Change Kudos to Likes?

[Ben Davis]

I wonder what it would be like if there was a "dislike" button but no "like" button? A different experience to just having a "like" button I think.

It would be like peer review.

[Angrboda]

I wonder what it would be like if there was a "dislike" button but no "like" button? A different experience to just having a "like" button I think.

It would be like peer review.

In traditional peer review, your peers are selected based on having a similar professional competence as that assumed of the author of the paper.

I guess you're right. It would be a lot like peer review.

[HorribleOffensiveScouser91]

I think Kudos is slightly patronizing. If you say you 'like' something it comes across that you are on agreeable terms with it, however kudos to me comes across as though the person is giving you 'kudos' and is putting themselves intellectually higher than you in someway. It's as if they are saying "I'm in a position to grant you kudos as you did well. A sort of "Give the dog a bone" mannerism

---

Kudos to you for this thread by the way!

[Cyberman]

I think you may be overthinking it somewhat. I get what you're saying, but since everyone has the same power to grant kudos, it works to level itself out. Yes, there are always going to be those who tend to attract kudos more than others who may not get any at all, just as in any kind of group situation; I see that as an incentive for the latter group to raise their game if such things are important to them, whatever that may mean in practise. I also realise how patronising I just came across there.

Maybe if we each had a limited monthly allotment of kudos points, then only those posts we deem especially kudos-worthy would get the recognition? I'm not putting that out as a serious suggestion - I'd pretty soon miss seeing those names at the bottom of my little brain-farts.

[Shell B]

Like is a shitty alternative. I kudos things I don't like all the time. Kudos is not condescending. That's a little weird. Kudos is praise for something. If there were a thread on most individuals of inferior race killed, I could give Hitler kudos (Godwin?) without liking what he said. Similarly, I can give idiots kudos here for saying something intelligible, even if I disagree with it. It's far preferable.

[Kousbroek]

We love France, it's the French we can't stand.

We ?

---

I think Kudos is slightly patronizing. If you say you 'like' something it comes across that you are on agreeable terms with it, however kudos to me comes across as though the person is giving you 'kudos' and is putting themselves intellectually higher than you in someway. It's as if they are saying "I'm in a position to grant you kudos as you did well. A sort of "Give the dog a bone" mannerism

---

Kudos to you for this thread by the way!

I wanted to give you kudos for this but since you don't appreciate it i won't so i'll give you this.

[Silas Stingy]

You could leave kudos as is but without an additional "rusted screwdriver" button it takes all the fun out of having buttons.

[Angrboda]

Regardless of the above, there's one aspect of the kudos system that I've always found questionable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my memory indicates that the average kudos figure in a person's profile is calculated as an average only for those posts that have received at least one kudo. This to me seems unnecessarily counter-intuitive, misleading, not to mention unnecessarily merciful. I think an "average kudos" for all posts, displayed right up there next to reputation points on the right hand side of a person's post would be far more useful. All the information for calculating it is there, but that seems a copout to say it isn't therefore needed.

As by way of example, let's examine a few representative (not) scores, average per kudo'ed post versus absolute average:

Myself, apophenia
1.87 versus 0.80

Minimalist:
2.14 versus 1.03 (fucking A Min, why aren't you omnipotent?)

Violet Lily Blossom
1.47 versus 0.35 (not picking on you dear; there's a place at my table for you whenever you care to grace my table)

fr0d0
1.66 versus 0.26

passionatefool
1.59 versus 0.52 (passionatefool's low total post count may make the metric misleading in this instance)

Drich
1.20 versus 0.07

Godschild
1.20 versus 0.05

I leave the interpretation of these facts up to you, as well as whether there is merit to my suggestion.

[LastPoet]

Question is, are these facts worth of analisys? Is a pat in the back all that important?

[Angrboda]

Question is, are these facts worth of analisys? Is a pat in the back all that important?

I think these are all attempts to measure credibility, contribution, relative social standing, and worth. Whether these qualities or those like them bear rating and sharing, in this specific case, is outstanding. In the more general cases, such as intelligence, trait psychology, analysis of the performance of politicians, doctors and even psychotherapists, I'd say many questions remain unanswered.

(ETA: Oh, and yes, pats on the back are important. I'm very fond of the pats on the back that I receive, though not nearly as fond as I am of the pats on the front.)