# How many "likes" have you received so far?



## Almaviva

It was a feature of the 'how often do you log in' poll.
People started to talk about their "likes."
I thought it would be fun to ask this question.
You can find this information by clicking on My Profile at the right upper corner, then you'll see on the left-sided column, "likes received."
Mine: 134


----------



## World Violist

I've got 39. Given 57...I don't know if that makes me generous or cheap or what, man...

(Toscanini would say "Eet means you have got 39 likes and given 57!!! Zat ees eet!!! DAAAACAAAPO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!")


----------



## Air

At the risk of forever jeopardizing my chance of having my posts liked in the future I will reluctantly admit that every single one of the posts l write are simply because I want to get a few more likes in order to boost my self-confidence and make my sucky "real" life a little bit better. Muahahahahaha.  

So a huge thanks to Talk Classical for that.


----------



## Ravellian

As far as judging overall posting quality, I think a more appropriate poll would be a "likes received-to-posts ratio". For example, Alma may have 134 likes, but he has over 5,000 posts so the odds of him getting more likes are higher. I have received 47 likes over my span of 600 posts. 

Alma: 1 like for every 37.6 posts (5,042/134)
Me: 1 like for every 13.2 posts (620/47)

As you can see by the numbers, the quality of my posts are substantially higher than Alma's.


----------



## World Violist

Ravellian said:


> As you can see by the numbers, the quality of my posts are substantially higher than Alma's.


Or maybe Alma posts so much that it's some sort of cerebral overload that prevents people from liking all of them.

I mean, out of however many posts per day he makes, people can't like every single one. They might just be banter, which is not there to be liked but merely to get to a next point/facilitate conversation. Each post doesn't matter, it's what arrival point the posts come to that matters.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Almaviva said:


> It was a feature of the 'how often do you log in' poll.
> People started to talk about their "likes."
> I thought it would be fun to ask this question.
> You can find this information by clicking on My Profile at the right upper corner, then you'll see on the left-sided column, "likes received."
> Mine: 134


Perhpas a more comparable way to look at these is to take the number of "likes" divided by the number of posts. So, you have 134 "likes" from about 5,040 posts. That's a "like"-rate of about 134 / 5,040 = 2.66%

Member World Violist has a "like"-rate of about 39 / 3,443 = 1.13%.

Statistics, statistics, statistics ...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Ravellian said:


> As far as judging overall posting quality, I think a more appropriate poll would be a "likes received-to-posts ratio". For example, Alma may have 134 likes, but he has over 5,000 posts so the odds of him getting more likes are higher. I have received 47 likes over my span of 600 posts.
> 
> Alma: 1 like for every 37.6 posts (5,042/134)
> Me: 1 like for every 13.2 posts (620/47)
> 
> As you can see by the numbers, the quality of my posts are substantially higher than Alma's.


Haha! You beat me to it with the same idea!


----------



## Almaviva

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Haha! You beat me to it with the same idea!


Hehehe, however both your ideas are wrong. You need to consider that the bulk of my 5,042 posts (now 5,043) were published before Frederik gave us this lovely "like" function so the percentages may be a lot more favorable to me once you count number of posts *from that point on.* Nobody has been reading the old posts buried in forgotten threads in order to be able to like them.

I'm a very likable guy!:lol:

[uhoh... by acting smug, I'm decreasing my chances of getting more likes]
[Alma writes down a reminder to never like any of World Violist's posts - one shouldn't boost one's closest competitors:devil:]

Maybe we should also have a 'dislike' function.:devil:


----------



## Polednice

Likes received: 70.
Likes given: 1.

Keep 'em comin' guys! 

[Honest, honest, honest! I'm _not_ a stingy git, I just don't like the whole 'like' culture, though, naturally, I hypocritically adore having you all tell me how wonderful I am. Go on, like this post right now! Do it! DO IT!]


----------



## emiellucifuge

Agreed with Alma, I dont think anyone has gone back and 'liked' posts from before the function was installed. We can take up Ravellian's idea but only including posts since April 11.

As I post 3.5 times a day on average and 11/04 was 4 months ago, I assume I made 3.5x4x30 posts which = 420.

59/420 x100%= 14%


----------



## Polednice

Playing the 'my maths is more precise than your maths' game, I've counted my exact number of posts since 11th April, rather than using a silly average (especially seeing as I have periods where I don't come online that often) 

That gives me 70/94 = 0.745 -> 74.5 %

Hell yeah!  You know when Polednice talks, it's time to listen


----------



## Ravellian

Alright, if we do the whole "posts since April 11th" thing..

Then my ratio is 47 likes, 71 posts. That = 1 like for every 1.51 posts. Not bad, eh? :devil:


----------



## regressivetransphobe

My internet ***** is thiiiis big:


----------



## Serge

I've got like 5. Thanks, samurai!


----------



## Ukko

Serge said:


> I've got like 5. Thanks, samurai!


:lol: Samurai is a liking person. I would question his judgment, but he likes Chrysler Imperial. Clearly he is also a person of superior discernment.


----------



## haydnfan

Likes received: 47
Likes given: 115
Total posts: 158

I enjoy the karma system. I like being able to like posts instead of replying with a dumb me too! or yuppers!


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

I probably should give *out* more 'likes.' There are lots of worthwhile posts on this forum- so I (perhaps parsimoniously) reserve my 'likes' for the things that _really_ make an impact.


Almaviva said:


> Nobody has been reading the old posts buried in forgotten threads in order to be able to like them.


Not unknown for ME to pass out a 'like' to a post from a couple of years back.


----------



## World Violist

Almaviva said:


> [Alma writes down a reminder to never like any of World Violist's posts - one shouldn't boost one's closest competitors:devil:]


Closest competitors? 1,500-1600-post gap, that's about as many posts as some of the other more prolific members of this site have themselves, and you call me a "close competitor." (if you're talking about "likes," Ravellian is a better competitor anyway...I'm just here for the journey, man...)

As for posts pre-April 11th thing...yeah, I've had several posts I've forgotten I'd even posted liked. So yeah, people like old posts.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Polednice said:


> Playing the 'my maths is more precise than your maths' game, I've counted my exact number of posts since 11th April, rather than using a silly average (especially seeing as I have periods where I don't come online that often)
> 
> That gives me 70/94 = 0.745 -> 74.5 %
> 
> Hell yeah!  You know when Polednice talks, it's time to listen


Is anyone else feeling tempted to block Polednice right now?

:devil:


----------



## Almaviva

[Alma writes down a reminder, not to like posts by World_Violist *and* Ravellian *and* Polednice *and* Manxfeeder - and not to be called stingy, to give out "likes" to Serge who isn't a close competitor in any way, shape, or form:devil:]

[Alma thinks of a strategy #2 to supplement the above: backroom deals with other members, of the kind "I'll 'like' *every* one of your posts if you 'like' *every* one of my posts:devil:]


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

I've sorta set up a goal for me that I will give out 2 likes for every like received. That way, I limit abusing it, and pressure myself to say more worthy things and less nonsense. Although, occasionally I've said a nonsensical post that got me a lot of likes... like a few days ago...


----------



## sospiro

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I've sorta set up a goal for me that I will give out 2 likes for every like received. That way, I limit abusing it, and pressure myself to say more worthy things and less nonsense. Although, occasionally I've said a nonsensical post that got me a lot of likes... like a few days ago...


Please don't post 'worthy' stuff too often, 'nonsense' is great for cheering people up.


----------



## Aramis

> how many "likes" have you received so far?


s
LESS THAN I DESERVE


----------



## emiellucifuge

13 likes so far... i wonder whether this is the thread with the most likes exchanged?


----------



## Ravellian

emiellucifuge said:


> 13 likes so far... i wonder whether this is the thread with the most likes exchanged?


http://www.talkclassical.com/1005-current-listening.html


----------



## Polednice

Almaviva said:


> [Alma writes down a reminder, not to like posts by World_Violist *and* Ravellian *and* Polednice *and* Manxfeeder - and not to be called stingy, to give out "likes" to Serge who isn't a close competitor in any way, shape, or form:devil:]
> 
> [Alma thinks of a strategy #2 to supplement the above: backroom deals with other members, of the kind "I'll 'like' *every* one of your posts if you 'like' *every* one of my posts:devil:]


[Polednice makes a note that, despite underground conspiracies to block him, he knows the praise will keep flowing in, because his words are revered and cherished so much that people cannot help but click that tempting, four-letter blue word. I AM GOD]


----------



## Chris

Received: 2 
Given: 0

I've never noticed this facility....but there are lots of things I fail to notice.

The search for worthy posts begins now.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Wow, 530 likes in the current listening thread.


----------



## Meaghan

emiellucifuge said:


> Wow, 530 likes in the current listening thread.


It helps that that thread is 585 (and counting) pages long.


----------



## Ukko

*Beware*

Hey, there is a potential downside to this *likes* thing. I can envision the emergence of the evolving mindset:

_If one > some > all of my posts don't receive 'likes', then... (some inappropriate conclusion will be reached)._

I suspect that opera lovers are particularly vulnerable to this malady.

:devil:


----------



## Polednice

Personally, I find it utterly repugnant that such unfair optimism and boundless friendliness is promoted without balance. _Please_, if we're going to have a 'like' button, why not a 'dislike' button? Then when someone gets a 'like', it will _really_ feel like an achievement


----------



## clavichorder

I would pride myself in the number of dislikes my first posts might have received, I loved the power of stirring up controversy in that instance.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Oh come on Clavichord, that post didnt deserve a like! 

In the absence of a dislike button, you could like a post and subsequently unlike it to make the point?


----------



## Polednice

emiellucifuge said:


> Oh come on Clavichord, that post didnt deserve a like!
> 
> In the absence of a dislike button, you could like a post and subsequently unlike it to make the point?


Oh, please, emiellucifuge, every suggestion I have is almost divine in nature.

And, seeing as we lack such a dislike button, perhaps we can instead create a putrid thread, festering with hatred, where we quote and/or list all the contributions on the forum that we dislike


----------



## Meaghan

Polednice said:


> And, seeing as we lack such a dislike button, perhaps we can instead create a putrid thread, festering with hatred, where we quote and/or list all the contributions on the forum that we dislike


We've had those (with rather misleading titles suggesting that the threads are actually about politics, religion, or even music ), but they either get locked or the principal posters get banned.


----------



## Polednice

Meaghan said:


> We've had those (with rather misleading titles suggesting that the threads are actually about politics, religion, or even music ), but they either get locked or the principal posters get banned.


Oh, well I'm sure we could do it in a _nice_ way!


----------



## clavichorder

Hey, I liked the idea. But I like the passive aggression of being notified of a like and then losing that like even better, you have a point.


----------



## Almaviva

emiellucifuge said:


> Wow, 530 likes in the current listening thread.


See, and I never post there, which makes of *my* likes something much more significant.
Those likes there just mean to say that people like the same kind of music. Duh... it's a forum for classical music lovers!
My likes on the other hand are given because people think that what I say is gold.[Take this, Polednice, you're not the only narcissist here, hehehe. Now our competition will involve who can be more arrogant and narcissist than the other]

And I even have to fight the natural restraint that many feel about 'liking' a moderator.
After all, moderators are seen as the bad guys who give penalties and infractions and delete stuff.


----------



## World Violist

Almaviva said:


> [Take this, Polednice, you're not the only narcissist here, hehehe. Now our competition will involve who can be more arrogant and narcissist than the other]


Everyone here knows the only reasons my posts aren't liked constantly are my under-appreciated genius and a certain moderator's well-publicized smear campaign against my posts using reasoning that is flawed to begin with.


----------



## Polednice

Almaviva said:


> See, and I never post there, which makes of *my* likes something much more significant.
> Those likes there just mean to say that people like the same kind of music. Duh... it's a forum for classical music lovers!
> My likes on the other hand are given because people think that what I say is gold.[Take this, Polednice, you're not the only narcissist here, hehehe. Now our competition will involve who can be more arrogant and narcissist than the other]


Then I think we are on par so far, as I don't post in the silly current listening thread either! I give out enlightening gems here and there, making people aware of the fine nuances in all kinds of great masterpieces; I might even go so far as to say that my articulation of these unique ideas ought to be considered a masterpiece in itself.

Talk Classical, _you are welcome_; it is my pleasure to grace you with my presence.


----------



## Almaviva

Meaghan said:


> but they either get locked or the principal posters get banned.


I'd say, deservedly so... 
I know you're mostly kidding, but I've seen fora (usually the non-moderated kind) with threads that are explicitly created to bash other members and to post lists of idiotic members or disliked members, or else people post their list of ignored members, etc. This is something that entertains the aggressive and rude types, but is actually a pointless and cruel exercise. I'll never permit such thing here, for as long as I'm a moderator.

OK, end of rant, back to the good innocent fun we're having here.


----------



## Meaghan

Almaviva said:


> I'd say, deservedly so...
> I know you're mostly kidding, but I've seen fora (usually the non-moderated kind) with threads that are explicitly created to bash other members and to post lists of idiotic members or disliked members, or else people post their list of ignored members, etc. This is something that entertains the aggressive and rude types, but is actually a pointless and cruel exercise. I'll never permit such thing here, for as long as I'm a moderator.
> 
> OK, end of rant, back to the good innocent fun we're having here.


Oh, don't worry, when locking/banning happens, I generally think it's deserved too. I was relieved at a couple of bans a few months ago, actually, and I'm glad that hate speech, etc., isn't tolerated here.


----------



## sospiro

Polednice said:


> I give out enlightening gems here and there, making people aware of the fine nuances in all kinds of great masterpieces; I might even go so far as to say that my articulation of these unique ideas ought to be considered a masterpiece in itself.
> 
> Talk Classical, _you are welcome_; it is my pleasure to grace you with my presence.












Quality over quantity eh Polednice?


----------



## Almaviva

Oh well, ever since I boasted about my likes here, I stopped getting them. 
This will teach me. My big mouth!

OK, folks, I was kidding! I suck! My posts are horrible! Don't 'like' them please!

[Alma hopes he'll undo the damage]


----------



## Couchie

Polednice said:


> Then I think we are on par so far, as I don't post in the silly current listening thread either! I give out enlightening gems here and there, making people aware of the fine nuances in all kinds of great masterpieces; I might even go so far as to say that my articulation of these unique ideas ought to be considered a masterpiece in itself.
> 
> Talk Classical, _you are welcome_; it is my pleasure to grace you with my presence.


Who's down for going back and unliking all of Polednice's posts, bringing him down a few notches? :devil:


----------



## Tapkaara

I have recieved more likes than I care to count. In fact, I believe that my commerntary receives more likes than anyone else's in the forum. I willl bet that THIS VERY POST will receive atleast 5 likes.

They like me, they REALLY like me!


----------



## Enjoying Life

I guess I am more of the introvert type and do not understand the fasination with "likes". I really don't care if someone else likes a post I am reading or not. And I care even less how many "likes" I get.

For me Classical music is a personal thing. I like to read and occassionally share thoughts here but it is not a popularity contest. I just like learning from others and being challenged. 

Besides, art is often a step ahead of "likes" and by the time it is understood and assigned a "like" it has moved on to something else. So maybe those with so many "likes" are just a step behind and missing something.


----------



## Air

Is this a self-updating poll? I mean I've noticed that Polednice has moved up a category since he voted, yet of course this can always be amended by unliking a few of his posts... thus returning him to his original level and correcting the poll. 

Of course, this is definitely not self-motivated by the fact that he has only one less like than me and there's no way I can get surpassed by an uh (said with utmost disgust ) ... petty Brahms fan. 

Clara's mine! :lol:


----------



## Philip

Yeah i bet if you guys could like yourselves you would...


----------



## Almaviva

Enjoying Life said:


> I guess I am more of the introvert type and do not understand the fasination with "likes". I really don't care if someone else likes a post I am reading or not. And I care even less how many "likes" I get.
> 
> For me Classical music is a personal thing. I like to read and occassionally share thoughts here but it is not a popularity contest. I just like learning from others and being challenged.
> 
> Besides, art is often a step ahead of "likes" and by the time it is understood and assigned a "like" it has moved on to something else. So maybe those with so many "likes" are just a step behind and missing something.


As far as I'm concerned I have no fascination with 'likes.' This thread is just for fun, not to be taken seriously.
For me the main function of a 'like' is to be able to agree with someone without having to write up a whole new post just to say "I agree" or "well said" or "I appreciated what you've just said." Clicking once to do this actually saves some bandwidth and shortens threads (therefore makes them more manageable) which won't have short posts with a few words just to agree with someone.

Did you think we were really serious here, and really upset and/or proud at the number of likes we've collected or lack thereof? Do you think this is really a popularity contest?

I thought it was pretty clear that this thread was just humor. Read the third line of the original post and you'll see why the thread was started - see the word 'fun' there?


----------



## Polednice

Enjoying Life said:


> I guess I am more of the introvert type and do not understand the fasination with "likes". I really don't care if someone else likes a post I am reading or not. And I care even less how many "likes" I get.
> 
> For me Classical music is a personal thing. I like to read and occassionally share thoughts here but it is not a popularity contest. I just like learning from others and being challenged.
> 
> Besides, art is often a step ahead of "likes" and by the time it is understood and assigned a "like" it has moved on to something else. So maybe those with so many "likes" are just a step behind and missing something.


Personally, I couldn't care less about classical music. I just become a member on all kinds of fora across the internet, so long as they have a 'like' button enabled, and then pretend to be interested in the topic. It then becomes my mission to obtain as many likes as possible, and if I don't get enough every day, then I sit in a darkened room and sob over a sharp knife as I cut myself.


----------



## Almaviva

Philip said:


> Yeah i bet if you guys could like yourselves you would...


I can't just like myself. I looooooove myself.


----------



## Keychick

Im very new here and have to my surpruise have almost 10 likes?
Thanks, now i see how it works...


----------



## Philip

cuz you're a girl


----------



## Philip

... and obviously some of you are lying, this looks nothing like a binomial distribution


----------



## emiellucifuge

Why must this be a binomial distribution?

Edit: curiosity got the better of me. Only one person obviously lied.


----------



## Kieran

5 received, and 3 given. So I think I'm a little mean in giving, since I like almost everything I read here!


----------



## Philip

emiellucifuge said:


> Why must this be a binomial distribution?


well it mustn't, but i had to motivate my assumption that some of you were lying


----------



## Ravellian

Polednice said:


> Personally, I couldn't care less about classical music. I just become a member on all kinds of fora across the internet, so long as they have a 'like' button enabled, and then pretend to be interested in the topic. It then becomes my mission to obtain as many likes as possible, and if I don't get enough every day, then I sit in a darkened room and sob over a sharp knife as I cut myself.


Nice. XD

[extra characters]


----------



## Nix

This thread is silly. 'Like' if you agree.


----------



## Almaviva

Nix said:


> This thread is silly. 'Like' if you agree.


Disagree. This thread is fun.


----------



## Serge

Nix said:


> This thread is silly. 'Like' if you agree.


Darn! You've read my mind. (And in real time, mind you.) Once I've called one on my threads silly, but now it turns out that _this_ is a silly thread.


----------



## Nix

Almaviva said:


> Disagree. This thread is fun.


Can't 'fun' and 'silly' go hand in hand?


----------



## Almaviva

Serge said:


> Darn! You've read my mind. (And in real time, mind you.) Once I've called one on my threads silly, but now it turns out that _this_ is a silly thread.


You're jealous, Serge, because you don't have too many likes.:devil::lol:


----------



## Almaviva

Nix said:


> Can't 'fun' and 'silly' go hand in hand?


That, they can. I stand corrected, good sir!:tiphat:


----------



## Almaviva

Yay! I just got above 150!!!
[uhoh... thank God for the existence of Samurai... alone, he's responsible for most of my likes:lol:]


----------



## Serge

Almaviva said:


> You're jealous, Serge, because you don't have too many likes.:devil::lol:


Yes, but I also would't like having too many likes. The perfect fit! Me so happy: like a glove.


----------



## samurai

Almaviva said:


> Yay! I just got above 150!!!
> [uhoh... thank God for the existence of Samurai... alone, he's responsible for most of my likes:lol:]


Aw shucks, Almaviva, you promised not to tell anybody!


----------



## Almaviva

samurai said:


> Aw shucks, Almaviva, you promised not to tell anybody!


Oops. Sorry, mate. It won't happen again. [I mean, it won't happen again until the time when I get to 200, with your help of course:devil:]


----------



## Almaviva

@Serge - look at what I just did (post #67), hehehehe:devil:


----------



## samurai

Oops, there I go again! My bad! :scold:


----------



## Enjoying Life

Almaviva said:


> As far as I'm concerned I have no fascination with 'likes.' This thread is just for fun, not to be taken seriously.
> For me the main function of a 'like' is to be able to agree with someone without having to write up a whole new post just to say "I agree" or "well said" or "I appreciated what you've just said." Clicking once to do this actually saves some bandwidth and shortens threads (therefore makes them more manageable) which won't have short posts with a few words just to agree with someone.
> 
> Did you think we were really serious here, and really upset and/or proud at the number of likes we've collected or lack thereof? Do you think this is really a popularity contest?
> 
> I thought it was pretty clear that this thread was just humor. Read the third line of the original post and you'll see why the thread was started - see the word 'fun' there?


I have no doubt you are having fun with this thread but I still do not understand the use of "likes" - giving or getting. I am not going to agree with a post just because someone else "liked" it. And i am not going to feel better about myself because others "liked" my post. And I don't feel I have done anything useful by saying I liked a post. Back to the popularity contest. For me it is not who likes what or how many people agree. When I listen to music or read a post, I make up my own mind.


----------



## Serge

Almaviva said:


> @Serge - look at what I just did (post #67), hehehehe:devil:


Ouch! I need some time to recover now, if you please.


----------



## Serge

Enjoying Life said:


> I still do not understand the use of "likes" - giving or getting.


It's just a silly feature of the board. A better feature, I imagine, would be if you could get a notification if someone responded to something that you said, but they probably don't have it as of yet.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

I came on today, and found I had 3 Like Notifications, but when I checked what posts they were, only 2 came in the feed! One was taken away! :O What does that mean? But I don't even know who did it or what post the like and "unlike" was for, so. Probably that Anti-Stravinsky post I made a while back.


----------



## tdc

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I came on today, and found I had 3 Like Notifications, but when I checked what posts they were, only 2 came in the feed! One was taken away! :O What does that mean? But I don't even know who did it or what post the like and "unlike" was for, so. Probably that Anti-Stravinsky post I made a while back.


Same thing happened to me the other day, the thing said I had 2 likes but I only had 1. I just about went Chuck Norris on my computer.


----------



## Meaghan

Serge said:


> A better feature, I imagine, would be if you could get a notification if someone responded to something that you said, but they probably don't have it as of yet.


That would be nice. It would be convenient to get notified when somebody quotes you. I have sometimes "liked" posts because I wanted the person to go look and see that I was responding to them.


----------



## Sid James

i have been given 84 likes to date, and i'm grateful for all of them, as it means people are reading my posts & hopefully getting something out of them. i am also trying to pass on as many likes as possible, but sometimes i'm a bit busy with other things & distracted. but usually i like to actually respond to the posts i find most interesting & have a "conversation" about the topic at hand...


----------



## Ravellian

tdc said:


> Same thing happened to me the other day, the thing said I had 2 likes but I only had 1. I just about went Chuck Norris on my computer.


This also happened to me a few days ago. I'm sensing a trend here...


----------



## Polednice

Enjoying Life said:


> I have no doubt you are having fun with this thread but I still do not understand the use of "likes" - giving or getting. I am not going to agree with a post just because someone else "liked" it. And i am not going to feel better about myself because others "liked" my post. And I don't feel I have done anything useful by saying I liked a post. Back to the popularity contest. For me it is not who likes what or how many people agree. When I listen to music or read a post, I make up my own mind.


You're obviously very bitter because you only have 3 likes. Get over it!


----------



## Delicious Manager

I have 42 (isn't that the answer to the question about 'Life, the Universe and Everything'?). I don't post all that often, so I suppose I'm a little flattered by that number.


----------



## Almaviva

Meaghan said:


> That would be nice. It would be convenient to get notified when somebody quotes you. I have sometimes "liked" posts because I wanted the person to go look and see that I was responding to them.


I'm thankful that the software here doesn't have this notification capacity as I've seen in other places, because my mail box would be flooded with such notifications since I post so much. Oh well, I suppose I'd be able to turn it off, so, sure, for those who want it.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Delicious Manager, it took some restraint but Ive managed to keep your count at that glorious number of 42 (indeed - the meaning of life)


----------



## Polednice

After this glorious thread, I've actually started giving out more likes these past few days! 

I didn't use it before because I thought it was bandwagonish facebook crap, but I've seen that it actually has a good purpose here, and it's just facebook that sucks no matter what it does and doesn't use


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Polednice said:


> After this glorious thread, I've actually started giving out more likes these past few days!
> 
> I didn't use it before because I thought it was bandwagonish facebook crap, but I've seen that it actually has a good purpose here, and it's just facebook that sucks no matter what it does and doesn't use


Well, I don't find facebook all that bad. It does get really boring, but I spend a lot of time on it if I'm looking for people to talk to, or for them to talk to me. In fact, I made a new friend through facebook who I've never met in person and facebook is our preferred method of communication, besides skype. And well... I write a lot of stories on facebook too to pass the time. 

I even talked to a famous conductor on facebook!


----------



## Almaviva

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Well, I don't find facebook all that bad. It does get really boring, but I spend a lot of time on it if I'm looking for people to talk to, or for them to talk to me. In fact, I made a new friend through facebook who I've never met in person and facebook is our preferred method of communication, besides skype. And well... I write a lot of stories on facebook too to pass the time.
> 
> I even talked to a famous conductor on facebook!


I use facebook *very* rarely. I have an account just to keep in touch with my two kids - these days it's easier to talk to a teenager and a young adult on facebook rather than the usual old-fashioned way of calling them (or even e-mailing them). I find that all these people describing what they are doing at all times to a bunch of facebook followers or tweeter followers... tsk, tsk... very boring. I couldn't care less if someone is now at the supermarket or is just out from a movie or is shopping for clothes or whatever. Why do these people experience the need to advertise these activities to others?


----------



## Meaghan

Almaviva said:


> I use facebook *very* rarely. I have an account just to keep in touch with my two kids - these days it's easier to talk to a teenager and a young adult on facebook rather than the usual old-fashioned way of calling them (or even e-mailing them).


Haha, my dad created a facebook account for the sole purpose of keeping tabs on me (even though I _do_ call my family when I'm away at school). His only "friends" are me and my mother, just because he doesn't want to talk to anybody else on it.


----------



## Almaviva

Meaghan said:


> Haha, my dad created a facebook account for the sole purpose of keeping tabs on me (even though I _do_ call my family when I'm away at school). His only "friends" are me and my mother, just because he doesn't want to talk to anybody else on it.


 Yes this is pretty much how I started. Only me, my wife, my son, and my daughter. The annoying part is that once I opened an account, old high school and college classmates - people I don't necessarily want to talk to any longer - and acquaintances, etc., started to ask me to confirm them as friends... it's rude if you don't, so, I kept confirming them... and now people have been complaining that they sent me a message on facebook and I didn't reply... what a nightmare! I just want to be able to talk to my kids.
For other things I prefer real human contact.
I guess it's a generational gap.
I love this message board - as you can all see given the amount of time I spend here - but I hate social media.
Posting here has a purpose - discussing classical music (in my case, opera) with like-minded folks. All this social media frenzy on the other hand seems too intrusive and too narcissistic to me. But I guess I'm a dinosaur and the new generation loves this kind of stuff.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I even talked to a famous conductor on facebook!


Really? Who?!

Maazel once answered a question of mine on Twitter...


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Meaghan said:


> Haha, my dad created a facebook account for the sole purpose of keeping tabs on me (even though I _do_ call my family when I'm away at school). His only "friends" are me and my mother, just because he doesn't want to talk to anybody else on it.


Aw, I'm sorry. My parents don't want anything to do with Facebook, but I take care of myself. My brother, who actually encouraged me to start facebook, is my guardian.

@emiellucifuge I got a message from Jose Serebrier! A few years ago, he finished his Glazunov Symphony cycle with the RSNO, and I really enjoyed it. Then, recently, he recorded the Concertos by Glazunov, as I found out by this website:
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/05/10/new-classical-tracks-alexander-glazunov/?refid=0
In my excitement, I posted this link to his Facebook page (I became friends with him a few months ago), and said thank you for recording the concertos. To my absolute surprise, he responded back quite quickly, saying thank you for my comments. He hoped that I would get the recording, and said he thought it was wonderful music.  I felt like one of those girls who goes to Taylor Swift concerts. :lol:
He then told me he just composed a flute concerto, and was going to premiere it in Carnegie Hall next year. I'm guessing he told me that because he probably saw my profile that I'm studying Flute Performance. I would want to hear it actually, maybe he writes really nice music.


----------



## Lenfer

I have just the 1 thank you *Samurai*!


----------



## clavichorder

Samurai, the most generous user with the likes.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

More than my posts probably deserve. 

But I've got a "friend count" of one here and I don't even know the guy, so it balances out.


----------



## itywltmt

I have 49, and I carry them around as badges of honour! Wish I'd get more on my blog, though...
http://www.talkclassical.com/blogs/itywltmt/302-beethoven-cycle-s-do.html


----------



## Ukko

The poll doesn't provide a running tally, nor is it a percentage of total posts (which may be a good thing, because I may be in danger of entering my self-designated 'kiss-***' category).


----------



## Argus

If there was a 'dislike' option for posts I'm sure I'd have acquired more of them than anybody else.


----------



## violadude

emiellucifuge said:


> Agreed with Alma, I dont think anyone has gone back and 'liked' posts from before the function was installed. We can take up Ravellian's idea but only including posts since April 11.
> 
> As I post 3.5 times a day on average and 11/04 was 4 months ago, I assume I made 3.5x4x30 posts which = 420.
> 
> 59/420 x100%= 14%


I have liked things before that...lol


----------



## regressivetransphobe

Actually I have gone back and "liked" a couple posts in some really, really old threads, mainly just to confuse the posters.


----------



## kv466

As many as I have given.


----------



## clavichorder

kv466 said:


> As many as I have given.


That's pretty remarkable.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

If there was a 'dislike' option for posts I'm sure I'd have acquired more of them than anybody else.

No... I think someguy would beat us both.


----------



## Ukko

StlukesguildOhio said:


> If there was a 'dislike' option for posts I'm sure I'd have acquired more of them than anybody else.
> 
> No... I think someguy would beat us both.


Argus should get credit for trying harder.


----------



## Bix

Polednice said:


> Likes received: 70.
> Likes given: 1.
> 
> Keep 'em comin' guys!
> 
> [Honest, honest, honest! I'm _not_ a stingy git, I just don't like the whole 'like' culture, though, naturally, I hypocritically adore having you all tell me how wonderful I am. Go on, like this post right now! Do it! DO IT!]


Im not into the like culture - I have given mine if something makes me laugh or I agree with someone - DOESN'T MEAN I LIKE YOU (well maybe just a bit)...........................

...or maybe a lot - Aaaaaa I loves you all! - well some of you - OH I DUNNO im rambling again


----------



## Kopachris

Since April 11? 118 posts, 53 likes. 2.23 posts/like, or 45% like-to-post ratio, which is a lot more than I ever expected. And I've given 94.

I'm pretty happy with those numbers. 

Of course, fewer of my posts than that have actually been liked. Some posts received multiple likes.


----------



## Bix

Serge said:


> It's just a silly feature of the board. A better feature, I imagine, would be if you could get a notification if someone responded to something that you said, but they probably don't have it as of yet.


This is another reason I use the like feature - often underneath I have commented on the post.


----------



## Bix

Couchie said:


> Who's down for going back and unliking all of Polednice's posts, bringing him down a few notches? :devil:


I like that idea - but the Deity that is Polednice lives just down the road from me so I will get the brunt of his wrath


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

I've definitely upgraded in last few months. Over 200 likes now.


----------



## Argus

Hilltroll72 said:


> Argus should get credit for trying harder.


Some guy ain't got a thread like this made because of himself.


----------



## Ukko

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I've definitely upgraded in last few months. Over 200 likes now.


 Apparently you don't share one of the classic 'downer' mentalities. You would be asking yourself "Why are so many of my posts getting 'likes'? Is it because they are not actively _disliked_? Are these likes a mark of insipidness? The litany goes on, until you arrive once again at the level of self disrespect you are comfortable with.

One other sort of downer mentality actively seeks to be disliked, maybe (I ain't a psychologist) as a confirmation of his self dislike. There could even be a TC member like that.


----------



## Polednice

Bix said:


> I like that idea - but the Deity that is Polednice lives just down the road from me so I will get the brunt of his wrath


You're right there. Although, don't get confused, I'm just a demi-God, but a vengeful, evil, heartless one.


----------



## Almaviva

Polednice said:


> You're right there. Although, don't get confused, I'm just a demi-God, but a vengeful, evil, heartless one.


 You're just a demi-God???? How disappointing! And to think that I was about to worship you! I'm not worshiping any demi-God! Give me a full God, please!


----------



## Almaviva

This thread made sense at the time it was started.
It was a sort of running joke since the Like feature was new and people were making comments about it in other threads. Now it's dated.
Even the classes in the poll don't make sense any longer since by now most people who post frequently should be above 150 anyway.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Hilltroll72 said:


> Apparently you don't share one of the classic 'downer' mentalities. You would be asking yourself "Why are so many of my posts getting 'likes'? Is it because they are not actively _disliked_? Are these likes a mark of insipidness? The litany goes on, until you arrive once again at the level of self disrespect you are comfortable with.
> 
> One other sort of downer mentality actively seeks to be disliked, maybe (I ain't a psychologist) as a confirmation of his self dislike. There could even be a TC member like that.


What?

Oh, you think the word "upgraded" had something to do with my self-esteem or status here. No, I was just saying that now I've moved to a new bracket on this poll which I hadn't formerly been when voting.

As for getting more likes, I don't know, I don't care so much anymore, if I ever did. I've stopped posting so much now that I found turntable.fm, that's completely taking my attention away from here nowadays.


----------



## BelaBartok

14 likes

Give me more!!


----------



## TresPicos

Almaviva said:


> This thread made sense at the time it was started.
> It was a sort of running joke since the Like feature was new and people were making comments about it in other threads. Now it's dated.
> Even the classes in the poll don't make sense any longer since by now most people who post frequently should be above 150 anyway.


Yeah, I'm stuck forever at 0-10 in this poll. People will think that I'm just not likable.


----------



## Kopachris

I've gotten another six in the last few hours for this post which really contributes nothing to society but points out an interesting and humorous coincidence. I'm actually starting to get sick of seeing "Notifications: 1" and clicking on it just to find out it's for the same post as the last five notifications.

(Yes, I could complain about anything. )


----------



## Sid James

I've been given 432 likes so far & have myself given others over 1200...


----------



## Amfibius

I have 22 likes from 42 posts ... not bad, eh!


----------



## Ravellian

Dang, these likes pile up fast. I think I'll update my numbers. 

Alright, since the time of my first post here (2 months ago) I've made about 160 more posts, and gotten about 80 more likes. That's about 1 like for every 2 posts. 

In that same time span, Alma has made about 1,600 more posts and gotten about 300 more likes. That's one like for every 5.333 posts. 

Looks like I'm still beating Alma in the quality-of-posts department :devil:


----------



## beethovenian

When i am logging in to Talk Classical, i feel like:









Then i will feel so excited at the prospect of getting new "Likes":


----------



## Polednice

Well, well, well, folks, it's time to stand back and let the master through.

If I humbly assess my figures since my original posting on this thread, then we find something very, very interesting.

Back then, a mere 74.5% of my posts gained likes - though, of course, that was still better than the rest of you. Now, my rate has rocketed to 105%. That's right folks, every single one of my posts, on average, gets more than one like. 

Don't I need a crown and a throne now?


----------



## Amfibius

Awww, you like getting likes? +1 like for you then Beethovenian


----------



## Almaviva

Ravellian said:


> Dang, these likes pile up fast. I think I'll update my numbers.
> 
> Alright, since the time of my first post here (2 months ago) I've made about 160 more posts, and gotten about 80 more likes. That's about 1 like for every 2 posts.
> 
> In that same time span, Alma has made about 1,600 more posts and gotten about 300 more likes. That's one like for every 5.333 posts.
> 
> Looks like I'm still beating Alma in the quality-of-posts department :devil:


Yep, I'm not appreciated enough.. [Alma cries profusely, his keyboard gets wet, malfunct.ltik;kni97hj]


----------

