I don't think we need seven different reactions. At that point we literally have the same reactions as Facebook, PLUS a "Disagree", "Thanks", and "Confusion".
I'm in favor of just having a "Like" reaction, and maybe the "Thanks" reaction. I say maybe because I think most uses for "Thanks" fall under "Like" anyway.
But I really don't think the rest are necessary. I agree with Bill that if you disagree with a post, it's best to communicate why than to just hit a button and move on. As to a "Funny" reaction, that would fall under "Like" anyway, and for a funny post the reason for that Like should be pretty clear. "Shocking" seems a bit ambiguous. Like, are you "shocked" that the post says something extreme that you disagree with, or are you shocked at how good/effective their argument is? Are you shocked because you're particularly concerned about something? "Sadness" I'm actually sort of neutral on, but when in doubt, I still think it's better to keep things simple. And I really don't see the role "Confusion" would play. If a member sees that their post got a Confused reaction, are they then obligated to tag said confused person and clarify it? If they don't understand something, isn't it just better to ask what you don't get than to react in an ambiguous way?
Also, this reminds me: does XenForo allow tagging members?