 02:18 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by taxlady (Post 1353288)
> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.
> I've never liked the Thanks button. I thought it replaced a well working system and like you said, now we get a PM. Half the time I get Thanked I'm opening a PM that doesn't even say anything (no message from the "thanker").
> I'm on a VB forum that has a Like button (hidden, you have to mouse over it) that lets anyone know you liked the post and lets the poster know, too. Without taking up PM space. And like our old system, your Likes are kept tally of. Also how many times you Liked.
> Not a big fan of our Thanks button.
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-23-2014 02:21 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by taxlady (Post 1353288)
> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.
> Yes. I have used the existing thanks button before. But its more a PM than a thanks button. I think it should be removed personally.
> 
> A "like" button is basically the same thing as a "thanks" button. This is what I mean by a thanks button.
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-23-2014 02:36 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by taxlady (Post 1353288)
> Um, there is a Thanks button. It's to the left of the Quote button. It sends a private thank you to the member who posted.
> 
> What I want is a "Like" button, like FB. That way other people can see that I liked the post, without me having to quote the message.
> I should have used "Like" instead of "Thanks" in my title. Since we already have a "Thanks" button that is actually a PM button....
> 
> Maybe a moderator could make this change for me?
> 
> ...................
> .
> .
> .
> .
> taxlady 03-24-2014 01:24 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by roadfix (Post 1353536)
> I like the 'thanks' format used in another forum thread linked below. Very simple, and to the point. Hope it show up without having to log in for the rest of you.
> 
> New York Strip Steak - SV style - The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS.
> It shows the thank yous, but doesn't show how someone did the thanking.
> 
> roadfix 03-24-2014 01:33 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by taxlady (Post 1353539)
> It shows the thank yous, but doesn't show how someone did the thanking.
> Oh, ok, there's a "Thanks" button on the right bottom corner of every post. I guess you need to be logged in to see that.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 01:36 PM
> I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.
> 
> CraigC 03-24-2014 01:37 PM
> I see it, because I am automatically logged in there.
> 
> taxlady 03-24-2014 01:38 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353544)
> I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.
> Roadfix had it right. If you want to give a reason, you can quote the post or send a PM.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 01:46 PM
> Thanks Taxlady.
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 01:49 PM
> One of the forums I am on the Like button stays hidden unless you scroll over it. It is within a member's post. If you Like the post it will say, "You, name, name and 4 others like this". You can click to see who all liked it. After you Like a post you have the option to Unlike it, too. In that case it is not hidden.
> And the best thing is no PM's are sent. You see a notification bar when you log onto the forum. If you click on it it might say, "You received three likes". If you click again that is when you actually leave the page and see the member who Liked your post and a few lines of the post. Otherwise you can simply ignore the Notifications bar and click on it when you feel like it. No annoying pop up either. The Notifications is highlited in orange.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 01:52 PM
> OK so I just tried to give you "thanks" taxlady and I got a popup that said "this post has not received any thanks. you have x number of thanks" with x being the amount of time I have been thanked. Weird.
> 
> roadfix 03-24-2014 01:56 PM
> I just gave myself a thanks. Most other forums will not let you do that, not that it matters.....
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-24-2014 02:06 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353544)
> I think what taxlady was saying (and TL please correct me if I am wrong) is that it does not allow you to give a reason for the thanks.
> No reason. No typing. Just click "thanks" and your name appears along with anyone else that has "thanked" the post.
> 
> GB. Click on my attempt above and you can see what is presented after someone thanks the post.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 02:17 PM
> RB I completely understand what you are saying. I am a member of probably over 50 forums. I am very familiar with the system your are talking about. My comment (which is irrelivant anyway since it was not what Taxlady was talking about) is saying exactly what you are saying. That under that system it just lets the person know they are thanked. It does not (like our current system allows) let the person being thanked know why they are being thanked.
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 02:41 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353559)
> RB I completely understand what you are saying. I am a member of probably over 50 forums. I am very familiar with the system your are talking about. My comment (which is irrelivant anyway since it was not what Taxlady was talking about) is saying exactly what you are saying. That under that system it just lets the person know they are thanked. It does not (like our current system allows) let the person being thanked know why they are being thanked.
> That, IMO, is the best way.
> A person can click one more time, first on the member's username then the PM button, and type until their heart's content if they have anything to say.
> This way the Thanks recipient isn't receiving (basically) blank PM's like it's set up now.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 02:47 PM
> I dont receive any PM's for thanks as it is right now let alone blank ones. I only see thanks when I click User CP
> 
> Andy M. 03-24-2014 02:48 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by pacanis (Post 1353560)
> That, IMO, is the best way.
> A person can click one more time, first on the member's username then the PM button, and type until their heart's content if they have anything to say.
> This way the Thanks recipient isn't receiving (basically) blank PM's like it's set up now.
> +1
> 
> The system needs to be simple and quick. If a personal statement is important to you, then make the extra effort to send a PM. Otherwise, just click one button and you're done.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 02:56 PM
> Right now it is just 2 clicks Andy. Click "thanks" then click "send your thanks". The personal message is optional.
> 
> Andy M. 03-24-2014 03:20 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353566)
> Right now it is just 2 clicks Andy. Click "thanks" then click "send your thanks". The personal message is optional.
> ...and a third click on OK when the forum tells you your thanks have been sent.
> 
> Addie 03-24-2014 03:34 PM
> Remember dear, dear, Margi? The globe traveling member? She really abused the "Thanks" button. Everyone go a Thanks! It got so bad that I just quit opening them.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 03:39 PM
> Wait, it is bad when someone thanks you?
> 
> Addie 03-24-2014 04:36 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353576)
> Wait, it is bad when someone thanks you?
> No, but she did overdo it quite a bit. She would send a Thanks for when you stated your score on the Jeopardy quizzes.
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 04:49 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353563)
> I dont receive any PM's for thanks as it is right now let alone blank ones. I only see thanks when I click User CP
> Maybe I should disable mine like Alix mentioned. I just don't want it to affect any other notifications. I'm always getting "blank" PM's. I say "blank" because they aren't actually void of text. Just void of text that's not forum generated like a form letter.
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Addie (Post 1353575)
> Remember dear, dear, Margi? The globe traveling member? She really abused the "Thanks" button. Everyone go a Thanks! It got so bad that I just quit opening them.
> We have a running joke on another forum that just because you received Likes from [name], doesn't mean you are a popular member. That one guy will pick a thread and run through it Liking every post in it
> 
> BUT... since it's not a PM it's no big deal. I can receive a dozen Likes from him a night and my PM box won't be affected.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 04:58 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Addie (Post 1353591)
> No, but she did overdo it quite a bit. She would send a Thanks for when you stated your score on the Jeopardy quizzes.
> Point taken. I guess I would just take that as a nice thing though. Someone cared enough to thank you for something even if you did not see the need for thanks.
> 
> FrankZ 03-24-2014 05:00 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by roadfix (Post 1353555)
> I just gave myself a thanks. Most other forums will not let you do that, not that it matters.....
> 
> Can you try this again, I tried and it behaved as I would expect.
> 
> Aunt Bea 03-24-2014 05:05 PM
> When I do it I get a message telling me that my post has not received any thanks yet.
> 
> Cooking Goddess 03-24-2014 05:24 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by pacanis (Post 1353427)
> ...oops, you're right, CG...
> Of course I'm right! I'm ALWAYS right! Except when I'm wrong...
> 
> *******************************
> 
> I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?" In my opinion, oh heck no. Why? Sometimes I think the purpose of a "like" button is to make the OP feel liked. Guess being popular or liked never really mattered to me so I don't really see a useful purpose of a like button for me. Obviously others' opinions differ. In the past it has also seemed like some posters made "Posts: #" a competition. Um, why? To show that you excel in verbosity? For me, that's my job in real life.
> 
> Personally, I prefer having the "thanks" button to use when I want to send a quick note about a specific post to the person who made that post. Much easier than composing a PM and it doesn't affect their PM limit. As I explained to pac, if you want to know which post it is that you're being thanked for you can see that in one click. And it's not a whole lot of trouble to click on the sender's name so that you can continue the conversation if you choose. As far as using the "thanks" button as if it were a FB "like" button, I could probably count the number of times I've done that on one hand. Guess using that "thanks" button shows I'm pretty good at verbosity myself.
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 05:37 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Cooking Goddess (Post 1353606)
> Of course I'm right! I'm ALWAYS right! Except when I'm wrong...
> 
> *******************************
> 
> I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?"
> 
> Yes. Apparently. Other than the Baking thread being broken apart I have never seen the admins act upon one new member's request so fast.
> Like you must have read, there was really nothing wrong with the old system.
> 
> In my opinion, oh heck no. Why? Sometimes I think the purpose of a "like" button is to make the OP feel liked.
> 
> Not exactly. It is a way for one person to make one click and agree with, or "Like" the post, without anything further being said.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Personally, I prefer having the "thanks" button to use when I want to send a quick note about a specific post to the person who made that post. Much easier than composing a PM and it doesn't affect their PM limit.
> 
> How is it easier than composing a PM? You can't even see your full sentence in the small Thanks window. Just a few typed words at a time.
> And maybe it doesn't affect your PM limit, but it does mine
> Are you sure?
> 
> As I explained to pac, if you want to know which post it is that you're being thanked for you can see that in one click. And it's not a whole lot of trouble to click on the sender's name so that you can continue the conversation if you choose. As far as using the "thanks" button as if it were a FB "like" button, I could probably count the number of times I've done that on one hand. Guess using that "thanks" button shows I'm pretty good at verbosity myself.
> Just sayin'
> 
> Cooking Goddess 03-24-2014 06:30 PM
> Which is why I also said "Obviously others' opinions differ." my dear pac.
> 
> If it happens I'll be indifferent to it. Unless no one likes my posts. http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/sad/depressed.gif
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 06:40 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Cooking Goddess (Post 1353635)
> Which is why I also said "Obviously others' opinions differ." my dear pac.
> 
> If it happens I'll be indifferent to it. Unless no one likes my posts. http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/sad/depressed.gif
> no, no, no... that's why I broke it down.
> Maybe the forum work differently for you. Are you using a PC or tablet/phone device? Because I can't believe your Thanks aren't counting against your fifty allowed PM's... They sure are mine.
> 
> GB 03-24-2014 06:55 PM
> Thanks dont affect my PMs either. I neither get nor send PM's for thanks.
> 
> pacanis 03-24-2014 07:04 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353647)
> Thanks dont affect my PMs either. I neither get nor send PM's for thanks.
> Interesting. I just clicked on my PM's Inbox to make double check and it's full of "You have been thanked!" subject lines.
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 07:04 AM
> To everyone who sent me thanks in this thread, thank you back. And yes I did get the thanks (without any PM's being sent or received from my side).
> 
> We truly live blessed lives in that one of our biggest concerns is that we are have to debate the best way to thank out fellow members. I think that right there says a lot about this place
> 
> Aunt Bea 03-25-2014 07:14 AM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353733)
> To everyone who sent me thanks in this thread, thank you back. And yes I did get the thanks (without any PM's being sent or received from my side).
> 
> We truly live blessed lives in that one of our biggest concerns is that we are have to debate the best way to thank out fellow members. I think that right there says a lot about this place
> I would've hit the like button on this one, but I couldn't find it!
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-25-2014 12:07 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Cooking Goddess (Post 1353606)
> I've read all four pages on this topic and my take-away is "some want to make this like Facebook?"
> You would be incorrect. No one wants it to be anything like facebook. Especially me.
> Did you take a second to view the examples? If you did, you would see a "thanks" button like pictured and linked are nothing like facebook. Nothing like it.
> This is why I recommended a true simple "thanks" button.
> Click "thanks" and be on your way to the next post.
> 
> When I first joined this forum, I clicked on the "thanks" button a few times. Once I realized what it was, I quit using it.
> Now I have to post my agreement or like the others say +1.
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Aunt Bea (Post 1353736)
> I would've hit the like button on this one, but I couldn't find it!
> There are times everyday I am on this forum I would have loved to be able to just click "thanks" and be done with "thanks".
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 12:15 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353796)
> Did you take a second to view the examples? If you did, you would see a "thanks" button like pictured and linked are nothing like facebook. Nothing like it.
> I looked at your example. In the example when you click thanks it shows the person who did the thanking. How, exactly, is that not the same thing as clicking "like" on Facebook which then show who clicked like on that post? Other than one being called "thanks" and the other "like" just what exactly are these differences that make you say the two are nothing alike?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353796)
> There are times everyday I am on this forum I would have loved to be able to just click "thanks" and be done with "thanks".
> Why can't you do that now under our current system? OK so it is 2 clicks instead of one, but it is really that much more out of your day to click a button one extra time?
> 
> CatPat 03-25-2014 12:36 PM
> I just realized I haven't thanked so many of you who have been so kind to me!
> 
> I'm not a good member when I forget to do that. I'll try to be better.
> 
> I belong to a political forum also, and I think there should be a "Dingbat" button there.
> 
> With love,
> ~Cat
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-25-2014 12:44 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353797)
> I looked at your example. In the example when you click thanks it shows the person who did the thanking. How, exactly, is that not the same thing as clicking "like" on Facebook which then show who clicked like on that post? Other than one being called "thanks" and the other "like" just what exactly are these differences that make you say the two are nothing alike?
> 
> Why can't you do that now under our current system? OK so it is 2 clicks instead of one, but it is really that much more out of your day to click a button one extra time?
> My point was that this is not an attempt to make this forum like facebook. I was responding to the insinuation that "some" are trying to turn this into, or like facebook.
> 
> But I have used both facebook "likes" and my other forums "thanks" and they are not the same.
> Liking something on facebook opens up a can of worms, uninvited comments from people I have never met and solicitation from companies selling something.
> The "thanks" button does not provide these unwanted extras. They are night and day different.
> 
> The current system on DC is not even close to the thanks button I use on the other forums.
> No box pops up and no text can be entered.
> Besides why should the thanks be hidden from the rest of the forum.
> 
> 
> Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums
> Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
> Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
> 
> Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums (http://www.discusscooking.com/forums/)
> - Forum Admin: Tech Support & Announcements (Forum Admin: Tech Support & Announcements - Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums)
> - - Thanks Button? (http://www.discusscooking.com/forums/f29/thanks-button-89339.html)
> 
> roadfix 03-25-2014 12:50 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by CatPat (Post 1353807)
> I just realized I haven't thanked so many of you who have been so kind to me!
> 
> I'm not a good member when I forget to do that. I'll try to be better.
> 
> With love,
> ~Cat
> Please thank me later....as my mail box is full right now. So if you thanked me now I'll never find out... Or just wait til we switch over to the simpler "thanks" system...so others can see you've thanked me big time....
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 12:53 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353814)
> My point was that this is not an attempt to make this forum like facebook. I was responding to the insinuation that "some" are trying to turn this into, or like facebook.
> if it had nothing to do with what they looked like on the surface then why did you ask the poster if they even looked at the attachment you posted. The only information that could be gleamed from that is visual.
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353814)
> Besides why should the thanks be hidden from the rest of the forum.
> Because sometimes people want their thanks to be private. Why should they be forced to have it public? It is 6 of one half a dozen of the other.
> 
> You also never answered why you can't click thanks and be done with it under the current system. No one is forcing you to write a message. It even says "optional" right on it so there is no ambiguity.
> 
> CatPat 03-25-2014 12:59 PM
> There is a text box in which you can type your thanks when you click on it. I just sent you thanks, Roll Bones.
> 
> There is a grammatical error here in DC, I think. When you send your thanks, the pop-up says "Your thanks HAS been sent."
> 
> It should say, "Your thanks HAVE been sent." Thanks are plural, yes?
> 
> Or am I wrong? English is so hard.
> 
> With love,
> ~Cat
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 01:00 PM
> Thanks in this case is singular CatPat. You are not sending someone thank.
> 
> roadfix 03-25-2014 01:01 PM
> I think 'thanks' is singular. 'Thank yous' are plural.
> 
> Dawgluver 03-25-2014 01:06 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by GB (Post 1353822)
> Thanks in this case is singular CatPat. You are not sending someone thank.
> 
> 
> You "thank" someone by sending them "thanks". Yes, it is confusing.
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 01:08 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Dawgluver (Post 1353827)
> 
> 
> You "thank" someone by sending them "thanks". Yes, it is confusing.
> We drive on parkways and park on driveways. Confusing for sure!
> 
> CatPat 03-25-2014 01:19 PM
> Thank you!
> 
> I wondered of this. I trip and fall over English so much one would think I need to begin paying a gravity bill.
> 
> With love,
> ~Cat
> 
> Roll_Bones 03-25-2014 01:28 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by CatPat (Post 1353821)
> There is a text box in which you can type your thanks when you click on it. I just sent you thanks, Roll Bones.
> You will need to explain how I find this "thanks" CatPat. I don't see any thanks.
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 01:32 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Roll_Bones (Post 1353838)
> You will need to explain how I find this "thanks" CatPat. I don't see any thanks.
> Are you on a mobile version of the site or are you on a computer?
> 
> CarolPa 03-25-2014 02:44 PM
> I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.
> 
> roadfix 03-25-2014 02:50 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by CarolPa (Post 1353856)
> I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.
> Yeah, but that's posting. .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...
> 
> Rocket_J_Dawg 03-25-2014 02:53 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by CarolPa (Post 1353856)
> I think if you want everyone to be able to see your thanks, you should just thank the person in the next post.
> That's the only option I have as I don't have a "thanks" button.
> 
> Andy M. 03-25-2014 02:55 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Janet H (Post 1353387)
> The Thanks button is not available on the mobile version...
> 
> Here's the answer
> 
> GB 03-25-2014 03:10 PM
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by roadfix (Post 1353858)
> Yeah, but that's posting. .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...
> Yeah but we all know you have never gotten 100 thanks in one thread. 80 maybe but not 100
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .....The text that you have entered is too long (38263 characters). Please shorten it to 25000 characters long.
> 
> a simple demonstration as to why everything on the Internet should not automatically be quoted back and cited in every reply.
Click to expand...


----------



## GB

dcSaute said:


> a simple demonstration as to why everything on the Internet should not automatically be quoted back and cited in every reply.


What does that have to do with anything posted in this thread?


----------



## Cooking Goddess

Roll_Bones said:


> You would be incorrect. No one wants it to be anything like facebook. Especially me.
> Did you take a second to view the examples?  If you did, you would see a "thanks" button like pictured and linked are nothing like facebook....


My FB comment was my initial reaction. A page later I still don't see that this would be make such a big difference in functionality as to warrant the time and effort involved for those to do the encoding to program the change.  And yes, I did look at the examples. I had the same thought as GB:



GB said:


> I looked at your example. In the example when you click thanks it shows the person who did the thanking. How, exactly, is that not the same thing as clicking "like" on Facebook which then show who clicked like on that post? Other than one being called "thanks" and the other "like" just what exactly are these differences that make you say the two are nothing alike?...


----------



## pacanis

roadfix said:


> Yeah, but that's posting. .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...


 
Maybe so, but for the four or five people here that bother to say anything it shouldn't be too bad


----------



## pacanis

dcSaute said:


> GB said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....The text that you have entered is too long (38263 characters). Please shorten it to 25000 characters long.
> 
> a simple demonstration as to why everything on the Internet should not automatically be quoted back and cited in every reply.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the heck?
> I think you want Cave76's thread on quoting.
Click to expand...


----------



## pacanis

Hey, look at that strange post.
I quoted dcsaute and it stuck GB's name in the field.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

I'll probably get suspended or kicked off for saying this  :

IF your biggest problem in life is liking or not liking the "thanks" button, or the lack of a "like" button, or not wanting to be bothered with the effort to quote just the select part of a comment you are responding to...well then, consider yourself one very lucky person. There are SO many other things to be concerned with that actually warrant this much attention. 

It really does take a lot of time to make a small change to any program. Those in charge may find that since we seem to be pretty evenly divided about wanting/not wanting this change, it isn't worth the time and aggravation to rewrite a computer program to make this change.  If your overall experience at DC is enjoyable you'll overlook differences.  For me, keeping the current way or making a change doesn't make a difference as to whether or DC is my "Happy Place".

In the end, I hope we all accept the way things are around here whether or not they're exactly the way we want them to be or are changed to a different way we may not prefer. In the end it's all about the friendships we've developed and the knowledge we've gained along the way at DC. 

Just my 2 cents worth. Hope I haven't offended anyone.


----------



## CarolPa

roadfix said:


> Yeah, but that's posting.  .....and if a hundred people did that the thread would be several pages long of just thank you notes...



No, because the only people posting their thanks would be the people who want their thanks to be seen by everyone.  The rest would be using the Thanks button they way it is.

Really, why is it important to thank someone?  It's just a discussion, and unless people are beginning to take sides, there's no reason to have to thank someone for agreeing with you.


----------



## dcSaute

GB said:


> What does that have to do with anything posted in this thread?



if I understood correctly, the demand was to have one's "Thanks" included in the thread.

it's the same thing - there are people who cannot reply without including the original post.  I guess they do not know how.

it is very helpful for old people who cannot remember what they said yesterday.  or for the folks who log on once a year.  

the usefulness of a Thanks button/function/score escapes me, completely.
other than building up one's own little clique of Likers, what's the point?


----------



## roadfix

I need to be loved by many...
We need a 'love' button too...  LOL..


----------



## GotGarlic

Some people like to express appreciation for help or advice they have received. Sometimes one might want it to be private, other times public. It's not about agreement or cliques.


----------



## Aunt Bea

[QUOTE Hope I haven't offended anyone. [/QUOTE]

CG, I'm not offended and I doubt that anyone else is. 

When I see a thread like this I think of the quote by Pablo Picasso " Give me a museum and I'll fill it!" 

I think most DCers feel the same way about a lively thread.


----------



## GB

dcSaute said:


> if I understood correctly, the demand was to have one's "Thanks" included in the thread.


Nope that was never what anyone was asking for.


----------



## GB

CarolPa said:


> \
> Really, why is it important to thank someone?  It's just a discussion, and unless people are beginning to take sides, there's no reason to have to thank someone for agreeing with you.


My parents always taught me to thank people. Thanking someone is polite. It has nothing to do with taking sides (and hence it is private under the current system). When someone makes a point I had not considered or something that enlightens me I feel the want to thank them.


----------



## roadfix

I would hit the 'thank' button at someone who posted something very informative or made me smile or laugh.


----------



## Andy M.

dcSaute said:


> if I understood correctly, the demand was to have one's "Thanks" included in the thread.
> 
> it's the same thing - there are people who cannot reply without including the original post.  I guess they do not know how.
> 
> it is very helpful for old people who cannot remember what they said yesterday.  or for the folks who log on once a year.
> 
> the usefulness of a Thanks button/function/score escapes me, completely.
> other than building up one's own little clique of Likers, what's the point?



Where do I start?

You understood incorrectly.  The request was to have a Thanks/Like button that worked differently from the current one.

"Some people" quote the post so it's clear what they are responding to.

I, for one, don't appreciate your ageist comment.

Social convention is to offer thanks for a comment/post that you appreciate.

Thank you for taking the time to participate.


----------



## CarolPa

GotGarlic said:


> Some people like to express appreciation for help or advice they have received. Sometimes one might want it to be private, other times public. It's not about agreement or cliques.




If I asked for and received help or advice I would just post "Thanks for the help!"


----------



## GB

CarolPa said:


> Really, why is it important to thank someone?





CarolPa said:


> If I asked for and received help or advice I would just post "Thanks for the help!"



I guess you just answered your own question.


----------



## CatPat

I try to be thankful for all of you, for you have been so kind and caring toward me.

I'm not sure of all this as far as the technological part, but from my heart, I thank all of you for being here.

With love,
~Cat


----------



## roadfix

GB said:


> CarolPa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, why is it important to thank someone?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CarolPa said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I asked for and received help or advice I would just post "Thanks for the help!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess you just answered your own question.
Click to expand...


Awesome catch.


----------



## dcSaute

Andy M. said:


> Where do I start?
> 
> You understood incorrectly.  The request was to have a Thanks/Like button that worked differently from the current one.
> 
> "Some people" quote the post so it's clear what they are responding to.
> 
> I, for one, don't appreciate your ageist comment.
> 
> Social convention is to offer thanks for a comment/post that you appreciate.
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to participate.



it's not impossible I'm older than you.

and more generally, being "online" since the mid-80's, I've seen the Votes and Thanks buttons become a point of contention - a "them against us" thing - a my score is higher than your score thing - very ugly - very destructive.

sounded like a good idea at the time; frequently does not work out in the end.

the quote backs?  long standing issue.

>>so it's clear
oh dear, where do I start . . . _so many_ other ways to accomplish that.....

but, I've forgotten . . .


----------



## GB

dcSaute said:


> and more generally, being "online" since the mid-80's, I've seen the Votes and Thanks buttons become a point of contention


So you are saying you have been online using votes and thanks buttons since the mid 80's?


----------



## Andy M.

dcSaute said:


> it's not impossible I'm older than you.
> 
> and more generally, being "online" since the mid-80's, I've seen the Votes and Thanks buttons become a point of contention - a "them against us" thing - a my score is higher than your score thing - very ugly - very destructive.
> 
> sounded like a good idea at the time; frequently does not work out in the end.
> 
> the quote backs?  long standing issue.
> 
> >>so it's clear
> oh dear, where do I start . . . _so many_ other ways to accomplish that.....
> 
> but, I've forgotten . . .



Your age doesn't make it OK to make an ageist remark.

We've had one means or another of saying thank you on this site for nearly a decade and the worst that's happened is that we have a spirited discussion like this one every few years.  

I agree that sometimes the quotes are overdone.  There's another thread that discusses that topic.

Sorry you're having memory issues.  Perhaps there are some memory aids that could work for you...


----------



## KatyCooks

Hm, an interesting thread so THANKS everyone!  

The way I see it, people are talking about:

1 Thanks
2 Liking 
3 Agreement

Unless we want a button for each option (which would clutter things up a bit), I'm not sure there is all that much of an issue with the current system? 

I also suspect this affects some posters more than others.   (Us irregular posters are not overly troubled with  "Thanks" PMs) 

However, that said, a very simple "Thanks" button that you could click at the end of a useful recipe or bit of cooking advice - that let the poster know that what they had posted was useful, but that doesn't involve "points" and doesn't clog up peoples' PMs, and doesn't "quote",  doesn't sound like the worst idea in the world. 

I'll get my coat...  (and brolly - still raining in Hampshire)


----------



## roadfix

Don't forget your popcorn, dear....


----------



## Andy M.

KatyCooks said:


> ...I'll get my coat...  (and brolly - still raining in Hampshire)





Don't go.  We need your smiling face around here.


----------



## KatyCooks

Never been too fond of popcorn, poppet.


----------



## KatyCooks

Andy M. said:


> Don't go. We need your smiling face around here.


 
Hi Andy! 

I know I have been AWOL! I will try to do better! (I haven't stopped cooking though.) 

I actually logged on because I had a cooking question, but I saw this thread and now I have forgotten what my question was! Doh! (Old age and the fact that it is very late here.) It will come back to me though.

(That said, I'm off to bed now).


----------



## Somebunny

That super long quote has crashed my phone 3 times!  I cannot go back to that page without it crashing, so I'm not sure how many posts were after it, I had just read the 1st one after it when it crashed
. Guess I Missed Katy's return.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

KatyCooks said:


> ...I know I have been AWOL! I will try to do better! (I haven't stopped cooking though.) ...


Hey, there you are Katy! Glad to see you're still among the living. I thought maybe the weather over the pond had finally gotten to you. Either that, or maybe you ran away with Harry?  He's been AWOL lately too.


----------



## GB

KatyCooks said:


> However, that said, a very simple "Thanks" button that you could click at the end of a useful recipe or bit of cooking advice - that let the poster know that what they had posted was useful, but that doesn't involve "points" and doesn't clog up peoples' PMs, and doesn't "quote",  doesn't sound like the worst idea in the world.


Which is essentially the system we have now. PM notification for thanks can be turned on or off per user so you have the option of getting them if you like them or not getting them if you don't. It does not currently quote anything at all. There is no real point system (it tallys how many thanks you get so if you call that a point system then disregard this point), but it is private and only the person getting the thanks sees that number.


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> Are you on a mobile version of the site or are you on a computer?



Computer.  But I do check in occasionally with my Iphone.


----------



## GB

And you don't see the "Thanks" button next to the "Quote" button on your computer?


----------



## roadfix

My new chromebook with the chrome browser and operating system show the 'thank' button.


----------



## Alix

Well I won't speak for others, but I'll clarify what I meant with my post since things seem to have wandered a bit. 

I'd prefer a button that is a one click deal, not a three click or more deal for a simple acknowledgement of a post. If I'm going to take the time to respond with more than a simple click, I can just as easily write a PM. 

I think public acknowledgement is nice, but if it gets folks all bent and thinking there is some kind of competition, then fuggedaboudit. 

Like button = one click (on other fora)
Thanks button = three minimum

My vote - one click.


----------



## taxlady

I agree with Alix.


----------



## Andy M.

taxlady said:


> I agree with Alix.




Me too!


----------



## roadfix

+2

...


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> And you don't see the "Thanks" button next to the "Quote" button on your computer?



Yes GB, I see the button. But I don't know or I have never been thanked I guess because I cannot see the thanks I believe Cat sent me.
Is it in user CP, or under my name above?  I looked yesterday and did not see any thanks sent my way.



roadfix said:


> +2...



+ 3


----------



## GB

It is under User CP.


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> It is under User CP.



Got it.  I did not scroll to the bottom of the page and thats why I never saw it.

To anyone and everyone who sent a thanks, thanks.
I did not see the thanks you sent until this very minute.

I still like the idea of a one click thanks button.


----------



## Alix

Hahahahaha!! I "like" that many of you have the same lazy in your bones as I do. "Thanks" for the posts.


----------



## roadfix

Thanks


----------



## Roll_Bones

So no thanks/like button for DC?

Since this has been discussed, I have wanted to hit a thanks/like button here so many times.
The staff could arrange it so there are no points involved.
Personally I can see no reason not to have this feature?


----------



## GB

As already pointed out, the thanks button is already there RB. And it isn't really a point system not. It is a running total of how many thanks you have got just as you can see how many posts you have (which is not a point system).


----------



## PrincessFiona60

Reminds me of the folks who move here from California because they don't like the lifestyle and then say, "That's not how we did it back home..."

DC is DC, we are unique and I like it.  People here respect one another and the TOS.


----------



## pacanis

PrincessFiona60 said:


> Reminds me of the folks who move here from California because they don't like the lifestyle and then say, "That's not how we did it back home..."
> 
> DC is DC, we are unique and I like it. People here respect one another and the TOS.


 
Some of those *people from CA* moved here and got changes implemented as soon as they squawked about something, as I pointed out earlier.
There's always room for improvement... most places.


----------



## Addie

PrincessFiona60 said:


> Reminds me of the folks who move here from California because they don't like the lifestyle and then say, *"That's not how we did it back home..."*
> DC is DC, we are unique and I like it.  People here respect one another and the TOS.



I got my fill of that with DH#1 and England. Haven't tolerated that line since.


----------



## Andy M.

Site ownership/Administration have been quiet on the topic.  

Any comments guys?


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> As already pointed out, the thanks button is already there RB. And it isn't really a point system not. It is a running total of how many thanks you have got just as you can see how many posts you have (which is not a point system).



We've already discussed how the current thanks button is different.

What's lacking from the current thanks count that prevents its being a point system?  I have over 300 thanks, how many do you have?


----------



## GB

Andy M. said:


> We've already discussed how the current thanks button is different.


It is still a thanks button though. RB said he wanted a thanks button. There is a thanks button.



			
				Andy M said:
			
		

> What's lacking from the current thanks count that prevents its being a point system?  I have over 300 thanks, how many do you have?


I have 25 PM's. Does that mean I have 25 points for PM's?


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> It is still a thanks button though. RB said he wanted a thanks button. There is a thanks button.
> 
> I have 25 PM's. Does that mean I have 25 points for PM's?




You didn't answer my question.  What's lacking from the current Thanks count that prevents it from being a point system?


----------



## GB

Andy M. said:


> You didn't answer my question.  What's lacking from the current Thanks count that prevents it from being a point system?


Intent. The intent of a point system is to rank one person against another in a competitive way. Your thanks count is known only to you. There is no competitive nature of the thanks count just as there is no competitive nature of how many PM's you have.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> Intent. The intent of a point system is to rank one person against another in a competitive way. Your thanks count is known only to you. There is no competitive nature of the thanks count just as there is no competitive nature of how many PM's you have.



The old karma system's points were known only to the recipient in the latter years of its existence.  Does that mean it wasn't a point system?  

I believe we will continue to disagree on this topic.  I'm off focus on the Red Sox game.


----------



## GB

I remember it differently. I remember the old karma system being public, but even assuming you are right and it changed to private later on, is was still the intent of how the system was structured. The points (and yes they were called points then unlike now where it does not say points, but just "thanks total") were awarded based on criteria. I do not remember the specifics, but it was a competitive nature in that the more points someone had the more their karma points were worth when they gave them to other people so there was a reward for having more points. Whether it was public or not, the structure of the system was that of competition. 

You never answered my question either though Andy. Is the count of PM's that you have a point system? I have 24 PM's. Do I have 24 points?


----------



## Addie

What purpose would a point system serve? I certainly for one, do not wish to compete with anyone in this forum. And unless the admins were going to send me a very expensive piece of kitchen equipment that I would never buy myself as a prize for the most points in a month, I can see no other purpose. If I am going to be in a competition, I would expect something for winning.


----------



## GB

Exactly Addie, which is why no one here is advocating a point system. Some think we already have one and they do not want it while others think we do not already have one and are happy about that. No one is trying to start one so you have nothing to worry about.


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> As already pointed out, the thanks button is already there RB. And it isn't really a point system not. It is a running total of how many thanks you have got just as you can see how many posts you have (which is not a point system).



Thanks GB.


----------



## GB

You're welcome.


----------



## Andy M.

GB said:


> ...You never answered my question either though Andy. Is the count of PM's that you have a point system? I have 24 PM's. Do I have 24 points?



Difficult to "keep score" with PM totals when you are given a limit of how many PMs you can have and you have the ability to delete them.  However, no, it's not a point system.

For the record, I don't care a whit about keeping score.  That discussion was just an offshoot of the main point of the thread.  All I was suggesting was a simplified Thanks button where you could perform a thanks with just one click.

I'm done with this.


----------



## roadfix

PM's tied to a point system or to determine popularity does not make sense anyway.
I've had many PM's which were complaints against me.....so those would have counted as negative PM's.....LOL...


----------



## GB

My point (haha get it) is that just because there is a total number associated with something, that does not mean it is a point system.

I have no problem with a simplified system, although I think the current system is extremely simple. 3 clicks of a mouse (less than a second out of your day) and you have sent thanks to someone. Sure it could be shortened to one click and you could shave off a fraction of a second to make it a small fraction easier, but it it really that hard to click your mouse 3x instead of 1x and is the gain you get really that much more? Obviously for some it is. For me it is not. I am fine either way.


----------



## pacanis

GB, in the world of computing, yes, a fraction of a second is a big deal. You should know that. Don't you recall moving from one dial up connection to another, or when your phone provider upgraded? And then there was the progression of broadband and additional speeds? Not to mention RAM upgrades and little things we were doing to gain more speed. I think anyone who spends regular time on a computer can tell when a page loads a millisecond slower. I'm sure you can tell milliseconds' difference when talking camera recovery times.
But as someone who is using a Dell laptop... those three clicks vs one are a BIG DEAL with Dell's crummy touchpad 

But really those are both moot points (get it ). Simpler is simpler and faster is faster. And DC's "uniqueness" has its limits. There is a reason virtually every other forum uses the Like system they do. It's a much better system. Slide the pointer over Like, click, done.


----------



## GB

pacanis said:


> But as someone who is using a Dell laptop... those three clicks vs one are a BIG DEAL with Dell's crummy touchpad


Well thats your problem right there. Time to upgrade to a Mac.


----------



## pacanis

GB said:


> Well thats your problem right there. Time to upgrade to a Mac.


 
Will I get a Like button? 


Actually do I think my next laptop will be an Apple. This is the second one (Dell) that gets a bit hinky at times. Their laptops seem to have inherent problems with both the keyboard and the touchpad.


----------



## Alix

I am chuckling a bit. I am one of the competitive ones with the old karma points. My husband and I had a running gag with each other competing for points. It was super fun and so many of the crew that were here at the time played along. We were never terribly serious about it, but it made us laugh every day.


----------



## Dawgluver

pacanis said:


> Will I get a Like button?
> 
> 
> Actually do I think my next laptop will be an Apple. This is the second one (Dell) that gets a bit hinky at times. Their laptops seem to have inherent problems with both the keyboard and the touchpad.



Pac, nothing to do with Thanks, but I cannot STAND a touchpad.  I have to have a mouse.  I have a few to plug in and always carried them with me.  And my previous work techies refused to use a touchpad as well.


----------



## taxlady

I'm not overly fond of the touchpad, but I use it all the time. I don't get an inflamed wrist nearly as often with the touchpad as with the mouse.


----------



## Dawgluver

I'd inflame my wrist by bashing my laptop.  Paragraphs would disappear from me doing nothing but typing.  I'd have to redo entire reports.  My supervisor said the same thing would happen to her too.  We'd both watch as I typed something and it would disappear.


----------



## taxlady

ctrl-z


----------



## Dawgluver

Good to know!


----------



## taxlady

I use it a lot with the touchpad.


----------



## FrankZ

Usually you can just have the touchpad turn off while typing.

New laptop, touchpad is horrible... though I think I almost have it tamed.


----------



## Roll_Bones

Glad to see this has turned into a discussion.
Let me be clear about my intentions as it seems there are a few that seem to already possess this information. RE: California comments.

1) My goal was not to change anything, but to possibly improve what we already have.  
2) Yes, I am using other forum controls as the example as they seem to be much better than the system we use here.
3) A true one click thanks/like button would be simpler, faster and frankly for me, more comfortable.
I think thanks should be public and I think no reason is needed for the thanks or like.

I know I am new around here, but I do have ideas and thoughts just like everyone else does.
I am wondering how this might have played out, had a seasoned member suggested this.  Something tells me it might have been more positively received?  Just my gut impression.
Since we have not heard from any site management, I will assume this is the case and no further posting on this subject is required, needed or wanted.
In fact this has already been suggested in earlier comments.


----------



## Andy M.

Roll_Bones said:


> ...I am wondering how this might have played out, had a seasoned member suggested this.  Something tells me it might have been more positively received?  Just my gut impression...




Several 'seasoned members' have agreed with your suggestion.  I don't think your tenure here has anything at all to do with how this suggestion was received.


----------



## Roll_Bones

Andy M. said:


> Several 'seasoned members' have agreed with your suggestion.  I don't think your tenure here has anything at all to do with how this suggestion was received.



Perhaps.  But the suggestion has eluded the staff completely and there has to be a reason.


----------



## Andy M.

Roll_Bones said:


> Perhaps.  But the suggestion has eluded the staff completely and there has to be a reason.




Yes, but that reason is probably not because you are the one who brought it up.


----------



## GB

Roll_Bones said:


> My goal was not to change anything, but to possibly improve what we already have.


An improvement to what we already have IS a change. That is a definition of change.

When I was an Administrator here and we were implementing the kamra, and then later the thanks system, there was a LOT of discussion behind the scenes about it. Andy and Alix will remember this I am sure. We discussed it for weeks if not longer. There is no simple answer. Everyone likes different things and you are never going to find a system that satisfies every single person. 

Just because the staff has not responded does not mean this has eluded them. Of course it does not mean that they are discussing it either.

As Andy said, tenure has nothing to do with anything. Every member here equal from the moment they sign up. One person does not have more of a say than any other.


----------



## Roll_Bones

GB said:


> An improvement to what we already have IS a change. That is a definition of change.
> 
> When I was an Administrator here and we were implementing the kamra, and then later the thanks system, there was a LOT of discussion behind the scenes about it. Andy and Alix will remember this I am sure. We discussed it for weeks if not longer. There is no simple answer. Everyone likes different things and you are never going to find a system that satisfies every single person.
> 
> Just because the staff has not responded does not mean this has eluded them. Of course it does not mean that they are discussing it either.
> 
> As Andy said, tenure has nothing to do with anything. Every member here equal from the moment they sign up. One person does not have more of a say than any other.



You are right GB, it is change.  My words in text, do not always fulfill my true meaning.  I hope you do understand what I meant to say?
I really did not want to "ruffle any feathers" as they say.


----------



## pacanis

And as they say in Animal Farm, some members are more equal than others


----------



## GB

Roll_Bones said:


> I hope you do understand what I meant to say?
> I really did not want to "ruffle any feathers" as they say.


I sure do understand. And speaking for my feathers only, they are not ruffled


----------



## Cooking Goddess

Roll_Bones said:


> ...The staff could arrange it so there are no points involved.
> Personally I can see no reason not to have this feature?


Do you or someone you know write computer code? Adding a "like" button isn't like pasting an image onto a page and attaching it like a photo. Computer instructions have to be written, then made to fit into the existing programming code in such a way that it doesn't blow up the entire system. And in the sample you linked to at another forum that has that feature also shows the names of people who "liked" the post...another instruction necessary for it to work...and more code to write. It's a lot of work!

R_B, do you have kids? If so, did you ever read to them a book called "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie..."? "If you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to ask for a glass of milk. When you give him the milk, he'll probably ask you for a straw. When he's finished, he'll ask you for a napkin..." And on and on...for pages. Writing code for that "one small change" is like that.  Besides, if they end up getting it wrong it can crash the entire forum. I seriously doubt you want to do THAT, right?


----------



## GB

Cooking Goddess. The code has already been written. The forum software we use has page after page of options that can be turned on or off or configured in a million different ways.


----------



## taxlady

GB said:


> Cooking Goddess. The code has already been written. The forum software we use has page after page of options that can be turned on or off or configured in a million different ways.


Yup.


----------



## pacanis

Yup 2.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

GB said:


> Cooking Goddess. The code has already been written. The forum software we use has page after page of options that can be turned on or off or configured in a million different ways.


I am well aware of our "Thanks" button GB (first oval on the left, at the bottom of every post box, per my User CP settings). I have both sent and received thanks here at DC. But did you see the actual word "thanks" in my previous post? Nope, I'm using the word "like". I haven't been using the terms interchangeably because as far as I can tell from Roll_Bones early posts in this thread he understands the difference and is requesting a "like" button - IMO similar to the feature on Facebook and other forums. Per one of his posts: I should have used "Like" instead of "Thanks" in my title. Since we already have a "Thanks" button that is actually a PM button.......[/QUOTE]"]





Roll_Bones said:


> I should have used "Like" instead of "Thanks" in my title. Since we already have a "Thanks" button that is actually a PM button.......



R_B posted a screen shot on page 3*. It shows posts with the "like" area of the post indicating how many "likes" the post received and who generated them. Wouldn't changing a function on DC to that type of result require rewriting some software? Our CP options features allow changes only to the existing system, correct? I could be wrong because I've never written a computer program to save my life. But Himself said my interpretation of what R_B is looking for would require software changes...and doing that sort of thing plus system design was his job in the IT industry for almost 40 years. He's my Tech Hero! 

*It's "page 3" if you have your Number of Posts to Show per Page count set to 20.


----------



## GB

Cooking Goddess said:


> I am well aware of our "Thanks" button GB (first oval on the left, at the bottom of every post box, per my User CP settings). I have both sent and received thanks here at DC. But did you see the actual word "thanks" in my previous post? Nope, I'm using the word "like". I haven't been using the terms interchangeably because as far as I can tell from Roll_Bones early posts in this thread he understands the difference and is requesting a "like" button - IMO similar to the feature on Facebook and other forums.


Please re-read my post Cooking Goddess. I never said you used the term thanks or that you used it interchangeably with "like" or anything else of the sort. What I did say is that the code has already been written. Our software (vBulletin) can already do the things requested. 



			
				Cooking Goddess said:
			
		

> Per one of his posts:
> R_B posted a screen shot on page 3*. It shows posts with the "like" area of the post indicating how many "likes" the post received and who generated them. Wouldn't changing a function on DC to that type of result require rewriting some software?


Nope. As I said before, the software has already been written. It is just an option that needs to be turned on.



			
				Cooking Goddess said:
			
		

> Our CP options features allow changes only to the existing system, correct?


It is not our CP options that would enable this feature. That is something that is done behind the scenes. 

Think of it this way. When you turn on your cable box do you see every single channel your cable company offers and get access to every option they have? Nope you don't. You just get what you pay for. If you call them up and say here is $100 more per month they will "throw a switch" and all of a sudden you have 50 more channels and 5 new options you did not have before. They did not write any code. The code was already written. They just turned on your access.


----------



## Cooking Goddess

GB, when you wrote:


GB said:


> Cooking Goddess. The code has already been written. The forum software we use has page after page of options that can be turned on or off or configured in a million different ways.


...my brain understood that to mean my own User Control Panel, not



GB said:


> ...Our software (vBulletin) can already do the things requested...


Oops. Sorry. 



GB said:


> ...Think of it this way. When you turn on your cable box do you see every single channel your cable company offers and get access to every option they have?...


Wellllll.....I'm pretty sure cable boxes have changed since 1986 or '87. We haven't had cable (or dish, or anything other than an antenna and, more recently, also an internet connection) since then. I could probably live without TV since I watch only two TV shows regularly. Himself is perfectly happy finding shows to watch on Hulu or the network sites like PBS. But I do understand how you select from a menu. More items, more bucks. But we're happy with "free". 

******************

And now for this simple(?) question: If making this change is as simple as flipping a switch (metaphorically speaking), why not put up a poll? "Yes to like button" "No to like button" "I don't care one way or the other". Since I have no problem with the current system I would click "I don't care". Which seems like a contradiction considering my other posts about this topic...


----------



## Addie

taxlady said:


> ctrl-z





My schedule of Microsoft Keyboard Codes tells me, Ctrl-s. The S is for save! When I am doing a long document, I will do that throughout the document as I am working on it. Also for recipes. Redoing the list of ingredients can be daunting some times. 

That reminds me, I need to get that back from my SIL. I let him borrow it to study. I will have to make a copy for him.


----------



## GB

No worries Cooking Goddess.

Addie Ctrl-s is save, but Ctrl-z is undo. If you make a mistake the last thing you want to do is save it. You want to undo it.


----------



## GB

Cooking Goddess said:


> And now for this simple(?) question: If making this change is as simple as flipping a switch (metaphorically speaking), why not put up a poll?


Because if they did that for this issue then why would they not have to do it for every other issues and option they could turn on or off? Even though this seems like a big issue because we have a thread on it that has lasted pages, look at how many people have actually participated in the conversation. And of those that actually participated, look at how many actually care what the outcome is. I did not bother to count, but I would guess maybe 10 people or so have expressed an interest in changing what we have. At least two of those people (both you and I) have said they really don't care one way or the other. Now look at how many members we have. It is a drop in the bucket. I am not saying that those in this thread that want it changed should not have a say, but to change something so small based on a vote would grind the behind the scenes office to a halt. There are millions of options that they could change just like this one. What color the site is, if certain options show up on the right or the left or top or bottom or at all. There are literally page after page of things and each one could potentially be a subject for a vote since everyone has personal opinions. A vote, while it sounds like a good democratic way in not very effective with something like this. Only people who read the thread would vote first off. What about all the people who never even bother to open the thread which would be the majority of the members? What about future members? Would they get a vote after the fact? Would the system have to keep changing as we get new members? What about an old member who has been away for a while and comes back after the vote? The staff has to make decisions on how the site will look and work and can't be bogged down with checking with every member each time they make a change. That is not to say changes can't and shouldn't be done by popular demand, but if that were done it would have to be a pretty big issue and I dont think a large thread necessarily equals a large issue.


----------



## Addie

I find it hard to believe that the subject of an extra silly button can create so much controversy. I would assume that every member who comes to this forum must 'like' it, or they wouldn't be here on a daily basis. 

Thank you and well said GB.


----------



## pacanis

If the number of members replying (with input) to this thread is ten I do not consider that a drop in the bucket. My ratio would be drawn on _active/participating_ members, not total members.
But that's me.


----------



## taxlady

Addie said:


> My schedule of Microsoft Keyboard Codes tells me, Ctrl-s. The S is for save! When I am doing a long document, I will do that throughout the document as I am working on it. Also for recipes. Redoing the list of ingredients can be daunting some times.
> 
> That reminds me, I need to get that back from my SIL. I let him borrow it to study. I will have to make a copy for him.


But, Addie, you only want to save when you like what you have. And "save" really only applies to files. If you are typing a reply to a post, it isn't really what you want.

ctrl-z is "undo". When the touchpad accidentally highlights an entire paragraph and deletes it, ctrl-z will usually bring back that paragraph.


----------



## Addie

taxlady said:


> But, Addie, you only want to save when you like what you have. And "save" really only applies to files. If you are typing a reply to a post, it isn't really what you want.
> 
> ctrl-z is "undo". When the touchpad accidentally highlights an entire paragraph and deletes it, ctrl-z will usually bring back that paragraph.



I understand. But just out of habit over the years, even when I am doing an email, I will stop and do a Ctrl+s out of habit. I have been known to do some stupid things like delete what I am working on right in the middle of the piece, even email.


----------



## pacanis

Addie said:


> I understand. But just out of habit over the years, even when I am doing an email, I will stop and do a Ctrl+s out of habit. I have been known to do some stupid things like delete what I am working on right in the middle of the piece, even email.


 
I like those forums that will save what you are typing automatically. If "something happens", you can click back and will not have lost your entire post. Most if not all will have been saved.
But that's another long thread...


----------



## GB

pacanis said:


> If the number of members replying (with input) to this thread is ten I do not consider that a drop in the bucket. My ratio would be drawn on _active/participating_ members, not total members.
> But that's me.


Just because someone is not in a thread participating does not mean they are not a participating member.


----------



## pacanis

GB said:


> Just because someone is not in a thread participating does not mean they are not a participating member.


 
I'm all ears. What is your definition of an active/participating member?

And just to add, would someone who does not post care one way or the other whether or not we use a Thanks or a Like button? I can't see how it would make a difference to them, but then I haven't seen your definition yet.


----------



## GB

My definition does not matter. What I am saying is how to you determine that one members opinion is more important/valuable than another. Just because you post in a thread that means you have more say over how the overall site should work? There are plenty of actively participating members (by any definition) who have not been in this thread. Does their opinion not count? 

There is another forum that I frequent that I hardly ever post on. Here I have over 25K posts. There (I have been a member roughly the same amount of time) I have around 100 posts. And most of those posts were in the past year, so lets say this was 2 years ago and I had 15 posts at that other thread. There was not a single person there who knew I existed, yet I still loved passively enjoying the site. I can promise you there are plenty of lurkers here at DC as well. Does that mean they are less of a member because they do not post? There are tons of reasons people do not post, but only read. 

What about the members who come here and post for a few months then go away for a few then come back for a few etc? What about long time members who left to do something for a while and are not currently on the site, but will be back at some point?


----------



## pacanis

Wow. I obviously struck a sore spot with you GB.
Don't try to twist my words by using phrases like "less of a member" and insinuating that I meant people who do not post opinions do not count. I meant nothing of the sort. I merely stated that I do not consider active posters' opinions as drops in a bucket. What I did wonder what was you meant by this:

Originally Posted by *GB* 

 
_Just because someone is not in a thread participating does not mean they are not a participating member._

Your definition of the word participate is obviously different than the actual definition and I was curious as to how you defined the word. Am I participating in a baseball game because I am sitting in the stands watching it? I don't think so. Am I participating in a forum just because I registered? No. I am still a member, simply not an active or participating member. At least by definition of the word. Not unless there is an Internet definition I don't know about. And that's why I asked you for your definition.


----------



## GB

First off, I never twisted your words. I asked a question. I did not say or insinuate anything. I asked if someone were less of a member in certain situations. I did not say you said that nor did I imply you said it. If you feel that I did otherwise then you have my apologies because that was NOT my intention.

What I meant by "Just because someone is not in a thread participating does not mean they are not a participating member" can be summed up very simply. Look through this thread and mark down the members who have posted. Now go into a different thread. Lets say the Song Title Game thread for instance, just to randomly pick one. Now I have not actually gone into that thread so I am just guessing here, but my guess is that there are people who posted in that thread that did not post in this thread. They are actively participating in this site are they not? Just because they have not also posted in this thread does not mean they are not actively on the site.

My further points go on to show that there are other ways of actively participating other than posting. If I spend 10 hours a day reading and researching then I am participating in the site. Posting is not the only way to participate. 

Your baseball analogy is not an apples to apples comparison. To make it more equal you should ask if the members on the bench who never get into the game are participating as they are members of the team just as lurkers are members of the forum. The apples to apples comparison would be non members of our forum (those who read but never bother to sign up) vs the fans in the stands. That would be more accurate.

I would argue that the team members on the bench are participating. Their presence there holds value wether they ever get to play or not. They are part of the team, just as members here who do not post for whatever reason (they don't feel comfortable putting their opinions out in public, they have a tenuous grasp of the English language, they can't spell, etc) are still members of the site with just as much say as anyone else who is a member.


----------



## FrankZ

Thank you everyone for the discussion and the idea.

We worked hard, and did a lot of thinking, planning and discussing, before implementing the "Thanks" button.

We are not Facebook, and we will never be.  We have a different, and possibly unique, outlook and functionality.

Art this time I don't think anything more could be added with this discussion. Thank you for the ideas and participation, but this one is getting sent to the deep chest freezer.


----------

