The "Thank You" button was a great success! It eliminated the need to just quote something and say, "I agree with this!"
The liogical next step is a way to non-verbally say, "I disagree with this!" and this could be done with a "No thank you!" button. What do you think?
Unlike an "I agree"/"thank you" system, where further commenting may be unnecessary, just saying "I disagree"/"no thank you" wouldn't be helpful at all. Unless you state why, it is pointless.
Additionally, I am generally skeptical of a system that feels inherently negative. I'd rather just have the thanks button to promote goodposting in a way that, you know, spreads "happy feelings", rather than one which basically says "this post sucks" without any explanation. It may have merit, since promoting goodposting is A+ and it could be a reasonable supplement to the thank you button, but at this point you can color me skeptic.
Like, I foresee that a "dislike" button would generate lots of "this guy hates me!"-like feelings, and that's not really a good thing.
There's nothing actually wrong with the concept of the "No Thanks" button, but how it will genuinely be taken will lead to too much negativity, and hostile feelings. I'm not suggesting that everything be a golden ray of sunshine in here, but this would single people out a little too much, make them feel disliked/hated/ostracized/etc.
I frequent some other forums with "reputation" functions for both positive and negative reps, and trust me, adding in a negative feedback button doesn't do any good. All it does is promote hurt feelings and forum wide flame wars and "neg-fests".
I also agree that without context, "I disagree" is a rather pointless thing to say, while "I agree" is always going to have the context of the post you are agreeing with as context.
I think one look at Reddit's upvote/downvote system shows the flaws inherent in those kinds of things. Human nature being what it is, we don't really need people "no thank you"-ing posts just because they don't like the poster, or joining a "no thank you" brigade to spam them on a single post. Even if there's no functional point to it, it's just a kind of pettiness I think wouldn't work out well to enable.
It's the internet. If you hit "No Thank You" and show that you're disagreeing with someone's opinion, they're more than likely going to get offended and become disgruntled. Then, since most human beings -when hidden behind the veil of anonymity- tend to have more fun finding ways to abuse tools that present some sort of negative consequence moreso than tools that produce something positive, it'd end up being abused. In other words, we'd have "No Thank Yous" everywhere compared to the few that use the current system (relative to the size of our userbase).
Personally, I appreciate the upvote/downvote system as it's used on the World of Warcraft official forums. When a post is down voted enough, it automatically becomes hidden and sends a report to the moderators. I think in places like the Rumor Mill a system like that which essentially allows the userbase to self-moderate can be extremely useful.
But, that's also looking at it in the context of a completely different community. Over there, two or three word posts that we give warnings for Spam for here go unhindered because they don't care about very short posts. That's a side effect of that community having a far greater tendency to begin flaming and trolling each other, so what we consider spammy posts is the least of their concerns over yonder.
With all that said, while I'm not suggesting we implement that specific mechanic here, I do feel we are in need of a new system. While the rule sets here have gone through many revisions for the sake of clarity or eliminating grey areas, the truth is we are still working on a system that hasn't grown with the internet over the years. I brought over a lot of how MTGNews did things to help establish and retain at least some order during a very, very chaotic time. Since then, via our ever-revolving door of staff, most changes (such as the retooling for the card system) have essentially been tweaking a very outdated system. Perhaps if a new system were ever developed and implemented, it could utilize some tools that allow the user base to self moderate in areas like the Rumor Mill, while be inactive in areas such as the competitive forums (mostly Standard) since those are areas that are... very volatile, when it comes to how users feel about their opinions.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I could see having a ":thumbsup:/:thumbsdown:" in the rumor mill, to rate the likelihood of a rumor, but to try and actually moderate the post in regards to its content with such, or make anything like that forum-wide... I can't really get behind that.
Mafia could steal this, for game use.
But once we start using it in Community Issues or Standard Discussion.. we start getting into the hostile feelings, etc.
I just want to chime in to state that while I can see some benefits, such as the ones that Feyd just listed, I do not believe that the benefits outweigh the expected harms of such a system.
I believe that a Thumbs-Down system is too likely to be used (and interpreted) as a way to stick it to the poster without having to exert any real effort. If you disagree with the poster, I am of the opinion that you should at least be courteous enough to explain why you don't like the post in question. A thumbs-down post discourages actual constructive criticism and discussion of the issues, which is where the discussion and effort really ought to be. By contrast, simply saying "I agree" or similar doesn't really advance the discussion, so replacing that with a "Thumbs Up" is beneficial to the extent that the same information is conveyed with less spam. If you like it, it's pretty self-explanatory. If you don't, there's a lot of things that could be disagreeable.
And if the post is so egregiously awful as to be offensive or malicious, the report button is right there and does the job better.
(EDIT: I realize on second glance that I more or less just repeated the same things that Sene just said above, but it's relevant enough that I think it's worth restating)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former Level 2 Judge (Retired / Renounced)
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
I agree with Sene and Teia.
I have thought of a feature I found absent, recently. However, it's not as though the function is not already possible.
Some posts are made which are so idiotic, or just ignorant of posts before them, that answering them would be spam. In this situation, and in other situations, sometimes you want to begin a private conversation while quoting the post, providing the link back to the post in-context in the thread.
The alternative is to ignore it (which doesn't feel constructive), or to wait for more idiocy to crop up to the point it is in a moderator's hands.
Either way, I thought there could be a more helpful way to inform a user (probably a new user - hopefully a new user) they are missing something, they are being impolite, they are more-or-less doing 'Nothankyou-worthy' things.
Currently you need to quote the post, display BBCode, cut the code, go back, open a private message to that user from the thread, and post the Code back into the PM.
Any feature at all that allows a user to begin a criticism of the user's single post, with trivial linkback to the source thread, but out of the public flow of the thread, would achieve the interest here. Perhaps if "Send a private message quoting this post" were available in the username context menu.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
There are quite a few people here who could use some readjustment of what passes for their "social graces" that wouldn't be covered by infractions.
People need to accept the reality that all this "feel good," "don't hurt anyone's feelings" garbage enables the entitlement of people to act like jackasses.
You know how you get a jackass to stop being one? Repeatedly point out where and why he is a jackass. Either he straightens up or he leaves you alone, because you've shown him that you won't stand for his poor behavior.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Now playing Transformers: Legends. 27-time top tier finisher and admin of the TFL Wikia site.
There are quite a few people here who could use some readjustment of what passes for their "social graces" that wouldn't be covered by infractions.
People need to accept the reality that all this "feel good," "don't hurt anyone's feelings" garbage enables the entitlement of people to act like jackasses.
You know how you get a jackass to stop being one? Repeatedly point out where and why he is a jackass. Either he straightens up or he leaves you alone, because you've shown him that you won't stand for his poor behavior.
As someone pointed out before, there's already a fix for that: infractions.
If someone is actually being enough of a jackass to warrant people responding as such, then a moderator almost certainly will be doing something about it anyway. Especially on this website, where trigger-happiness in the moderation has come out a bit more often than some people think it should
My take on an upvote/downvote type of system is that it's absolutely horrible and should never be added to any forum at all. It's the major reason that Reddit is the horrid cesspool that it is, it encourages bandwagoning and whatnot. And for another example, I play League of Legends, the forums for which have a self-moderating upvote/downvote system that encourages people to pile on downvotes as fast as possible for posts they dislike, oftentimes by making multiple accounts. It's a complete trainwreck, and even if there are steps taken to make it less of an issue on here it would still cause way more problems than it would be worth for the minor benefits you get out of downvoting a post.
So does the "Debate" section of this (and most) sites.
My opinion hasn't changed.
When you disagree with someone via a post, you need to provide content for your disagreement. Content that can be replied to, and form a discussion.
A "I don't like you" is simply a passive aggressive way to annoy people, and just engenders hurt feelings and bitterness, with no content or conversation.
There's nothing actually wrong with the concept of the "No Thanks" button, but how it will genuinely be taken will lead to too much negativity, and hostile feelings. I'm not suggesting that everything be a golden ray of sunshine in here, but this would single people out a little too much, make them feel disliked/hated/ostracized/etc.
Well said. I don't want users to feel ostracized just b/c they might be new to a format/game/forum etc....
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The liogical next step is a way to non-verbally say, "I disagree with this!" and this could be done with a "No thank you!" button. What do you think?
My YouTube Channel
Additionally, I am generally skeptical of a system that feels inherently negative. I'd rather just have the thanks button to promote goodposting in a way that, you know, spreads "happy feelings", rather than one which basically says "this post sucks" without any explanation. It may have merit, since promoting goodposting is A+ and it could be a reasonable supplement to the thank you button, but at this point you can color me skeptic.
Like, I foresee that a "dislike" button would generate lots of "this guy hates me!"-like feelings, and that's not really a good thing.
There's nothing actually wrong with the concept of the "No Thanks" button, but how it will genuinely be taken will lead to too much negativity, and hostile feelings. I'm not suggesting that everything be a golden ray of sunshine in here, but this would single people out a little too much, make them feel disliked/hated/ostracized/etc.
No longer staff here.
I frequent some other forums with "reputation" functions for both positive and negative reps, and trust me, adding in a negative feedback button doesn't do any good. All it does is promote hurt feelings and forum wide flame wars and "neg-fests".
I also agree that without context, "I disagree" is a rather pointless thing to say, while "I agree" is always going to have the context of the post you are agreeing with as context.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
(Also known as Xenphire)
Hoi, hoi, u embleer hrair
M'saion ulé hraka vair.
He said "No" to me directly, s'all I'm sayin'.
My YouTube Channel
Personally, I appreciate the upvote/downvote system as it's used on the World of Warcraft official forums. When a post is down voted enough, it automatically becomes hidden and sends a report to the moderators. I think in places like the Rumor Mill a system like that which essentially allows the userbase to self-moderate can be extremely useful.
But, that's also looking at it in the context of a completely different community. Over there, two or three word posts that we give warnings for Spam for here go unhindered because they don't care about very short posts. That's a side effect of that community having a far greater tendency to begin flaming and trolling each other, so what we consider spammy posts is the least of their concerns over yonder.
With all that said, while I'm not suggesting we implement that specific mechanic here, I do feel we are in need of a new system. While the rule sets here have gone through many revisions for the sake of clarity or eliminating grey areas, the truth is we are still working on a system that hasn't grown with the internet over the years. I brought over a lot of how MTGNews did things to help establish and retain at least some order during a very, very chaotic time. Since then, via our ever-revolving door of staff, most changes (such as the retooling for the card system) have essentially been tweaking a very outdated system. Perhaps if a new system were ever developed and implemented, it could utilize some tools that allow the user base to self moderate in areas like the Rumor Mill, while be inactive in areas such as the competitive forums (mostly Standard) since those are areas that are... very volatile, when it comes to how users feel about their opinions.
(Also known as Xenphire)
Especially in Mafia.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Mafia could steal this, for game use.
But once we start using it in Community Issues or Standard Discussion.. we start getting into the hostile feelings, etc.
No longer staff here.
I believe that a Thumbs-Down system is too likely to be used (and interpreted) as a way to stick it to the poster without having to exert any real effort. If you disagree with the poster, I am of the opinion that you should at least be courteous enough to explain why you don't like the post in question. A thumbs-down post discourages actual constructive criticism and discussion of the issues, which is where the discussion and effort really ought to be. By contrast, simply saying "I agree" or similar doesn't really advance the discussion, so replacing that with a "Thumbs Up" is beneficial to the extent that the same information is conveyed with less spam. If you like it, it's pretty self-explanatory. If you don't, there's a lot of things that could be disagreeable.
And if the post is so egregiously awful as to be offensive or malicious, the report button is right there and does the job better.
(EDIT: I realize on second glance that I more or less just repeated the same things that Sene just said above, but it's relevant enough that I think it's worth restating)
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
Have played duals? I have PucaPoints for them!
(Credit to DarkNightCavalier)
$tandard: Too poor.
Modern:
- GW Birthing Pod(?)
Legacy:
- UWR Delver
I have thought of a feature I found absent, recently. However, it's not as though the function is not already possible.
Some posts are made which are so idiotic, or just ignorant of posts before them, that answering them would be spam. In this situation, and in other situations, sometimes you want to begin a private conversation while quoting the post, providing the link back to the post in-context in the thread.
The alternative is to ignore it (which doesn't feel constructive), or to wait for more idiocy to crop up to the point it is in a moderator's hands.
Either way, I thought there could be a more helpful way to inform a user (probably a new user - hopefully a new user) they are missing something, they are being impolite, they are more-or-less doing 'Nothankyou-worthy' things.
Currently you need to quote the post, display BBCode, cut the code, go back, open a private message to that user from the thread, and post the Code back into the PM.
Any feature at all that allows a user to begin a criticism of the user's single post, with trivial linkback to the source thread, but out of the public flow of the thread, would achieve the interest here. Perhaps if "Send a private message quoting this post" were available in the username context menu.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
There are quite a few people here who could use some readjustment of what passes for their "social graces" that wouldn't be covered by infractions.
People need to accept the reality that all this "feel good," "don't hurt anyone's feelings" garbage enables the entitlement of people to act like jackasses.
You know how you get a jackass to stop being one? Repeatedly point out where and why he is a jackass. Either he straightens up or he leaves you alone, because you've shown him that you won't stand for his poor behavior.
The MirroCube - 420 card Mirrodin themed cube
And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you need to be offended. But here's my apology and one more thing...
How does a "no thank you" button do that?
All it would do is engender bad feelings and bitter flamewars.
My opinion hasn't changed.
The MirroCube - 420 card Mirrodin themed cube
And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you need to be offended. But here's my apology and one more thing...
As someone pointed out before, there's already a fix for that: infractions.
If someone is actually being enough of a jackass to warrant people responding as such, then a moderator almost certainly will be doing something about it anyway. Especially on this website, where trigger-happiness in the moderation has come out a bit more often than some people think it should
My take on an upvote/downvote type of system is that it's absolutely horrible and should never be added to any forum at all. It's the major reason that Reddit is the horrid cesspool that it is, it encourages bandwagoning and whatnot. And for another example, I play League of Legends, the forums for which have a self-moderating upvote/downvote system that encourages people to pile on downvotes as fast as possible for posts they dislike, oftentimes by making multiple accounts. It's a complete trainwreck, and even if there are steps taken to make it less of an issue on here it would still cause way more problems than it would be worth for the minor benefits you get out of downvoting a post.
When you disagree with someone via a post, you need to provide content for your disagreement. Content that can be replied to, and form a discussion.
A "I don't like you" is simply a passive aggressive way to annoy people, and just engenders hurt feelings and bitterness, with no content or conversation.
Well said. I don't want users to feel ostracized just b/c they might be new to a format/game/forum etc....