The x people liked this. Like it too.
-
Continuing the discussion from I'm a nobody, and I'm out:
<img src='/uploads/default/2769/aca021bc02e4f63d.jpg'>
Can we get a pipe character, hyphen, anything between 'X people liked this.' and 'Like it too.'?
I keep clicking 'Like' when I'm only trying to figure out who the hell could like such an abomination. Just looking for something that gives more of a separator between the two things to be more discoverable that these are actually two separate functions.
-
@awesomerobot what do you think ?
-
If you're fussed about it, why don't you add a
there? Extremely rare bit of feedback in my experience.
-
That would probably be sufficient, I'm really just looking for any type of break between the two hyperlinks that aren't hyperlinks.
-
Extremely rare bit of feedback
I remember somebody else mentioning it, too, but I don't remember who and it's past quitting time on Friday evening, so I'm not going to go looking for it now.
-
Bug: Discourse doesn't slap @ben_lubar with a trout for a bit for his HTML
-
They were pilchards. In oil.
-
The mind boggles. Seriously. Just because it's a rare piece of feedback doesn't make it any less right.
Two links that are next to each other that have absolutely no visual cue that they are two separate things... there's a WTF. Worse, it's not like there's an absence of cue, it's almost like it's intentionally blended together to look for all the world like a single link.
I don't care if you haven't heard it before. It should not take an arbitrary number of people telling you that you did something stupid to accept that you did something stupid.
Worse: by saying "this is a rare piece of feedback" is almost like you're intentionally trying to marginalise the feedback because it doesn't fit your view of how things should be.
-
I don't even think we need the "like it too" - the like button is 100px away.
I guess I'd use an emdash? The pipe looks too much like the letter |.
So:
1 person liked this — like it too.
-
I agree, I think we should get rid of the "like it too" thing, @codinghorror ?
Less words, less of the "rich getting richer", seems correct to me.
-
Discourse's design ethic is minimalism, that would certainly work for me.
As a thought, you could even go one step further and have the number in a circle (I believe the technical term has become 'badge' to represent this?) next to the heart which, when clicked on, would show the avatars of those that liked said content. Not sure I'm quite a fan of it in DC's current view but it's consistent and familiar with other systems that use likes.
-
I just realized that when I go to like something, it's always using the heart as I can see it a lot easier. My brain ignores the hyperlink to 'like it too' because it's below the hotlinks + reply button which my brain implicitly signs as 'End of post'
-
No, we really want to encourage people to pile on when it comes to like and love. So the overlap and dual methods is and are intentional.
-
I disagree here but regardless an extra 5px does a lot:
- I will add the extra 5px
- I will give this stuff proper classes so they can be suppressed if mods feel like it.
-
Adding some space is fine. Piling on love is 100% intentional, though, and always has been.
-
Also if @awesomerobot and @sam are digging for things to work on in the like arena, I say this is still a great idea
https://meta.discourse.org/t/add-a-you-to-liked-this-after-liking-a-post/1898/14?u=codinghorror
-
Definitely - more consistent and it's also I expected it to work so I assume it's how other people expect it to work.
-
I particularly like the idea of the heart turning red on posts I have liked to make them stand out for me as I am scrolling. Also more consistent with bookmark.
-
If piling on the love is part of the plan, why in hell's name do you limit it to 50 likes per day for a user to make by default?
-
I quite like the "Like it too." link, although I get so used to clicking it that I have to think a little bit harder when I want to like a post that hasn't already been liked.
Filed under: Like like like like...
-
We have the definitive answer to that.
-
Two links that are next to each other that have absolutely no visual cue that they are two separate things... there's a WTF
I've complained about this previously wrt posts. I usually resort to manually underlining the disparate links to indicate the fact that it's two (or in one case five) separate links and not one link from two (or five) consecutive words.
-
Fortunately that practice of making several consecutive words into different links is actually dying out because it's a WTF in itself.
-
It was relevant in that instance:
-
Oh look. It broke in onebox...
-
I think that would be sufficient if the separate links were underlined, like normal web links are. I think an obvious non-interactive separator that isn't whitespace would be better.
-
Redunculous. Jeff Knows Best and I'm sure he's even got a blog post to pre-emptively defend his position.
-
If piling on the love is part of the plan, why in hell's name do you limit it to 50 likes per day for a user to make by default?
Reminds me of a story from this book:
A Korean dating website allowed users to send an e-rose to two users, free of charge. You couldn't buy more e-roses, you had those two and only those two. So what this signaled to the recipient was that the person was definitely interested in them, since it was such a high-cost to the sender. They couldn't buy more and send them to everyone within 50 miles.
Similar thing with the likes...you should be able to like things, but it means more if you're not liking every post.
-
AKA:
Birth of the spam signup bot.
-
Extremely rare bit of feedback in my experience.
It is more like edge case in my opinion.
-
-
-
If piling on the love is part of the plan, why in hell's name do you limit it to 50 likes per day for a user to make by default?
A limit that small does kind of imply more like spewing or oozing love instead of piling. A slow dribble on a few people here and there
-
Well, if you love indiscriminately...
-
But sluts are fun
Edit: picture removed as deemed offensive
-
-
So are we saying that 'like sluts' are a new TDWTF meme?
-
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpHniCEHY7I
There's no ep4. Sadface.
-
I thought it was Swedish too! But google translate fucked me over so I went around the neighbourhood.
Yes, I know, languages are not the same (Finnish being the ultimate WTFery at a guess, I hear enough Hungarian, which is apparently the same family, and it's... what is it?), but I knew it was a Nordic country so...
Filed under: Not using Google translate anymore, it's slut
-
I'd like to thank the OP for making me realize there were two different links on the same row.
People not realizing that is obviously the #1 reason for the lack of feedback on that matter.
-
Probably then as @awesomerobot proposed
-
-
Finnish being the ultimate WTFery at a guess, I hear enough Hungarian, which is apparently the same family, and it's... what is it?
I believe that Estonian is fairly similar to Finnish (I'm not sure about Saami) but Hungarian is only a distant relative. They're further apart than English is from Russian (and those are from different branches of the Indo-European super-group).
-
[quote="agbeladem]I'd like to thank the OP for making me realize there were two different links on the same row.[/quote]
+1. Not discoverable visually or by link-hovering. The proposed separation is only marginally better -- it still reads like a single action (see what I did there?).
"Like it too" must come from the same school of thought as the asinine "you should follow me on twitter" that shows up everywhere. I'm kind of surprised that Jeff is so keen on this as it seems to conflict with his "omit needless words" mantra. The informational and grammatically correct "ago" is verboten, but the feature-duplicating "like it too" is okay?
-
No, no, I'm not talking about a general case. I'm talking about the specific case of people who are only in it for the likes.
-
but the feature-duplicating "like it too" is okay?
Love is always OK, and the more of it the better.Filed under: within reason, you slut
-
I still feel a 'like' only world is misrepresentation of truth. We need a 'dislike' feature that everybody except the original poster can see.
-
'dislike' feature that everybody except the original poster can see.
Clarification please: Do you want everyone except the OP to be able to dislike the post, just the way he/she/it cannot like its own posts? Or do you want everyone else except the OP to see how much he/she/it is disliked? Or both?
Filed under: I'd really like @presidentsdaughter to see how much I dislike @Nagesh's posts.
-
Everyone except the person who made a post should be able to dislike it. And everyone except the person who made a post should be able to see how much it is disliked.
Right now, a poster cannot like their own posts - but will see how many likes it gets. This would add an additional option to dislike where the OP won't see it.
Guests should also be restricted from seeing the dislike count too.