Forum buttons

Lycidas

Let's continue this conversation here rather than Tweets, eh? @Xenthos @Maligorn @Nelras etc. Personally I feel like all we needed to do was change the 'Flag' option and everything would've been fine. Can we please discuss the actual merits of Agree and Disagree? This isn't about Flag.

Xenthos

I feel that it was about the whole suite of options.  The shakeup is a good thing.  As I said, I don't mind the Agree flag coming back, but if the only way to get the Agree flag is also the Disagree flag, then we're better off with neither.

I do think that the discussion was pretty much winding down though.  Maligorn stated that he doesn't really see it changing back (neither do I).  We've mostly just been discussing our points of view on the whole thing, and it's mostly just gotten to a lot of things being restated.  The only new stuff was the Flag option which you're asking not to discuss here anyways.

Lycidas

Well, because I think the changes to the Flag were universally agreed upon, unless I made a mistake reading the conversation. So what exactly is wrong with Disagree? It doesn't detract from anything but acts as a way to show your opinion on said post.

Nelras

Just copying my last post over as it was made just before this thread and people should have a chance to respond to it.

Nelras said:

Xenthos said:

Nelras said:

Please can we just keep one thing straight here as it seems to have been getting blurred over the course of recent posts.
The dislike button and the flag system are not, and were not, the same thing. Flags are for reporting things to the admin, dislike is a method for expressing just that - that you dislike the contents of a post.
The two were (and should be) used in different ways. The changes to the flag options are not really being questioned here.

They're all part of the same suite of negative reactions.  Differing uses, but both with the same goal per the design of these forums (crowdsourcing curation of the forum contents / conversation to the posters).

https://docs.vanillaforums.com/help/reputation/reactions/

Specifically:

"There is always the potential for abuse when you open up avenues of self-curation in a community. In general, we discourage the use of any negative reactions unless there are established guidelines for their use in your community."

Even from the definition posted on that page, the disagree option is not a negative reaction. Dislike is the 'negative reaction'.

Disagree - "Users that disagree"... "disagreement is highly subjective"... "doesn't ...bury the post or give any points."

Using negative reactions (emphasis mine)

The current default for negative reactions in new installations of Vanilla is for them to remove 1 point from the discussion or comment, but to have no effect on the point total of the user who made the post. This discourages abuse of negative reactions beyond simple voting scenarios.

*edit* was missing the word from in my first sentence.

Kethaera

Disagreement is not a negative reaction. The fact that this is a subject of debate is a fundamental problem in how people on this forum approach disagreement.

Arix

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

Kethaera

Arix said:

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

People could still do that with flag. As annoying or ego-offending as the abuse of the disagree button may be- why is that a problem? It doesn't hurt you to be disagreed with, and from what I understand it doesn't affect points either, if one cared about such things. 

Nelras

Arix said:

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

We did, there is no way to deny that. By the same token, we also had people who used it because they disagreed with the post. Now we will have people running around the forums LOLing at every post made by people they didn't like and the people who want to actually disagree will have no readily available avenue to do so. 

I think that abuse of the flag system is separate to this, and is an issue for the admins to deal with as they see fit.

Xenthos

Nelras said:

Arix said:

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

We did, there is no way to deny that. By the same token, we also had people who used it because they disagreed with the post. Now we will have people running around the forums LOLing at every post made by people they didn't like and the people who want to actually disagree will have no readily available avenue to do so. 

I think that abuse of the flag system is separate to this, and is an issue for the admins to deal with as they see fit.

LOLing at posts in an attempt to troll is really not working out that well imo.  The meaning is too nebulous, which robs it of any impact.  A debate can be had as to whether it even needs to exist, but people running around wasting their time flagging with it... well, if that's what they want to do, whatever, I guess!

There is a readily available avenue of disagreeing with posts though!  Here it is.  <--  (And around we go in circles once more)

However, what can't be done is going around pressing Flag on every post made by someone you don't like (despite the claim made a couple posts back), 'cause doing that now sends a notice to the administration immediately and they're not going to be appreciative of that.

Kethaera

Xenthos said:

Nelras said:

Arix said:

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

We did, there is no way to deny that. By the same token, we also had people who used it because they disagreed with the post. Now we will have people running around the forums LOLing at every post made by people they didn't like and the people who want to actually disagree will have no readily available avenue to do so. 

I think that abuse of the flag system is separate to this, and is an issue for the admins to deal with as they see fit.

LOLing at posts in an attempt to troll is really not working out that well imo.  The meaning is too nebulous, which robs it of any impact.  A debate can be had as to whether it even needs to exist, but people running around wasting their time flagging with it... well, if that's what they want to do, whatever, I guess!

There is a readily available avenue of disagreeing with posts though!  Here it is.  <--  (And around we go in circles once more)

However, what can't be done is going around pressing Flag on every post made by someone you don't like (despite the claim made a couple posts back), 'cause doing that now sends a notice to the administration immediately and they're not going to be appreciative of that.

The functionality still exists. And that isn't an argument against the disagree reaction. As for LOLing... seems like quite a few people who aren't you agree that it does work that way.

Xenthos

Kethaera said:

Xenthos said:

Nelras said:

Arix said:

Well we used to have people who would just run around the forums disagreeing/flagging every post made by people they didn't like

We did, there is no way to deny that. By the same token, we also had people who used it because they disagreed with the post. Now we will have people running around the forums LOLing at every post made by people they didn't like and the people who want to actually disagree will have no readily available avenue to do so. 

I think that abuse of the flag system is separate to this, and is an issue for the admins to deal with as they see fit.

LOLing at posts in an attempt to troll is really not working out that well imo.  The meaning is too nebulous, which robs it of any impact.  A debate can be had as to whether it even needs to exist, but people running around wasting their time flagging with it... well, if that's what they want to do, whatever, I guess!

There is a readily available avenue of disagreeing with posts though!  Here it is.  <--  (And around we go in circles once more)

However, what can't be done is going around pressing Flag on every post made by someone you don't like (despite the claim made a couple posts back), 'cause doing that now sends a notice to the administration immediately and they're not going to be appreciative of that.

The functionality still exists. And that isn't an argument against the disagree reaction. As for LOLing... seems like quite a few people who aren't you agree that it does work that way.

Hey, if you want to be negative about LOLs, I can't stop you.  Not everyone has to see them the say way though.

Maligorn

Oh...well...I forgot that disagreeing with people was "trolling". Oops.

Hey, are you going to respond to Nelras taking your "evidence" from the intent of Vanilla forums? It kind of tears apart your argument. You know. That "disagrees" were negative.

Kethaera

Xenthos said:

Hey, if you want to be negative about LOLs, I can't stop you.  Not everyone has to see them the say way though.

People disagreeing with an interpretation of a button reaction? Wow, how negative of them.

Xenthos

Maligorn said:

Oh...well...I forgot that disagreeing with people was "trolling". Oops.

Hey, are you going to respond to Nelras taking your "evidence" from the intent of Vanilla forums? It kind of tears apart your argument. You know. That "disagrees" were negative.

It does?  It specifically states "since disagreements are highly subjective".  They stated that they gave that one special rules because of its nature, so of course it isn't impacted by the defaults.  "Hey, I set default values, this one deviates from it, here's why it deviates."

Lycidas

It states that the Disagree button does not impact the poster in a negative fashion.

Maligorn

So you admit that your opinion on the disagree button is purely subjective. I can live with that.

Xenthos

Lycidas said:

It states that the Disagree button does not impact the poster in a negative fashion.

  You're missing the rest of the sentence: "since disagreements are highly subjective."

Nelras

Yes, it says that they are highly subjective. By being subjective, it would mean that their are neither objectively positive nor negative. Furthermore, as @Lycidas says, they do not impact the poster in a negative fashion.

Xenthos

Nelras said:

Yes, it says that they are highly subjective. By being subjective, it would mean that their are neither objectively positive nor negative. Furthermore, as @Lycidas says, they do not impact the poster in a negative fashion.

That's... not what it means, no.  The negative usage of it isn't the subjective part.  The subjective part is in determining how you're applying the thing.  As has been pointed out, sometimes it was just "mark the posts of people you don't like."

Lycidas

To put this into an example, I'm going to give an example post:

"Hey guys, I think we should (insert overly done complaint) to bring balance."

You can hit a Disagree button or you could respond to the post like:

"That sounds pretty dumb, everything is fine!"

The posted response has more of a negative impact than the Disagree button. Granted you could say not all the response posts are in this same vein, but there have been plenty of posts just like this, even when we had Disagree.

Xenthos

Lycidas said:

To put this into an example, I'm going to give an example post:

"Hey guys, I think we should (insert overly done complaint) to bring balance."

You can hit a Disagree button or you could respond to the post like:

"That sounds pretty dumb, everything is fine!"

The posted response has more of a negative impact than the Disagree button. Granted you could say not all the response posts are in this same vein, but there have been plenty of posts just like this, even when we had Disagree.

Preferably we wouldn't have posts that go "That sounds pretty dumb, everything is fine!" (though yes, that may be asking too much-- as you say, it can and has happened, and probably will again).  The disagree flag doesn't stop that, though (which admittedly you do point out).

Kethaera

Xenthos said:

Nelras said:

Yes, it says that they are highly subjective. By being subjective, it would mean that their are neither objectively positive nor negative. Furthermore, as @Lycidas says, they do not impact the poster in a negative fashion.

That's... not what it means, no.  The negative usage of it isn't the subjective part.  The subjective part is in determining how you're applying the thing.  As has been pointed out, sometimes it was just "mark the posts of people you don't like."

In other words, if you view something as negative, then it is objectively negative, regardless of anyone else's opinion(including the developers), and regardless of what the definition of "subjective" is.

Aydeksa

Use me as a disagree button for removing disagree button

Lycidas

Aydeksa said:

Use me as a disagree button for removing disagree button

Instructions unclear, Aydeska stuck in ceiling fan.

Aydeksa

i feel like the buttons got changed because kool aid chuggers typed furiously to the support staff at perceived abuse

Lycidas

It was an entirely unannounced change, no warning, no posting saying they were going to happen. I literally posted on a thread and poof, things were changed.

Saran

So cliffnotes?

Disagree is bad because it's highly subjective and could be taken negatively
LOL is fine even though it's highly subjective and could be taken negatively

edit: At the end of the day, the main issue I personally had with the disagree button was just people trying to police others usage of it.
From memory, LOL was removed from the starmourn forums because it was pretty much only ever used negatively.

Lavinya

I feel like Xenthos feels the disagree button is negative and abusive. HE uses it in this manner - like as retaliation after disagreeing with one of his posts.

I think we're all aware of your feelings on the matter Xenthos, but there seems to be overwhelming disagreement with your sentiments. You may not like the way they were used, but you're definitely in the minority here, and defending the change that seems to be pretty generally disliked (the removal agree/disagree specifically) beyond the first 'I like the change' is just an argument in futility. Sometimes neither side will change their opinion no matter how much you debate it.


I really dislike that agree and disagree are gone. I'm ok with the heart. I think the LOL is more troll than anything else. Agreeing doesn't necessarily validate the person, and disagreeing also doesn't suggest insult to the person - just the content. 

Bring back agree and disagree!

Arix

Oh, I'm fine with an agree/disagree button. It might have been flagging that those people were doing, because they would just run around handing out abuse/off topic flags. Dunno what the lol button does as opposed to like and heart which seem redundant

Maligorn

Lavinya said:

I feel like Xenthos feels the disagree button is negative and abusive. HE uses it in this manner - like as retaliation after disagreeing with one of his posts.

Another huge QFT - somebody finally said it.

Saran

Just thinking about it, like LOL might be used because something is actually funny sure. But it actually seems worse than disagree when it’s used negatively, cause it’s not just “I don’t agree with this post” it’s elevating it to mocking the post.