Do not be cruel-hearted,
Do not be so stingy!
Why not try be humble,
Kind and friendly and generous?!
It costs nothing to give a “like”,
And there is an infinity of likes
In your possession to give!
You will never run out of “likes”!
But you may run out of “friends”!
And you surely one day,
Will run out of days!
So give a bloody like,
Before you leave this world,
And let your ego die,
Of spite and shame and defeat.
36 Likes
Specialists in internet behaviour note that positive feedback is a key way to reduce incidence of online trolling and fostering positive behaviour.
16 Likes
Bhante, I’m a believer is being judicious with likes. Just like kisses and Slim Whitman albums, if we just give them away, they start to lose their value. I’m in favor of a “meh” button, that can express the response that “yeah, I saw your post, but it did nothing for me.” At least there’s the acknowledgement, and the “tiny squirt of dopamine” that Jon Kabat-Zinn references when we get a “like” or a “heart” on Facebook. 
By the way, @anon61506839 and @gnlaera, I liked both of your posts!
6 Likes
I’m highly sympathetic to your point, but it does sort of imply there is a set, universally agreed way in which meaning is encoded into and extracted from ‘likes’. Now, as it turns out, I’m not especially interested in making the pro (or, for that matter, the anti) ‘like’ case and will just bumble along with my part-willy-nilly-part-dark-art ‘like’ strategy (whereby this one humble button can be intended to signify at least three different things - a very refined language, huh? 
).
Meh! 
It’s neither here nor there. The reason I actually really engaged with the quoted comment is because it led me to wonder if perhaps some folk feel the same way about metta, too (note, I’m not relating metta and ‘likes’ at all, their only connection to each other is by a sequence of thoughts).
6 Likes
That is a really great question, @Aminah. My two baht is that Metta is just such a different practice, and part of its quality is that the more you cultivate it, the more deep and expansive it is. The Brahmaviharas seem to have this unique quality of expansiveness, and viral (in a good way) quality that they become more powerful and stronger the more that we develop them. For me, part of the reason Metta practice is such a challenge: it’s easy to give “likes” away, and hope that (here’s the two bit shadow psychology from me) in part people like us more for doing so. With Metta, it is purely unconditional, and without boundaries or expectation that we receive something in return. Even more powerful is that state where our Metta for our enemies is as powerful as our Metta for those that we naturally love, or for ourselves. That’s a cultivation that I am sure I won’t reach in this lifetime, but with more bhavana, I can hope to get closer. 
3 Likes
@AnagarikaMichael & @Aminah … I suggest you start giving so many more likes than you would naturally give, and then follow the dukkha that will inwardly arise?! :).
The poem was the teaser, though, the full article is coming soon!
5 Likes
Much thanks for the advice Venerable, but it does presents a bit of a conundrum for me, as referring back to my ‘like’ strategy, quite genuinely when I first started to engage with this platform I did have to spend a moment trying to figure out exactly what the ‘like’ business was about and how it could be approached. I recognised the point that Michael initially introduced, but for myself concluded I favoured liberal ‘liking’ behaviour (mostly on the basis that by contrast to the focus of what it ‘does’ / or might mean to or signify about me, my primary interest was the recipient). Forum even gave me a badge for it, which has it’s own funniness… it’s like a ‘super-like’ for ‘liking’!
I don’t think to ‘like’ more wouldn’t raise any great amount of dukkha beyond that of an RSI, but it really would ramp up the willy-nilly element to my ‘like’ practice. Still, I do have a fondness for the willy-nilly as it happens. 
4 Likes
So long one is not intentionally ignoring others, and not too often careless as to ignore them unintentionally, then there’s no harm.
Here is a quote (full article tomorrow I hope):
I understand though that “giving and not giving a like” can mean different things to different people, and that for some it doesn’t mean anything in particular to ‘not’ give a like, and that yet for others their giving and not giving likes is completely haphazard, spontaneous, and lacking any logic or method, or even intention! Some don’t give likes because they are inattentive or busy, others don’t want to appear now, they want to withdraw and disappear in the background for some reason or another. But non of this exempts those innocent people from the moral responsibility of “having an effect on others” still, when they in practice end up publicly responding to some but ignoring others, even if they don’t intend to do that or do it with good intentions.
An argument that may be raised here, is that giving a like to everyone and everything will only render this practice meaningless or without purpose, as people will no longer view it as a special event (“I got a like!”), but rather a usual and expected one. This is very true, but not in all cases. It is perfectly valid when we don’t give a like to something that we, simply, don’t like, or don’t find interesting, or even if we just wish to remain silent! The trouble arises when we fail to give a like in those so many situations where giving a like, particularly to a comment or reply that we have received, would mean nothing more than that we are appreciative or grateful for the attention that the other person has given us, or at the very least that we acknowledge what they said, or even acknowledge the fact that they have said anything at all! Imagine for a moment a bheaviour just similar to that in real, non-virtual conversations: to completly ignore a “friend” after he or she has finished a statement directed to you! To remain silent, say nothing in return, or even turn your back to them and leave! This would be considered an incredibly impolite and offensive behaviour in real life. But no more on social meida!
5 Likes
Actually in Discourse the amount of likes you can pass out in a day depends on your Trust Level. I’ve never run into this limit personally but according to the documentation there should be one. Perhaps @Aminah could enlighten us on what this limit actually is.
Also…sorry for raining of your parade, Venerable 
4 Likes
Eeeeerm… 
… Idunno… maybe it says somewhere else on the meta forum. Once you find out though, do let us all know; we can make a game of it!
3 Likes
You become a Sotapanna when you give five thousand likes and 5000 kisses.
5 Likes
Interesting thoughts, Venerable. Intriguingly enough just after replying to you I went of on my bicycle and considering the matter (where, in fact, considering the road might have been more appropriate) I realised that by my choosing ‘like’ would really be ‘appreciate’ (as suggested in your post) and that is typically how I use the button.
To be honest, my own personal preference is not to over-think it too much (much as I do see how it can just as well be used as the stuff of as meaningful a reflection as any other - incidently, I trust your final article will include a mention of the difficultly of a ‘like’ being conflated with agreement). Still, I can at least mention in my more deliberate ‘liking’ practice I think my chief use is to appreciate how something is said rather than what is said. Any mode of talking that promotes a harmonious, kindly, fluffy vibe (especially within the exchange in which parties disagree) is likely to get a ‘like’ from me.
As I said I’m inclined to use the button in a bunch of ways, but when engaging with it in a more reflective way (as seems to be your intention to encourage) the ideas being advanced in a post are often irrelevant to me.
3 Likes
And even not to think it at all! :). But only to be attentive and careful when someone has addressed us, or demanded our attention in any way. Since there is surely kamma involved in ignoring them then, or responding emotionally with aversion or cruelty. In turn these attitudes, especially when turned into habits, exercise a significant negative effect on any community as a whole.
5 Likes
Dear all :).
So many thanks for liking the poem that much! :).
Here is the link to the full article though, it’s about certain problematic behaviours on social media. I’m looking forward to hear your views on this matter.
4 Likes
I can’t seem to get to the beginning this thread (ongoing issues on my computer with this site and with SC) so this may not appear in the right place. Anyway, this is probably really a question for the @moderators. I so appreciate all the posts in this Buddha Beings thread and I was just reading ones I’ve missed for quite awhile and trying to ‘like’ them and got a message saying I reached my maximum ‘likes’ for the day. This was yesterday, same message today. What’s the ‘rule’ here, seems kinda odd?
2 Likes
Never come across that issue before Linda…maybe @helpdesk-dd can shed some light on the matter please?
2 Likes
There is an algorithm that the platform uses, I can’t remember the specifics, but it starts off with less likes and then allows greater numbers of likes per day up to, I think, 50. The help desk that @ficus tagged should be able to give the details. Of course there is also the possibility of a glitch 
6 Likes
In case this is useful for anyone else, I found this article very helpful when I was trying to understand how the trust levels work (since I’m new here and new to using Discourse in general). It doesn’t seem to specify exact numbers of likes allowed per day, but it explains how the daily like limits increase as the trust levels go up:
4 Likes