They certainly should be, for sure. Don’t get me wrong Seb, I think it’s a fun and funky little way of generating a sense of inclusivity and an all-round positive vibe. That’s why I thought I’d point out how close some of these guys are to the next trust level, see if even one or two might want to give it a try. But it’s a redundant system if the majority of the regular members aren’t doing it. Taking Phil above as an example: He’s a long-time contributor to this site and a hugely valuable asset. But his trust level numbers don’t tell that story at all, because although discussions on genre cinema interest him and bring him here, Discourse’s trust system doesn’t. And that’s perfectly fine, of course, but if there are not enough members taking it on then the data it provides becomes skewed, there’s little evidence or indication to new members that it’s something we want to encourage, and eventually the few that are doing it will lose any incentive to keep plugging away since their own trust levels are dependant on the contributions of others (“Likes Received”), making progression virtually impossible and regression an inevitability.
I wasn’t asking if the “like” button itself could be removed though, I was just wondering if its use (or lack thereof) had to remain an integral part of the trust system since it seems to routinely prove the difference between the trust system taking off in earnest or dying on the vine. If the trust system wasn’t dependent on the “like” button we’d have had a few more level 3 members over a longer time - which might in itself have seen the system flourish as an incentive - and it would no longer matter in the slightest if most of the core membership never used the “like” button again . Those who wanted to could, and those who didn’t, needn’t.
All merely IMO, of course.