Can an agree button be abused to negative effect? A bit, maybe, possibly. Is it credible it could lead to harm? Not really in a moderated forum, no.

Can a disagree button be abused to negative effect? Yes. Is it credible that it could lead to harm? Absolutely yes and we have seen it in various forms happen on social media to the extent that giants like YouTube have completely removed the function.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter that some people might find something useful if it is obviously open to causing people harm in a way that is difficult to counteract.

The classic example of this is the -isms. Racism, sexism, etc.

An abusive message can attract many agrees. There is a workaround for this: the message gets moderated.

A totally neutral or, indeed, positive message can attract many disagrees by the ists of this world. What is the workaround for this? How do you moderate a message that is not itself offensive, only the responses to it are offensive?

Well, there IS as it happens a workaround to that problem. It's not moderation, which is impossible in that scenario. It's not having a disagree button.

Syldras wrote: »

JemadarofCaerSalis wrote: »

I might want to hide the posts from *my* view, but I have rarely ever wanted to remove a post from everyone's view

That reminds me: This forum has an ignore list. So if someone finds one specific user's posts disruptive or really, really, annoying, they can already choose to put them on that list, so they don't see what they write anymore.

Well.... except for when the ignored person starts a thread.... and unfortunately, vanilla doesn't seem to allow for a first post by an ignored individual being ignored as well as in-thread posts.

Elsonso wrote: »

I think it is where information overload and cancel culture intersect. The ratio of agree to disagree helps some people prioritize attention on the important things. As long as the proper group-speek is attached to things, there is less pressure to opinionate and they can move on to somewhere they might be needed more, or find more interesting.

Ah yes, the efficiency thing. I also may be old-fashioned in that regard, but I think that, if someone has so very little time that skimming a forum post for 5-10 seconds (let's be real, many posts aren't longer) wastes too much of their precious free time, they might reconsider if they really want to spend it loitering in a game forum

Elsonso wrote: »

I actually use it more to short-term highlight what someone is saying so I don't miss it.

I don't use it at all But that does sound like an interesting idea

Elsonso wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin. Not sure if this has been said. A disagree button might cut down on the “back and forth” the moderators have to deal with.

I'm sorry, but I doubt it.

In the case there's still new arguments to be exchanged, people will write them out. And I personally don't see anything bad in that (as long as the discussion is civil); although of course I know that my personal idea of whether a discussion is still legit or not plays no role when it comes to forum rules.

And in case it's just a heated exchange of insults, I doubt the posters are sober enough to just stop that and click "disagree" instead.

Same goes for the weird strategy of some people to just repeat the same thing over and over as if mere repetition would suddenly change someone's mind. Although, to be fair, that strategy "works" is the way that people will grow tired sooner or later and just leave the discussion (unpersuaded) because they find it's a waste of time.

Syldras wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin. Not sure if this has been said. A disagree button might cut down on the “back and forth” the moderators have to deal with.

I'm sorry, but I doubt it.

In the case there's still new arguments to be exchanged, people will write them out. And I personally don't see anything bad in that (as long as the discussion is civil); although of course I know that my personal idea of whether a discussion is still legit or not plays no role when it comes to forum rules.

And in case it's just a heated exchange of insults, I doubt the posters are sober enough to just stop that and click "disagree" instead.

Same goes for the weird strategy of some people to just repeat the same thing over and over as if mere repetition would suddenly change someone's mind. Although, to be fair, that strategy "works" is the way that people will grow tired sooner or later and just leave the discussion (unpersuaded) because they find it's a waste of time.

Well, cut down on. Not eliminate. I observe cases where two people go back and forth, neither one letting the other have the last word. Neither of them is budging, as you suggest at the end. A disagree button might allow one of them to get the "last word" in before the moderators have to step in and throw a wet blanket over them.

Not sure if this outweighs the negatives of having the button, though. Probably not.