Why did Moz remove thumbs down from blog posts?
-
Interesting idea. Maybe we can have a little tooltip for the thumbs somewhere. Will have to noodle on it.
Thanks again!
-
I like the idea! Very often I was asking myself why a particular blog post got 6 thumbs down when I thought it was brilliant. Criticism should always be constructive.
-
Entirely agreed. Thanks!
-
I gave you a thumbs up
-
Haha! So meta...
-
Totally agree with this move. Thumbs down is too easy, not specific, and too anonymous. If a reader really has constructive feedback then they should be prepared to post a comment.
-
Bingo. So glad you agree.
-
I don't think that removing the thumbdown is a bad idea. A negative thumb should have some sort of comment associated, in order to be critique.
I was worried that the thumbs down was removed all together, but thankfully only on blog posts! -
I have no problem whatsoever with the removal of the thumbs down and think it's a good move for all the aforementioned reasons.
Another thing that I think could be improved is the star rating system attributed to users. I have always assumed star ratings denote a scoring system that follows something similar to 1 star=poor, 2 stars=below average, 3 stars=average, and so forth. I think, when applied to a users contribution and experience, the star rating system is confusing and misleading. If I see someone who is, say, 2 stars out of 5, I automatically assume their ability to respond to a question as "below average", when in reality it may simply mean they are new to the forum or only post sporadically.
If I could suggest an alternative system, I would instead like to see one similar to the Whirlpool forums where you are given a user title that correlates to your participation and experience levels.
Just a thought
-
I agree 100%, Paul -- thanks for the idea. The Q&A section is due for an update before too long, and I think that's a great change for us to keep in mind.
-
I'm happy for this change because I think one thumbs down would lead to more. For instance, let's say I make what I think is an important (but possibly controversial) comment. It gets 1 or 2 thumbs down then another then another then another just because people like to pile on. Then, because I got 7 thumbs down, maybe I'm angry. And I take it out on the rest of the comment stream by downing every other comment just so we're "even." It happens - I am 100% sure of that.
Now, let's say you want to encourage discussion. What does thumbs down do? It makes everyone yes-men & women. Let's just agree, maybe someone will like my comment. Big whoop. lol I'd rather make the honest critique rather than tell someone what they want to hear. When I first came back to Moz after a few months off, I almost immediately got 5 very quick thumbs down. It was a reminder that the system in place suggested that I was supposed to just agree with everything everyone says.
Let's put it this way - one of the most discussed, necessary posts on Moz last year had more thumbs down than any I've ever seen on Moz. Yet, it was a necessary conversation no matter which side of the debate you fall on. Negative commentary doesn't have to be a bad thing. I think Moz should encourage more posts like Josh B's, not fewer. If people are less "afraid" to post controversial things for fear of being knocked back, that is good for Moz.
-
Which I think falls in line with what others, including myself, were saying earlier.
- Guidelines need to be published. e.g. A thumbs down is not a bad thing, it's a sign of disagreement.
- Comments need to be encouraged. We all don't have to agree, but we do need to explain ourselves so others can decide which side of the fence they fall upon and contribute to the conversation. Disagreements are healthy so long as they're civil, open and honest. That's how a community grows and evolves.
- Guess you'd also have to reflect whatever policy you come up with in the attribution of Mozpoints as well.
Glad you came back. I think you've made a lot meaningful contributions to the site.
-
Do this, go to the homepage and look at the number of comments that posts in the Moz Blog receive. What do you see? 40? 60? 80? Something with a lot of activity might get over 100?
Now, go into the post and examine those comments. Many of them are fan posts. Some of them are comments by people who "don't get it" (sometimes I am in that group).
The genuine engagement is often 1/2 or less of the total comments at most, by my count.
When I compare that to what I believe the stature of Moz is in the search industry and the number of people who visit the blog, those are low numbers. Really low numbers. In my opinion.
In an industry where there is so much uncertainty and so much data, I would think that the engagement and debate would be a lot higher, and the amount of diverse opinion would be a lot higher.
Why is that? We could list a hundred reasons or more. Competitive industry and don't want clients or boss seeing secrets being revealed. Lack of time. Earning money is more important and don't want boss or clients seeing time being spent. Hesitant to disagree with the poster because of Moz fans. Hesitant to disagree with poster because he/she is world famous. They think TAGFEE means you gotta love everything. Not motivated to do the research and writing required to present a good argument that contradicts world famous expert and a big tribe of fans. Don't want to come back several times to engage in protracted debate. (And many people spend an hour typing a big, researched, passionate comment, only to see it disappear when the "post response" button is pressed.) I could go on. I understand why the engagement isn't higher.
So, I think that in addition to comments, the Moz Blog needs a way that people can quickly give feedback. Make it quick and you will get more. Expect people to write and you will find that people hate writing. They really hate writing. Everybody knows that you gotta pull teeth to get content, right?
Many of us are online merchants and we daily receive one to five star feedback from our customers along with one or two sentences. Lots of customers do that because it is quick and easy. As merchants we often make business decisions based upon their very brief input. I think that can happen at Moz. Yes, you will have trolls, haters, idiots and people who "didn't get it" responding. If those comments are attributed to member names then the reader and the poster will have some ability to place value on them.
So I would encourage Moz to find a way to get this quick feedback from the many busy people who visit and I think that will help the participation rate and give feedback that is more meaningful than a simple up/down vote.
-
We are currently in the process of revising our community etiquette, which will hopefully more explicitly cover some undesired behaviors that it doesn't. Though the current one does cover spammy thumbs.
-
Thanks for the thoughtful response, EGOL. While I wholeheartedly agree that we should find ways to increase engagement, I actually disagree that our posts show relatively low engagement. I think the Moz Blog's comment threads are some of the most extensive, insightful threads you can find, and it's maybe my favorite thing about our blog. A quick look at SEL's most popular recent posts reveals around 20 comments on average. The latest six posts from Content Marketing Institute have a total of 9 comments, and one of HubSpot's blog managers recently confided to me that she wished they could get the engagement we do. Even you subtly referenced a "big tribe of fans" in your comment above. We're incredibly lucky to get as many great comments as we do, and while the "Nice post!" versions are indeed prevalent, we also see some really, really insightful comments, and I don't want to take that for granted for one single minute.
That said, more quality engagement is always a good goal, and I hear you about many folks not having time. I think, though, that I'd suggest folks go ahead and leave that quick feedback in the form of a comment. We do indeed look at every comment on every post, so even if it's only a sentence or two and it doesn't spark a great debate, we hear the feedback... and I really don't think anonymizing it or encouraging drive-by feedback is productive. We want to encourage and nurture a site where people feel as comfortable as possible offering up their opinions, and a potentially fantastic idea might get left unsaid because the person who wanted to leave it saw a bunch of "trolls, haters, and idiots" who'd already stunk up the threads.
It's a delicate balance, but given the choice, I'll take fewer enthusiastic discussions over more quick feedback any day of the week -- it benefits those who comment and those who simply peruse the threads.
-
Thanks for your perspective, Trevor.
-
I see that thumbs down are back.
Nice.
Although they can be hard to interpret, I think that it is good to have them.
--- It allows you to give thumbs down to stuff that you think is rubbish
--- It allows you to receive thumbs down and be proud about your contrarian opinion
--- and... it allow you to ponder behavior that you find to be totally irrational
Care to comment on the reversal ?
-
Hi EGOL,
No reversal -- they're still gone from blog posts. They were never removed from blog comments (see the little note at the bottom of my OP above), nor were they removed from Q&A. Are you seeing something different? Please let me know if so...
-
Whoops! I thought they were gone and came back.
Thanks for letting me know.
-
@Trevor - I've noticed an anecdotal trend since around 2011/2012 as the average thumbs up on any Moz post has decreased. Seems that after the switch from SEOmoz to Moz there was a dip, and then a second dip after this most recent redesign. Am I totally off here, or is this something you guys are seeing.
Would be a cool blog post to compare the trends of page views and thumbs up over time and any big meta trends that go along with that, could be very informative. I'm sure there's some UX and brand engagement metrics to go along with that.
Have also noticed less comments from well known SEO/other leaders since around that time. Could very well be a correlation between those who were leaders in 2012 that have since just received so much business that they can't keep up with commenting and/or they've shifted attention to their own websites and content. I'm thinking of people like Wil Reynolds, Ross Hudgens, Dan Shure, even Cyrus Shepard and Dr. Pete, among others!
Again, would make an excellent blog post!
-
19133
-
12848
-
05662
-
0372
-
06981
-
02191
-
02270
-
06894