7-Day Poll: How do you like your likes?

[Kirby]

It was recently requested that we trim up the text on the user profile so that it doesn't take as much space: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4120

One of the suggested changes was to change the "Like" sections.

In particular, the format used to be:

Likes: X times
Was Liked: Y times

It was changed to:

Likes: X
Liked: Y

to save on space.

daal brought up the potential ambiguity in "Likes/Liked" vs. the way it used to be.

Please provide your input as to whether you prefer the "Likes/Liked" section as it was,if you prefer things the new way, or if you'd like something totally different.

[topazg]

I haven't voted yet, because I haven't thought about it enough, but it's hard to vote as a regular, as there's no ambiguity for me (I know what they mean!) - I suspect for a new user, this may be a bit ambiguous as to which is which. Do any relatively new forum users feel that this is the case?

I think I would be in favour of "was liked", and "liked others", and leave out the "times" bit which is redundant.

[cdybeijing]

I voted for the old way but at a minimum I prefer the standard "was liked". For the other term I have no strong preference, although Topazg's suggestion seems good.

[daal]

My "something different" vote is for Topaz' suggestion, which I ... like.

[hyperpape]

I voted for the old way, but probably think Topazg has the best idea.

[Joaz Banbeck]

I voted for the old way, not thinking of newcomers but of non-native English speakers.

Also, for us geezers, remember that 'likes and 'liked' differ by one character. The old way is easier to read.

Of course, you could just do the difference.

[Li Kao]

The new way doesn't even safe space, since it's vertical space that's scarce, not horizontal space.

[Kirby]

It looks like people prefer the old format rather than the new format.

It's not a poll option, but some people have expressed a preference toward's topazg's suggestion:

...
I think I would be in favour of "was liked", and "liked others", and leave out the "times" bit which is redundant.

Since the poll's already open, I won't add it as an option, but could I get some comments on what people think of topazg's suggestion vs. the old implementation (i.e. those that haven't already indicated this preference)?

As the poll suggests, I won't make a change until early next week. Currently it appears that the preference is toward the old way, so if I changed it today I'd change it back to how it was.

If enough people express a preference towards topazg's suggestion, I'll make that change. Either way, I'll make a modification based on what appears to be the consensus around Monday of next week.

[Li Kao]

I agree with topazg, the "times" part is redundant and just adds noise.

[lefuet]

yea, just drop the "times"

btw, is there a way to lump many identical go server handles together?
e.g.:
KGS,DGS,WBaduk,Tygem: lefuet

[Kirby]

yea, just drop the "times"

btw, is there a way to lump many identical go server handles together?
e.g.:
KGS,DGS,WBaduk,Tygem: lefuet

I might be able to figure out a way to do that. I suppose you mean that you would still enter the ids separately in the user CP, but if names from different servers happened to be the same, they'd be grouped...

That sounds like a fun project. I'll look into it.

[judicata]

I think saving the horizontal space makes it look less cluttered. But, to be honest, I didn't even notice the change and likely never would have. I voted on the new way, but I really don't care.

[Toge]

I know it's really easy to add all kinds of counters and gadgets to board software, but this made me wonder why is it necessary to have this kind of feature, especially if board space is scarce? I've seen some boards where the post space is so bloated with all sorts of animated banners, counters, logos, tags, avatars, ranks that the actual one-line message takes maybe one tenth of the post space.

I voted the first option, because a little verbosity adds to readability and understanding. I come here to see what people have in their minds and their credibility has nothing to do with their post count to me.

I like the minimalist style of GameFAQs message boards. It's an old site and has managed to avoid much of the frivolities that new board softwares bring.

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[hyperpape]

Redundancy isn't bad per se. Look at the "view unread posts" page. Assuming you have been away from the boards for a few hours, how many times do you see the "Tue Jun 28"? How many times could it be removed without lowering the informational content of the page?

I think "times" works nicely to demarcate those two lines from the posts and go discussions posts, along with the rank, which can just be a number and character.

This is small potatoes, though.

[Joaz Banbeck]

...
btw, is there a way to lump many identical go server handles together?
e.g.:
KGS,DGS,WBaduk,Tygem: lefuet

Yes. It is easy.
I just created a new field.
.
<<===============
.
.
BTW, it is not automated. It is just an alphanumeric field that you set like any other.
To do so, click on 'user control panel' in the top right, then 'profile' on the left.