Maintenance for the week of December 22:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
Zenimax- Just add a dislike button.
-
Jankstar✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.3 -
seaef✭✭✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »The bottom line is, we're already in it, waist deep. All a button would do is put a name on something people are already doing. Argue until you're blue in the face, it won't change what other people do.
Punching a dislike button instead of explaining why you disagree is the coward's way out. If they have to explain themselves, they run the risk of coming out of the interaction as the person who looks like an idiot instead of the person they are responding to.
I have a feeling it has more to do with this than anything.
Hit and run commenting. For those without cajones.
Edited by seaef on August 13, 2014 1:48AM"The Illuminati are very achievement focused. It's like Xbox - only everything is hardcore."
- Kirsten Geary7 -
Jankstar✭✭✭GrimGryphon wrote: »williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »The bottom line is, we're already in it, waist deep. All a button would do is put a name on something people are already doing. Argue until you're blue in the face, it won't change what other people do.
Punching a dislike button instead of explaining why you disagree is the coward's way out. If they have to explain themselves, they run the risk of coming out of the interaction as the person who looks like an idiot instead of the person they are responding to.
I have a feeling it has more to do with this than anything.
Hit and run commenting. For those without cajones.
I disagree. No one expects people to give an explanation for why they agree.
You seem to be working from a belief that posting in a forum takes cajones, it doesn't. Some times you want to respond to a post but are not going to add any more information, so the buttons let you do that with out just driving up post counts,
I understand that people don't want the point loss from beta, I don't like that either and think disagrees should work like the other buttons.
To silence others opinions because you don't like them is not productive, and to call them names weakens your position and undermines your argument.6 -
Srugzal✭✭✭✭✭DenverRalphy wrote: »Dislike buttons are too susceptible to griefers. The maturity level of the majority of forum users simply isn't conducive for dislikes to be a valuable asset.
That was certainly the case with all of the "negative feedback" buttons that have existed at one point or another in these forums which were, and I think wisely, removed one by one.
Please, let's not go there again. It was ugly.2 -
Srugzal✭✭✭✭✭DenverRalphy wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »It doesn't have to be "dislike." It could be "disagree." How is that different than many of the poll threads we see? I would at like to see a "Disagree" option to the choices.
No.
If you disagree with someone, explain yourself. If you don't care enough to explain yourself or if you don't have a decent argument, then clearly there's no need for anyone to know about your disagreement.
That makes no sense. The assumption on your part is that all folks would do is click disagree and move on without offering their opinion.
Actually, more often than not, that's exactly what happens.
Exactly. Have you seen what happens on a voting forum like Reddit? Far more people vote than comment, both pro and con. I for one would be in favor of eliminating all "vote" buttons, positive or negative. Talk to each other, engage. This "click" to like is anti-debate, anti-conversation.2 -
seaef✭✭✭✭✭
You seem to be working from a belief that posting in a forum takes cajones, it doesn't. Some times you want to respond to a post but are not going to add any more information, so the buttons let you do that with out just driving up post counts,
And you seem to be working from a belief that I feel differently about the other "buttons". Read my earlier post.
"The Illuminati are very achievement focused. It's like Xbox - only everything is hardcore."
- Kirsten Geary3 -
GrimGryphon wrote: »williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »The bottom line is, we're already in it, waist deep. All a button would do is put a name on something people are already doing. Argue until you're blue in the face, it won't change what other people do.
Punching a dislike button instead of explaining why you disagree is the coward's way out. If they have to explain themselves, they run the risk of coming out of the interaction as the person who looks like an idiot instead of the person they are responding to.
I have a feeling it has more to do with this than anything.
Hit and run commenting. For those without cajones.
Let's say I agree with you (in reality I sort of do) that punching a disagree button is a "coward's way out." nobody cares. They'll do it anyway. They are currently doing it anyway, by pushing the LOL button.. There are no cojones on messaging boards, there are only people talking into a space, and other peopling reading space.
Let's say I disagree with you in your assertion. I would've hit the button. Still, nobody cares. Now you know there's somebody out there who read what you said, and thinks Nope, no. Except you would've been spared reading all of this hilarious text. You'd be younger by 5 to 30 seconds, depending on how fast you read.
The reality is the same, that of you saying your thing, and me disagreeing with what you had to say. It's only the mechanics of making that obvious to both you and me that are different. Me? I got stuff to do. Anything that makes things faster and more obvious is good. I don't share nevarararineine or SFBBRian's taste for endless, pointless argument. I can tell very quickly, within moments, if somebody's talkin' nonsense, I don't need to back-and-forth with them over a span of weeks.
Are you still reading? WHY? This is your life ticking away by increments, all of which could've been prevented by having a "disagree" button. You could've put down a mint plant in your front yard in this time. In the same amount of time it's given you here to furrow your brow and stare at these words and make frowny-face, you could've put a living thing in the ground that can grow and give you fresh mint in perpetuity in the future.Edited by williamburr2001b14_ESO on August 13, 2014 4:39AM5 -
Jankstar✭✭✭GrimGryphon wrote: »
You seem to be working from a belief that posting in a forum takes cajones, it doesn't. Some times you want to respond to a post but are not going to add any more information, so the buttons let you do that with out just driving up post counts,
And you seem to be working from a belief that I feel differently about the other "buttons". Read my earlier post.
I also disagree with that post. Feedback and content are two different things. Adding lot of extra me toos makes the forum harder to read, having the feedback on your post let's you know how well you have made your point,
I believe that restricting the negative feedback holds the whole community back because the openness of ideas is also restricted by it.5 -
PolskiBunny_ESO✭✭✭I don't see why people make it into such a big deal that there isn't a dislike button.
It was sooooo terribly abused, as mentioned, the disagree button. You could say "I had a good day today" and it would be disagreed with.
Also, I've noticed a funny side effect of the lol button: obviously some people are so rude or ridiculous their Lols are ironic, and some are funny and get good Lols.... When someone is rude and tries to make a joke, I've noticed sometimes they don't have as many Lols on their post because the people using lol ironically don't want to make the person think it was a funny post.
Back on track, I don't think disagree is necessary. You can voice it, or you can keep using lol. Lol has been used against those supporting and against a down vote button anyway, so it's here to stay for now.
I like that it technically isn't negative, even if negatively used, and I have seen that not having a disagree seems to open up more debate. If you don't like putting your view in words, cool, but someone else will have a similar opinion and you can "agree" with them.
Idk.
I feel like a disagree button isn't as big of a deal to ask for; participate in the forums or play the game! I see why it doesn't exist and if it's brought back it would be taken down again. It sounds like a good idea to silently give your opinion but it really did cause more issues, as people didn't use it as "disagree" but as "I just don't like you so I'll dislike everything you've said ever because that's super mature."
Some people used it fine, but it was more abused than lol.
I should have written this more coherently, but I'm half asleep.2 -
Jankstar✭✭✭
As someone put it, if you want to use LOL passive aggressively... Then I'll happily take that LOL. I can use all the LOLs I can get!
I don't want to use the lol button, I want to use a disagree button. If you have a lol from me, you should read it as a disagree, and I probably didn't laugh. I just don't want to sound passive aggressive here, because that is not useful to me or you.3 -
SFBryan18✭✭✭✭✭
✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
The one line post is better, because at least we know who you are and can respond to it.Edited by SFBryan18 on August 13, 2014 7:05AM4 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭The one line post is better, because at least we know who you are and can respond to it.
Respond to what? Their Disagreement? Are you daft enough to respond to a post that reads "I disagree?" What do you say that? No you don't? Why? Be more enlightened and agree with me?
You need to know "who" they are? No you don't. Nobody Owes you or anyone else an explanation of their opinion. Nor do they owe you the time it takes to do so. It's not a common courtesy, good or bad manners, a slight or snub. This is a place of ideas AND opinions. They can be long, short, well thought out or not. They can merely disagree and move on and in a world where some folks are interested in accuracy and brevity...that's OK.
Logic mandates the use of a "disagree" tag in conjunction with the other options. All the rest is emotional fappage. But hey, I won't stand in your way of explaining it to everyone you want to.
6 -
SFBryan18✭✭✭✭✭
✭The one line post is better, because at least we know who you are and can respond to it.
Respond to what? Their Disagreement? Are you daft enough to respond to a post that reads "I disagree?" What do you say that? No you don't? Why? Be more enlightened and agree with me?
You need to know "who" they are? No you don't. Nobody Owes you or anyone else an explanation of their opinion. Nor do they owe you the time it takes to do so. It's not a common courtesy, good or bad manners, a slight or snub. This is a place of ideas AND opinions. They can be long, short, well thought out or not. They can merely disagree and move on and in a world where some folks are interested in accuracy and brevity...that's OK.
Logic mandates the use of a "disagree" tag in conjunction with the other options. All the rest is emotional fappage. But hey, I won't stand in your way of explaining it to everyone you want to.
It's not a matter of necessity. It's a matter of accountability. If someone is going to put my statements down, I want to know who they are and why. Like I said before, this is a preference, not some fact about what is correct or not.4 -
GreySix✭✭✭✭✭
✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
Okay, so why do you disagree, other than ... you just do? Folks who've stated agreement need no further explanation, because the explanation was already sufficiently provided by the person with whom they agreed.
You however have offered no explanation for your disagreement ... other than to state you disagree.
That would be similar to someone simply stating, "I oppose peace."Crotchety Old Man Guild
"Hey you, get off my lawn!"3 -
nerevarine1138✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
As someone put it, if you want to use LOL passive aggressively... Then I'll happily take that LOL. I can use all the LOLs I can get!
I don't want to use the lol button, I want to use a disagree button. If you have a lol from me, you should read it as a disagree, and I probably didn't laugh. I just don't want to sound passive aggressive here, because that is not useful to me or you.
I'll keep that in mind (actually, I'll just take the LOL as a compliment about how funny I am, because I don't care how you intended it).
If you don't have any kind of coherent argument to make against a post, then you don't get a button to encourage your laziness. If you disagree, then make an argument. If you can't, then your opinion doesn't need to be heard.----
Murray?5 -
smeeprocketnub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
And if it is used for a petty popularity contest, who cares? This is all talk, it's wind and air. We are already engrossed in a petty popularity contest through the use of Insightful, Awesome, and Agrees. Facebook is the same with Likes and Shares. Just about every forum and comment section has an uptick and a downtick. If you're seeing something petty only in the use of negative and not seeing it in the positive, that is your personal baggage, and nobody else's.
The bottom line is, we're already in it, waist deep. All a button would do is put a name on something people are already doing. Argue until you're blue in the face, it won't change what other people do.
because that kind of negativeness leads to added toxicity in the forums which is bad for everyone.
Yes it's all just talk and we should get thicker skins and so forth and so on, but facilitating that kind of behavior just leads to unhappiness overall.
IDGAF about suppressing or not suppressing someone's cherished opinion.Dear Sister, I do not spread rumors, I create them.2 -
Tabbycat✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭I think it all boils down to if they can push a button they can disagree anonymously, if they have to actually post, they have to defend their position or at least explain it... and everyone knows who they are.
Disagree, dislike or even LOL is easy to abuse because no one knows who did it.Founder and Co-GM of The Psijic Order Guild (NA)
0.016%3 -
Jankstar✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
The one line post is better, because at least we know who you are and can respond to it.
I would be for seeing who used the disagree or any other button. I would like to have the accountability that people have mentioned in this thread for the other buttons as well. If some one agrees to a bunch of toxic posts, then that should be as transparent as as someone who is just disagreeing with everything.
Transparency is good.
1 -
Jankstar✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
Okay, so why do you disagree, other than ... you just do? Folks who've stated agreement need no further explanation, because the explanation was already sufficiently provided by the person with whom they agreed.
You however have offered no explanation for your disagreement ... other than to state you disagree.
That would be similar to someone simply stating, "I oppose peace."
I don't see how this is like saying I oppose peace. Could you eleborate?
1 -
seaef✭✭✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »Are you still reading? WHY? This is your life ticking away by increments, all of which could've been prevented by having a "disagree" button.
Why would I want to prevent it? I know more about why you disagree with me than if you had pushed a dislike button. That's part of my point.
BTW, if I'm sitting here reading forums, my life is already "ticking away by increments" and could have been prevented by me not coming here AT ALL.
"The Illuminati are very achievement focused. It's like Xbox - only everything is hardcore."
- Kirsten Geary2 -
GreySix✭✭✭✭✭
✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
Okay, so why do you disagree, other than ... you just do? Folks who've stated agreement need no further explanation, because the explanation was already sufficiently provided by the person with whom they agreed.
You however have offered no explanation for your disagreement ... other than to state you disagree.
That would be similar to someone simply stating, "I oppose peace."
I don't see how this is like saying I oppose peace. Could you eleborate?
Sure. If you say you oppose peace, but you provide no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps deranged.
Similarly, in debate if someone poses a point with explanation, you you simply state, "I disagree," with no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps just ignorant of the most basic function of debate.Crotchety Old Man Guild
"Hey you, get off my lawn!"1 -
seaef✭✭✭✭✭I think it all boils down to if they can push a button they can disagree anonymously, if they have to actually post, they have to defend their position or at least explain it... and everyone knows who they are.
Disagree, dislike or even LOL is easy to abuse because no one knows who did it.
Good point.
Instead of adding a dislike button, let's remove LOL since it's getting abused anyway.
"The Illuminati are very achievement focused. It's like Xbox - only everything is hardcore."
- Kirsten Geary2 -
The_Sadist✭✭✭✭✭It seems a little counterproductive if you ask me. If you disagree with an opinion / suggestion / notion feel free to state why you disagree and whatnot or just move on. Yes, there will be the odd 'hurr flyin' mountz n nerf all classes dat isnt me plox' thread, but that's a different story entirely.Edited by The_Sadist on August 13, 2014 6:03PM"Each event is preceded by Prophecy. But without the hero, there is no Event." ― Zurin Arctus, the Underking.Tragrim - How do I work this thing?
Casually stalking the forums3 -
Jankstar✭✭✭The_Sadist wrote: »It seems a little counter productive if you ask me. If you disagree with an opinion / suggestion / notion state why you disagree and whatnot or just move on.
I disagree because it fills the forum with one line posts that have no content.Edited by Jankstar on August 13, 2014 1:21PM1 -
Jankstar✭✭✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
Okay, so why do you disagree, other than ... you just do? Folks who've stated agreement need no further explanation, because the explanation was already sufficiently provided by the person with whom they agreed.
You however have offered no explanation for your disagreement ... other than to state you disagree.
That would be similar to someone simply stating, "I oppose peace."
I don't see how this is like saying I oppose peace. Could you eleborate?
Sure. If you say you oppose peace, but you provide no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps deranged.
Similarly, in debate if someone poses a point with explanation, you you simply state, "I disagree," with no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps just ignorant of the most basic function of debate.
Would this be the same as just posting I agree?1 -
GreySix✭✭✭✭✭
✭williamburr2001b14_ESO wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »You want a disagree...
I want all the buttons to show who clicked them and also a limit on how many ratings a person can spam in a day.
If there was some accountability for the ratings it wouldn't be a problem. I just hate when a small percentage of trolls spam buttons all day.
Well you can only "spam" a single button per post. So you can't really have that much of an effect on people, especially since LOL points don't count for anything.
You missed the point.
What was the point, then?
You can't spam someone with ratings that would negatively impact them in any way. So why do you care who's rating your posts?
You can not spam a single post, but you can click on every post you see. Get just a few of these people (there are always more than enough) and the 'disagree' trolling begins. Remember this thread is in favor of a dislike button, so we are not talking about what people can currently do. We're talking about what happens when votes have no accountability or limits. Like I said, you can have your dislike button, if you remove the anonymity and add a limit to how many a person can give in a day.
You have yet to make a coherent case why your proposed system does anything at all, other than arbitrarily limit other peoples' actions.
If the worst-case scenario happens, and there is "disagree trolling," the consequences are as follows:
There are no consequences, because this is all just people talking.
I don't understand this weird nannying of air, of thoughts and opinions. "Accountability" and "limits" are only necessary to prevent harm. There is no harm here, there's just you wanting to police what people are allowed to say, and how they are able to express their opinions, for its own sake, for no tangible explicable reason whatsoever.
I know from experience. I've been to forums with a down vote option and it's always used for some petty popularity contest.
I prefer they do not have a down vote button. No one is stopping you from posting. This is my opinion so I don't have to prove anything. Some decisions are not made on fact, they are made on preference, and I prefer a forum without the insulting down votes. If you disagree, then write it.
I do disagree, and sense I don't have a button I fill forum with one line posts saying I disagree. That is why buttons exist, to reduce the post count.
Okay, so why do you disagree, other than ... you just do? Folks who've stated agreement need no further explanation, because the explanation was already sufficiently provided by the person with whom they agreed.
You however have offered no explanation for your disagreement ... other than to state you disagree.
That would be similar to someone simply stating, "I oppose peace."
I don't see how this is like saying I oppose peace. Could you eleborate?
Sure. If you say you oppose peace, but you provide no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps deranged.
Similarly, in debate if someone poses a point with explanation, you you simply state, "I disagree," with no explanation whatsoever, you come off simply as a moron ... or perhaps just ignorant of the most basic function of debate.
Would this be the same as just posting I agree?
No, because if you agree, the explanation for your agreement has already been aptly provided ... by the person with whom you agreed.Crotchety Old Man Guild
"Hey you, get off my lawn!"1 -
seaef✭✭✭✭✭BTW...
Thanks for making me more popular than ever...lol
"The Illuminati are very achievement focused. It's like Xbox - only everything is hardcore."
- Kirsten Geary2 -
Jankstar✭✭✭GrimGryphon wrote: »I think it all boils down to if they can push a button they can disagree anonymously, if they have to actually post, they have to defend their position or at least explain it... and everyone knows who they are.
Disagree, dislike or even LOL is easy to abuse because no one knows who did it.
Good point.
Instead of adding a dislike button, let's remove LOL since it's getting abused anyway.
If they take away the lol button, let's use the awesome button instead to give that I disagree feed back. Then if that goes away let's use the insightful button. Do not allow your voice to be silenced, everyone's opinion has value and adds to the community.
1
This discussion has been closed.