[Opinion] Separate Library likes on books from Regular Forum Comment/Post Likes

[Saint]

Before you proceed, I want you to know this is not about 'pride' and 'ego' or any form of 'anti-aura-farming' move, it's about giving crumbs of informations to each other through already existing functions Now, let me explain why I suggest this to you.

When we look on someone's comment and likes ratio, it usually tells us this and that about a user. If you see a user with 600 comments and 600 likes, you rightfully assume most of their comments are not stirring wide interest or agreement from the active community, while if you see someone post 300 comments but received, for example 800 likes, you may feel that yes, this user possibly put effort into their comment, the value they deliver is welcomed through communicating with likes.

Skull himself stated somewhere, that he wish this community to be more than just a Library, and therefore he want some changes in the current system.
I think that seperating likes given in the Library and what is given on regular community forums is a very useful and actually important step.

• Some user never checks the Library, they are not here for taken books, they're here to communicate with each other
• Some people merely communicate, and rather post PDFs like no tomorrow, therefore, they themselves have no impact on the community, others' written books does
• Some people does both, yet their likes usually comes from books, and not from commenting in a manner or quality that stirs reaction, resulting a misleading rating

So, I think the likes given in the Library should be separate ratings. I have a couple of ideas.
1. Thank you - PDF posts in the Library should get a 'Thank you' button instead of a 'Like', and so the like they received so far, would appear as a secondary statistic under their pfp, highlighting how many books and how welcomed those books has been
2. 1-5 ratings - People could rate the PDF posts based on how useful they found that particular book, instead of giving likes to it, this could appear as a statistic under the user's pfp, and perhaps, even customized whether they want it to appear or not
3. Upvote or Downvote - A PDF post can be upvoted or downvoted instead

The goal here to not showcase PDF likes/Likes given in the Library as if it was the user's own merit. These are taken books from others, re-posted here, and those who actually put effort into talking, delivering informations, helping each other and keeping it friendly, respectful and welcoming, are less valued by this current mish-mashed system.

Thank you for your time, it was hell of a yapna, I know. I apologise.

 

[FireBorn]

I agree. The message to reaction score is data. Making that data more accurate would be smart. While the message to reaction score isn't the totality of a user, it does lean towards resonance overall. That is what I believe that data to represent (Do I have that wrong?) I mean why else have it?

Would it improve posts in general? Not everyone cares, but Im curious about how many actually do care. Its only a tool, but it could be sharpened a bit to reflect reality a bit more cleanly.

And yes, my reaction score would drop a bit due to book shares, so be it. I would prefer accuracy over the optics every day. That's just me. Great idea!!

 

[Morell]

I think that this type of forums does not support system of likes having 2 groups. I think it is not doable. But eradicating ability to give likes in Library (just like in controversy section) is possible way to go. And I confess that it makes some real sense to me.

 

[Saint]

I think that this type of forums does not support system of likes having 2 groups. I think it is not doable. But eradicating ability to give likes in Library (just like in controversy section) is possible way to go. And I confess that it makes some real sense to me.

Ultimately Library likes only matters to those who check a book, and also as a feedback to the poster that yes, this user appreciated the book, but for the Community who are actively talking, giving each other their own knowledge, experiences, and respect and patience, it's different. It's (just like @FireBorn said) it's a data, and ultimately a feedback not on a book, but a person's attitude and thoughts they shared, and how others find them or relate to it.

It is also possible to simply set the Library likes not counted. Same way how DM likes and profile post likes are not counted, either. The upvote and downvote system without a like is also a way to communicate gratitude and how welcomed a book is. We have similar sections, as you said, no likes, just upvote and downvote.

It'd profit transparency too, and help separating this two very different section on the Forum. Especially because, Skull himself said he'd like the community to do more than just be here for the books, if possible. If I could I'd mute the whole Library section for good, for I care about your opinion and experiences, and be able to actively discuss with you, not feeding PDF collections.

 

[SkullTraill]

Super interesting idea, and I totally see the vision behind it. I agree that some people have inflated reaction score from book shares (especially me lmao).

Like @Morell said, this isn’t supported in the software, but it’s something I can look into getting custom coded or try and code myself. It’ll be difficult, and probably take me a long time to get around to it. And I still want people to be rewarded for posting book shares… but this is an interesting and useful idea worth considering.

I’ll look into it.

 

[Morell]

Super interesting idea, and I totally see the vision behind it. I agree that some people have inflated reaction score from book shares (especially me lmao).

Like @Morell said, this isn’t supported in the software, but it’s something I can look into getting custom coded or try and code myself. It’ll be difficult, and probably take me a long time to get around to it. And I still want people to be rewarded for posting book shares… but this is an interesting and useful idea worth considering.

I’ll look into it.

We have rewards for good book-shares already, we can simply use them more or create some automated rewards like we have for posting 10 threads and 100 posts in the sections of the forum.

Making them uncounted is possible, I've forgot that the DM ones do not count, which is ture.

Post automatically merged: Mar 11, 2026

1 entry (maybe not needed) - Got Library card (or) Been to library
10 entries - Visitor of Library
25 entries - Explorer of Library
50 entries - Knower of the Library
100 entries - Google of the Library!

Or...
First book
Few books
More books
A lot of books
A TON of books... Are you writing them?

 

[StoatCatcher]

IMO deactivating likes, implementing Morell's idea of more Library-specific awards and putting in the upvote and downvote system like the one we're using to rank this suggestion right now sounds like the least time-consuming options and wouldn't require rewriting anything. I think it's better to re-use familiar parts of the forum in the meantime while trying to get a proper custom solution done.

 

[SkullTraill]

IMO deactivating likes, implementing Morell's idea of more Library-specific awards and putting in the upvote and downvote system like the one we're using to rank this suggestion right now sounds like the least time-consuming options and wouldn't require rewriting anything. I think it's better to re-use familiar parts of the forum in the meantime while trying to get a proper custom solution done.

Wow, great idea. I think the upvote system could be hooked up to automatic awards too.

Still, having some second thoughts about removing reactions. I haven’t fully made up my mind that book sharers don’t deserve any reaction score…

 

[Underlaws]

I’ll assume the role of devil’s advocate here to challenge some of the points.

First, it doesn’t seem feasible, at least at this point, to remove the like button from the Library. A significant portion of the collection is tied to this access mechanism. Removing likes without simultaneously revising this requirement in certain posts could cause bugs. In that sense, I agree that a more balanced solution would be to remove the like count while preserving its functional role for accessing some of the already posted books.

The second point concerns the criticism of the Library and PDFs. Not all material available there can be reduced to the simplistic idea of “piracy.” In the field of occultism in particular, access to works has historically been limited. Many titles are out of print, have never been republished, or only circulate as digitized copies.

There are clear cases of rare or nearly lost works whose only form of access today is via PDF. This includes, for example, older editions of texts by Franz Bardon that simply no longer exist in the market. Without digitalization and online circulation, this kind of material would effectively be lost forever.

In addition, there are documents originating from orders and groups that no longer exist, which reinforces the historical preservation role of this type of collection. Ignoring this aspect and reducing the Library to a user behavior problem seems unfair to me.

Even if there are other spaces on the internet with a similar function, I don’t see a reason to delegitimize this space within the WF. On the contrary, it plays a relevant role in preserving and disseminating materials that would otherwise be condemned to oblivion.