angelchemuel wrote:

Gilly wrote:

Are you accusing me of being as shallow as a puddle of spider pee? If so you would be correct.

I only get TY because I'm the forum dealer.

angelchemuel wrote:
She bought 500 of them off ebay.

Get out from behind/under there woman....you deserved every single one of them!

Jane

thoreau wrote:
Now that's an impressive ratio that says a lot.

I haven't even figured out what the Thank you thing is for. I suppose it stops lots of posts saying "Thanks for that", but apart from that I can't get the real gist of it. I presume it's a bit like positive rep on other forums? (Which i also think is bad idea on forums as it can create cliques.)

Nah, we had a karma thing which did that, so we binned it.

The thanks thing can be a lazy way of acknowledging a good post.
An agreement.
Or indicate something which made you laugh.

Mostly it laziness tbh.

I think thank you ratios are best ignored.

Like if a post is hilarious and you reply with an emoticon like should you thank and reply or is that overkill? But if you only emoticon and don't thank, that hits their thank you ratio even though an emoticon reply is technically a larger stamp of approval.

If you write what you consider a fine post and it gets no thanks but one you consider mundane or a bit shit gets lots of thanks, is your judgement all wrong?

In an argument, if you're getting no thanks and they're getting lots does this mean you must be wrong or that they're the mindless herd?

You could drive yourself crazy pondering such questions.

Best just see it as, as has been said, a handy feature for lazy acknowledgement.

And Mike -
Dreadnaught

Mike wrote:

Awwww