Could we get a polite negative reaction for the forums? (ZOS?)

SilverBride

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

People who care enough are sometimes/often cloggin the thread up with a post that does nothing more than echo the opinion of others.

Multiple posts echoing the same reason why posters are for our against a particular suggestion actually provides valuable information. Knowing that most of the posters who agree do so for this reason, and most of those who disagree do so for that reason gets to the core of the topic.

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

Very interesting dialogue here, friends. I was expecting about this level of disagreement, but it's cool to hear the reasons why.

You won't get that if all a poster does is click a disagree button.

xXSilverDragonXx

Why do YOU need this? You feel it is so very essential to disagree with some random person in some random forum? Maybe stop reading and move on.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

show previous quotes

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

Very interesting dialogue here, friends. I was expecting about this level of disagreement, but it's cool to hear the reasons why.

You won't get that if all a poster does is click a disagree button.

Yup! And to add to this, that disagreement would often be new information. So you're missing out on a statement not already made in the thread most likely.

Meanwhile if someone hits agree and says nothing else, they didn't have anything further to add that wasn't already stated in the thread. This is why someone pressing agree with a post that laid out why they disagree with the thread owner is different than them hitting disagree on the opening post. The person they hit "agree" on had already stated what they thought, so there was nothing new to add. The person they disagree with is saying something different to what they think, so there is something new to add.

wenchmore420b14_ESO

spartaxoxo wrote: »

show previous quotes

SilverBride wrote: »

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

Very interesting dialogue here, friends. I was expecting about this level of disagreement, but it's cool to hear the reasons why.

You won't get that if all a poster does is click a disagree button.

Yup! And to add to this, that disagreement would often be new information. So you're missing out on a statement not already made in the thread most likely.

Meanwhile if someone hits agree and says nothing else, they didn't have anything further to add that wasn't already stated in the thread. This is why someone pressing agree with a post that laid out why they disagree with the thread owner is different than them hitting disagree on the opening post. The person they hit "agree" on had already stated what they thought, so there was nothing new to add. The person they disagree with is saying something different to what they think, so there is something new to add.

Agree!

Nightowl_74

I'm happy with our current options. I can see how a "disagree" might cut down on responses that add very little to a conversation but that's never been an issue that bothers me, personally. Without context, the buttons are just a small nicety that doesn't really mean much anyway. I do use them, because I figure why not encourage someone, but if I have criticism I type out a response. Here, or on FB, or wherever.

It's also a positive point to me that I'm not able to immediately see the popular versus unpopular posters here, because that's how so many relatively small forums with "dislike" or "disagree" type buttons work, and I'd rather it doesn't become that way.

SimonThesis

Or you could just type "I disagree" .

WiseSky

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

Currently our forum reactions are limited to "Agree", "Insightful", and "Awesome".

While I can totally imagine and appreciate why ZOS do not want to create a mini-reddit downvote system here, the current options provide players with the option of providing a positive reaction, going to the effort of writing up a negative reaction or letting it slide and becoming considered part of a silent majority.

So if Reddit is no good for a friendly, cohesive community environment that acknowledges its members have differing views without descending into the potential destruction of its contributors....let's look at Facebook...i am in no way saying facebook is anything close to a model to follow overall, but their 'sad' and 'angry' reactions allow people to respond in the negative without becoming aggressive or offensive and without adding to bullying by default (which is what reddit downvotes definitely do a lot of the time).

So why can't we please add a "Disagree" or similar reaction? This would allow less confident people to have their voice heard in some way. It would allow people to show their opinion without clogging up the thread with a brand new post saying the same thing others did.

I know this stuff isn't the end of the world, but the lack of a polite but clear negative reaction (and I truly do believe this is possible) actually invalidates the three positive reactions we have currently. If some of the community can't react in the other direction, the three positives in no way represent fair slice of the community reaction....yet they are presented this way.

It's been proven that Text is the lowest form of communication after Voice and Face to Face conversations.

I am sure just a Single Text word is the worst possible way to communicate.

We are complex human beings that usually need paragraphs of of text to just to try to convey our meaning...

So I Agree with you that people should be able to Disagree, as your post is Insightful in some ways and I find that Awesome.

But a Simple reaction is not Disagreeing Politely.

As you see it took me around 100 Words just to Try to feel like I stated my point.

The only way to Disagree politely with people is with words, not a word.

But even before that being polite means listening to the other person and making them feel understood... which is a mythic skill to have.

WiseSky

Tomboski wrote: »

OP is onto something here. Brevity, while not always the best policy, does have its merits. The sheer volume of threads that have degenerated into five-heads hopelessly trying to explain why they believe that they're the smartest person in the room is simply astonishing.

Are you saying some people like to speak and not listen?

Or is it that some people keep talking cause they haven't felt like their point has been proven?

Or are you saying that each person is just trying to seem cool to the audience as its something they value in the One Up Manship?

WiseSky

chattygeekHD wrote: »

What about a "Curious?" button.

It would maybe give the opportunity for the reader to note that they think differently, or that the poster's words don't necessarily resonate with the reader - but without the negativity.

My favorite post in this thread.

LordRukia

Downvoted, unfriended, blocked & reported sir.

Supreme_Atromancer

Its pretty disheartening to receive a bunch of anonymous, meaningless downvotes or whatever, with little to no explanation as to why. It misses the nuance of why there's disagreement and just reflects a general dogpiling. It makes the experience that much more negative.

Its far better when people engage and explain their point of view. It shows me points of view I might not have considered, or gives an opportunity for discussion to actually go further.

Supreme_Atromancer

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

but I also recognise that this is a game with a very low tolerance to potentially perceived bullying/bigotry etc etc whatever...and so the fear of dislike button bullying makes a lot of sense.

For the record on "perceived bullying/bigotry etc etc whatever..."...I am one of the last people to say that being 'woke' has gone too far. I will go to war with any homophobe or racist on zone, guild chat, this forum..whatever.,. ...and the same other small-minded silliness if someone wants to find a niche way to be a bigot coz homophobia isn't edgy enough anymore or whatever.

... because of the current ZOS complaint/pastoral care strategies. I still maintain that we should be able to do better than that...but acknowledge we can't or won't.

Its not really about fear or need for "pastoral care", its about the value of requiring that critical engagement actually be done in a constructive, useful way. If you want to sadface at someone's contributions, take the effort to explain why because "sadface" or "disagree" doesn't help me, it doesn't further the conversation.

Iselin

Disagree as well as LOL were both standard reactions in these forums during the first year.

I can't remember if they both went away together although I think LOL went away first since it was the reaction more at odds with its seemingly friendly nature because it was more used sarcastically and disparangily to disagree less politely.

FeedbackOnly

...that's what the awesome button is for no..?

Merforum

When I read the title I thought this was going to be a thread about having more productive and friendly comments. But it is about adding another method for people to disagree with others OMG. It is the worst feature on Reddit because there are troll farms that downvote people like crazy, especially since a downvote cancels an upvote.

chattygeekHD

HerrKeinTipp_MrNoTip wrote: »

show previous quotes

chattygeekHD wrote: »

What about a "Curious?" button.

It would maybe give the opportunity for the reader to note that they think differently, or that the poster's words don't necessarily resonate with the reader - but without the negativity.

I like this...as yet another option among maybe half a dozen or so.

Not wanting to come across as simply justifying myself..

One of the main things to consider is obviously the feelings of others, and the social health of the community. And one of the obvious problems with a "dislike" button is how this would impact the feelings / mental health of a poster - seeing a high number of "dislike" presses could likely lead to the poster deciding to never use the forums again with a very unhealthy feeling about themselves.

This is something we obviously want to avoid.

The good thing about a "curious" button is that that a high number of these button presses could actually denote interest in the posters opinion - and encourage them to elaborate and maybe even post more often and engage in our precious community more often. - This is something I'd definitely be up for!

It's all about improving and enhancing the health of our community.

chattygeekHD

Also I forgot to say that the other thing to consider is that a button click of some form might help to divert what would otherwise be a "troll" comment - which can be more harmful.

Lazuli

Many would press disagree for the sake of just "disagreeing "

SerasWhip

If there was a button to disagree I would use it now

Tommy_The_Gun

Lazuli wrote: »

Many would press disagree for the sake of just "disagreeing "

Yep. I can imagine that entire organised guilds will come down to the eso forums and do a classic "review bombing" on whatever person or idea they don't like. Not constructive thinking that would not contribute to anything relevant. Imagine how for example PTS feedback section would look like. People would down vote anything that is critical towards anything they use in game... skill, class, racial passive etc.

SammyKhajit

It’d lower forum participation especially on contentious issues.

Also, the poor dev or Gina or Kevin will have to cop a lot of disagrees and that’s not fair on the messengers.

ixthUA

If this forum had negative reaction button/counter - i would immediately and forever stop posting here.
On youtube i have view count, comments, likes and dislikes, that help me as creator to improve my videos. Here it would serve no positive purpose.

LikiLoki

It's very simple. A rational person wants to see a reaction to his words. He wants to see the reaction of disagreement, because it gives understanding. But developers are afraid of such a reaction. Why? Because they think that these reactions carry a negative emotion. We know that we need a reaction for a full-fledged dialogue. They also follow the fashion of destroying dialogue, preventing the spread of diversity of opinions.
The reaction of disagreement is a positive reaction. Don't be afraid to hear people with a different opinion - it makes us richer

VaranisArano

LikiLoki wrote: »

It's very simple. A rational person wants to see a reaction to his words. He wants to see the reaction of disagreement, because it gives understanding. But developers are afraid of such a reaction. Why? Because they think that these reactions carry a negative emotion. We know that we need a reaction for a full-fledged dialogue. They also follow the fashion of destroying dialogue, preventing the spread of diversity of opinions.
The reaction of disagreement is a positive reaction. Don't be afraid to hear people with a different opinion - it makes us richer

Well, the problem with the disagree button is that there's no understanding and no hearing of the different opinion.

The only thing you learn is "[X] people disagreed with me."

If you want to learn why they disagreed, or listen to their different opinion, you have to hold an actual discussion rather than just pushing the disagree button. Discussion is what makes us richer.

LikiLoki

Many people here write reasonable thoughts in favor of both points of view. But let's look from the side. Gymnastics of the mind: people who approve of one side have 4 tools for expressing opinions (three emotions and a comment), people who disagree have only one tool for expressing opinions (a comment). Everyone should have equal rights and opportunities in any discussion. Now, in fact, if I create a discussion, in other words, I forbid dissenters to use 3 words out of all available.

Lugaldu

LikiLoki wrote: »

Many people here write reasonable thoughts in favor of both points of view. But let's look from the side. Gymnastics of the mind: people who approve of one side have 4 tools for expressing opinions (three emotions and a comment), people who disagree have only one tool for expressing opinions (a comment). Everyone should have equal rights and opportunities in any discussion. Now, in fact, if I create a discussion, in other words, I forbid dissenters to use 3 words out of all available.

Of course, there are many ways to express agreement and just as many ways to express disagreement and it should be balanced. The problem is on all levels, not just here in the forums or in the game, that agreeing usually does not hurt anyone, but rejecting another opinion quickly crosses personal boundaries if this is not done with respect.

VaranisArano

LikiLoki wrote: »

Many people here write reasonable thoughts in favor of both points of view. But let's look from the side. Gymnastics of the mind: people who approve of one side have 4 tools for expressing opinions (three emotions and a comment), people who disagree have only one tool for expressing opinions (a comment). Everyone should have equal rights and opportunities in any discussion. Now, in fact, if I create a discussion, in other words, I forbid dissenters to use 3 words out of all available.

A poll should have a equal number of (preferably unbiased) options for expressing agreement/disagreement. Polls exist for exactly that sort of numerical representation of how popular/unpopular something is, absent the sort of complexity that's present in a discussion.

I'm not sure how to respond to the bit about dissenters not being about to use certain words. Perhaps it's time to order myself another sarcasm detector.


As a side note, I'd like to ask the "Disagree buttons" fans about some etiquette. If I disagree with you and I say so in a comment explaining why, do I also hit the Disagree button to show you numerically? Or is that double-dipping?

Kesstryl

I think this would shut down discussion more than help anything. People already voice opposing viewpoints and get agrees and awesomes for it from like-minded people on both sides of debates, why put something negative in that will just turn people off from posting anything?

spartaxoxo

LikiLoki wrote: »

Many people here write reasonable thoughts in favor of both points of view. But let's look from the side. Gymnastics of the mind: people who approve of one side have 4 tools for expressing opinions (three emotions and a comment), people who disagree have only one tool for expressing opinions (a comment). Everyone should have equal rights and opportunities in any discussion. Now, in fact, if I create a discussion, in other words, I forbid dissenters to use 3 words out of all available.

Giving a disagree button actually lowers the quality of voice of dissenting discussion. Completely ignoring outcome of options does not lend itself to equality of voice. A disagree button makes someone less likely to post why they disagree, which means valid information is lost to the disagree side of the debate. Agreement does NOT produce new information. Disagreement can also discourage people from posting their opinion if they see disagrees in high number, but agree with the post being disagreed with. The result is threads with echo chambering, where both sides of a debate are not presented equally in power. The goal should be equity in the debates, to prevent echo chambering and to allow both sides to fully flesh out opinions. Not blindly counting how many buttons each group has.

Molydeus

We used to have "Respectfully Disagree" as an option, not sure when it went away or why...