Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Mad Props for the new DISAGREE button!

24

Comments

  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the agree/disagree function should display the names of the responders.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.

  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the agree/disagree function should display the names of the responders.
    People will point to the A/D ratio of posts or the user as "proof" that the post/user is wrong instead of making any other argument, even if it's just down to a special clique obsessed about that one topic being responsible for it. And numbers, especially big numbers are intimidating.

  • HelhoundHelhound Registered Users Posts: 4,603

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904
    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    Thing is, the disagree button doesn't make any distinction between "disagree because of factual reasons" and "disagree out of spite".

    The button is a way to show hostility without even having to stick your neck out since it's anonymised.

  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976
    edited April 14

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the agree/disagree function should display the names of the responders.
    Number of times someone grew a thicker skin on the internet: 0

    Are we trying to solve the problem or not? The problem isn't that some random people on the internet need to mature and learn to take things in stride. The problem is that people are getting into screaming matches on the forums and derailing topics with personal grievances towards other forum users.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976
    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • HelhoundHelhound Registered Users Posts: 4,603

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904
    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
    How many people will instead or reading a post, look at the A/D buttons first, see a highly negative ratio and then decline to even read what's being posted?

  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
    How many people will instead or reading a post, look at the A/D buttons first, see a highly negative ratio and then decline to even read what's being posted?
    You're right, this probably will happen as well. Along with peoples opinions being skewed by the ratio. Even if someone makes a topic and posts an opinion you might otherwise like you'll see the ratio and not bother to post your support of said idea for fear of also being disliked.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • HelhoundHelhound Registered Users Posts: 4,603

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976
    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,179
    edited April 14

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
    How many people will instead or reading a post, look at the A/D buttons first, see a highly negative ratio and then decline to even read what's being posted?
    A ton I imagine. Heavily liked and disliked posts BOTH usually receive a good read because people want to see what all the fuss is about regardless. Like, if something is heavily disliked, I become mildly intrigued as to what exactly they said that triggered everyone.

    For me personally, the overall length of a post and/or the length of its individual paragraphs are a much more significant deterrent as to whether or not I read it (longer posts that are broken up in a well organized manner are definitely more appealing than blocks of text). While whether or not I think I’ll agree with the content of the post has a much smaller impact on what I read by comparison.
  • HelhoundHelhound Registered Users Posts: 4,603
    edited April 14

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKRegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 39,688
    edited April 14
    How do you know that people weren't using the flags v likes ration as a criterion for posting or not under the old system? Or that said ratio did or did not have any affect on the recipient's mood.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993
    Kind of off topic: This forum is glitchy as all hell.
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976
    edited April 14
    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKRegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 39,688
    edited April 14

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    I suspect that would have been the case regaredless of the new buttons, because the moderation guidelines have been tightened up.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904
    edited April 14

    How do you know that people weren't using the flags v likes ration as a criterion for posting or not under the old system? Or that said ratio did or did not have any affect on the recipient's mood.

    People false-flagged to initimadate and bully users and ideas they didn't like into silence. Now they got a perfectly rule-compliant tool to do so. I had people on more than one occasion try and get me to shut up by telling me that I was arguing a minority point of view.

    "You just have an extremely biased view on what you want this game to be and you're spamming posts about it and I don't know anyone who shares your vision. Maybe it's time to stop spamming."

    There, perfect example of this mindset. Why did CA decide to accomodate these people?

  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    I suspect that would have been the case regaredfless of the new buttons, because the moderation guidelines have been tightened up.
    Then I don't envy you your job. You're going to have to shift through a lot of toxic fights and explain to every user why they were punished. RIP free time.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993
    Seriously though, no amount of forum feedback can be as discouraging to posting as your posts being eaten by the forums or outright blocked by mods, I’m not sure which is happening.

    Anyone else having that issue today?

    I am willing to entertain the possibility the mods str8 up don’t like me.
  • HelhoundHelhound Registered Users Posts: 4,603

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    You can't guarantee anything really. I suppose speculation is a safe enough place to posture though. Your only opponent is time. Me, if we are playing the betting game, then I bet nothing changes. Those few who still post regularly here already know the score.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,179

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    I suspect that would have been the case regaredfless of the new buttons, because the moderation guidelines have been tightened up.
    Then I don't envy you your job. You're going to have to shift through a lot of toxic fights and explain to every user why they were punished. RIP free time.
    Except the new buttons actually help free up their time, because they only have to sort through legitimate flags. The previous ‘flags as disagree’ system had to prompt a mod’s attention every single time even if they didn’t take any action in the end.

    The new system should both reduce the total number of flags and increase the percentage of flags that have merit.

    The mods ALREADY have to wade through toxic discussions...so that part of the job remains unchanged.

    What’s different is they now have more time to take appropriate actions on said discussions, rather than spending time sifting through ‘disagreement flags’.
  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKRegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 39,688
    edited April 14

    Seriously though, no amount of forum feedback can be as discouraging to posting as your posts being eaten by the forums or outright blocked by mods, I’m not sure which is happening.

    Anyone else having that issue today?

    I am willing to entertain the possibility the mods str8 up don’t like me.

    That sounds like the forum autofilter at work.

    Edit: a couple of off-topic comments removed.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 2,976
    Valkaar said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    I suspect that would have been the case regaredfless of the new buttons, because the moderation guidelines have been tightened up.
    Then I don't envy you your job. You're going to have to shift through a lot of toxic fights and explain to every user why they were punished. RIP free time.
    Except the new buttons actually help free up their time, because they only have to sort through legitimate flags. The previous ‘flags as disagree’ system had to prompt a mod’s attention every single time even if they didn’t take any action in the end.

    The new system should both reduce the total number of flags and increase the percentage of flags that have merit.

    The mods ALREADY have to wade through toxic discussions...so that part of the job remains unchanged.

    What’s different is they now have more time to take appropriate actions on said discussions, rather than spending time sifting through ‘disagreement flags’.
    People who use Flags that way will continue to use flags that way. And I'm saying there will be more toxic discussions to wade through.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • SonevcoSonevco Registered Users Posts: 10


    People false-flagged to initimadate and bully users and ideas they didn't like into silence. Now they got a perfectly rule-compliant tool to do so. I had people on more than one occasion try and get me to shut up by telling me that I was arguing a minority point of view.

    "You just have an extremely biased view on what you want this game to be and you're spamming posts about it and I don't know anyone who shares your vision. Maybe it's time to stop spamming."

    There, perfect example of this mindset. Why did CA decide to accomodate these people?

    This is not like reddit where your comments get buried if you are downvoted, so that the first handfull of people who see your comment decide its fate.

    In this system your points will still be there for everyone to see and agree/disagree with.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,904
    Valkaar said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example, I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    I suspect that would have been the case regaredfless of the new buttons, because the moderation guidelines have been tightened up.
    Then I don't envy you your job. You're going to have to shift through a lot of toxic fights and explain to every user why they were punished. RIP free time.
    Except the new buttons actually help free up their time, because they only have to sort through legitimate flags. The previous ‘flags as disagree’ system had to prompt a mod’s attention every single time even if they didn’t take any action in the end.

    The new system should both reduce the total number of flags and increase the percentage of flags that have merit.

    The mods ALREADY have to wade through toxic discussions...so that part of the job remains unchanged.

    What’s different is they now have more time to take appropriate actions on said discussions, rather than spending time sifting through ‘disagreement flags’.
    They could have just removed the abuse/spam flags and made written reports a necessity just like it's now again and how it originally was on the old forum software. The one where we had an ignore function.

  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the a

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    This is an assertion that I don’t understand; on Reddit being downvoted to oblivion is a thing because your post disappears. Here it won’t, so there’s no oblivion to speak of. You just see that, hey, I’ve got 20 dislikes and 3 likes, people must not like my idea.

    I’ve been on the unpopular side of issues on these forums plenty of times and I wasn’t afraid of going against the grain, it’s not like any of us have to worry about actual confrontations here.

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
    How many people will instead or reading a post, look at the A/D buttons first, see a highly negative ratio and then decline to even read what's being posted?
    Some, but most likely individuals who weren’t passionate about posting something in the first place. Again, you can get a feel for how many people are for or against you generally just by how many users post what.

    If people are going to worry about like/dislikes as a kind of “points” system that’s on them for misinterpreting the purpose of the mechanic.

    As for people disagreeing out of spite, that already happens, only this way we hopefully won’t have to wade through a sewer of personal arguments and

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    You're not being fair here. While I do agree the term sociopath probably isn't an appropriate description of the individuals he's describing, the core of his argument remains without the term. If an individual demonstrates actual immaturity, this is not name calling here this is definition, by reacting to a simple dislike button with hostility, then that individual should not be surprised if they are in turn ignored.
    they're not going to react to the dislikes with hostility, the dislikes will put them in a worse mood and they'll react to the first user that acts confrontational towards them. I.E. escalating the situation instead of defusing it.
    You went back to that mood argument, so I guess my previous argument dodged you. I do tend to be wordy, so let me try again in laymans terms.

    I am not the arbiter of your **** mood.

    I am however, allowed to simply disagree and move on with my business. If an individual reacts to disagreement with needless hostility that is a fault of their character. Not the forum. Not the individual who disagreed.
    Thats fine and dandy but it doesn't solve the actual problem that started all of this.
    Yea but what you are proposing does not need to be taken on lieu of the disagreement feature. They're not mutually exclusive. And for what it's worth I do think that an ignore user feature isn't a bad idea. Both can exist.
    Fine, I can find that an agreeable compromise. But having one with out the other WILL make things worse here. I guarantee it. And there will be measurable metrics that can be observed, for example. I'll predict that mods will hand out "jails" or "suspensions" at triple the normal rate in the coming months. And it will be a direct result of people getting into more heated fights.
    Things have already been pretty terrible lately😤😰

    How do you know that people weren't using the flags v likes ration as a criterion for posting or not under the old system? Or that said ratio did or did not have any affect on the recipient's mood.

    People false-flagged to initimadate and bully users and ideas they didn't like into silence. Now they got a perfectly rule-compliant tool to do so.
    A disagreement isn’t an example of bullying. If anything it’s less so then people firing off poorly composed hostile replies
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the a

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    This is an assertion that I also don’t understand; on Reddit being downvoted to oblivion is a thing because your post disappears. Here it won’t, so there’s no oblivion to speak of. You just see that, hey, I’ve got 20 dislikes and 3 likes, people must not like my idea.

    I’ve been on the unpopular side of issues on these forums plenty of times and I wasn’t afraid of going against the grain, it’s not like any of us have to worry about actual confrontations here.
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,993

    I think l

    Helhound said:

    "No, I don’t think it will devolve this place into a ‘Reddit-type’ board, where it’s basically just a popularity contest."

    That's exactly what will happen.

    But no ones opinion is going to disappear so “downvotes” don’t even matter.
    Doesn't matter, this will make things worse and will increase hostility. Hear me now, quote me later.
    Both points require further explanation or stand as speculation. In what way would a simple disagreement function "make things worse" and how would it "increase hostility"? Remember, disagreement here won't run the risk of shuffle similar to Reddit. The post remains right in the order placed.
    For all intents and purposes the "disagree" button is a dislike button. You think people who get buried in dislikes are going to go "oh gee maybe I had a bad take." No, they'll be put in a worse mood and become more defensive and lash out more. Do you think that people who dislike a post will simply hit "disagree" and move on with their lives? No they'll disagree, flag, and post nasty comments pointing out how many people hate the user. This will end poorly. I'll make a bag of popcorn now.
    I think lashing out simply because one’s opinions are unpopular will only show us who the sociopaths to be disregarded are
    See? You're already calling these hypothetical people names. This is going to intensify the established hostilities that already exist. What was needed was an ignore button that hides posts and threads for users you don't care to interact with.
    There’s also such a thing as being overly sensitive. A lot of folks around here would be well served by trying to grow a thicker skin.

    @ShiroAmakusa75 how do envision agree/disagree ratios being used against someone? I do agree with you that the a

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    This is an assertion that I don’t understand; on Reddit being downvoted to oblivion is a thing because your post disappears. Here it won’t, so there’s no oblivion to speak of. You just see that, hey, I’ve got 20 dislikes and 3 likes, people must not like my idea.

    I’ve been on the unpopular side of issues on these forums plenty of times and I wasn’t afraid of going against the grain, it’s not like any of us have to worry about actual confrontations here.

    Helhound said:

    Helhound said:



    There are a great many things that could be summarized and do not require a reasoned post. Anything that constitutes an opinion for example. If what you have to say will in no way contribute or affect the discussion, then a simple disagree is easier than 11000 posts that follow that can all be summarized into basically that. See any thread started by Veresh for example. There is also no mob rule here, disagreement has no consequence. It just starts and ends there, a civil disagreement. The flag system and moderators remain the rule. Not your afeared mob.

    Veresh and co. are huge outliers, so designing a system around them is a major mistake. What about people who have ideas that aren't popular, like for example they want unit X over unit Y where Y is some forum darling? They get disagreed into oblivion by a dozen posters who are obsessed with this unit with no need for anyone to explain why and get intimidated into falling in line. Does that sound enjoyable?

    This system simply doesn't encourage a healthy forum atmosphere, it instead encourages competition and mob rule.
    How do they get "disagreed with into oblivion"?
    If he disagrees pile up, that alone will have an intimidating effect and discourage people from speaking their minds. I mean, "lots of people disagree = idea is wrong" is not such a far-reaching conclusion to make even though that's not what it shows.

    That's why I don't like such feature. Those who disagree should have to explain their reasoning rather than just press a button.
    This isn't "into oblivion".

    Your argument right here relies on a very specific assumption. That by virtue of being able to see disagreement by number, that an individual will immediately in turn feel shut down and never bother asking why they're being disagreed with. You are assuming the mental state of every individual to receive a large quantity of dislikes and in a way that does not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to maturity. You also highlighted that not all opinions that are disagreed with en masse are wrong, and here you are entirely correct. Thankfully your opinion will not vanish into the void, or "into oblivion", like Reddit, and will instead remain in the exact same fashion as every other thread posted before or after.
    How many people will instead or reading a post, look at the A/D buttons first, see a highly negative ratio and then decline to even read what's being posted?
    Some, but most likely individuals who weren’t passionate about posting something in the first place. Again, you can get a feel for how many people are for or against you generally just by how many users post what.

    If people are going to worry about like/dislikes as a kind of “points” system that’s on them for misinterpreting the purpose of the mechanic.

    As for people disagreeing out of spite, that already happens, only this way we hopefully won’t have to wade through a sewer of personal arguments and **** contests whenever two individuals don’t like each other.
Sign In or Register to comment.