[b]Before posting here, please read the OP in the OOC. [/b]

In order to create a system for people to contribute without writing a full post, the following system has been devised to translate to ratings of posts into meaning:

Like - 'Like' posts that you think were well made in general, and that you have no leaning on. Be generous with these; it encourages an overall better and healthier quality of writing.

Laugh - 'Laugh' at posts that in the opinion of your broad historical expertise are pure poppycock. The more laughs a post has, the less well regarded as a source it is. This is completely irrelevant to quality, and often some of the highest quality posts will be seen as broadly historically inaccurate but still phenomenal reads.

Thank - 'Thank' posts you think are superb histories and completely factually accurate. The more thanks a post has, the more well regarded as a source it is. This is also completely irrelevant to quality,

These categorizations are meant to be humorous, and I personally encourage you to give out as many as possible.
If multiple ratings could be applied to a post, that'd be superb, but until then take all of them as compliments.

As far as from what perspective you should rate posts from, I'd recommend rating from the perspective of the chronicler you last posted as, or rating from the perspective of what is the most humorous, up to you.

Happy writing!