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!

13

Comments

  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,944

    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 every time two users don’t like each other.
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,944

    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. We may be approaching a point where the community simply isn’t worth saving.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,775



    A disagreement isn’t an example of bullying. If anything it’s less so then people firing off poorly composed hostile replies

    Hostile and insulting replies could lead to negative consequences. Just getting the mob to lower the A/D ratio to discredit a post will have none.


  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 5,644
    Imagine being intimidated by a disagree!

    Come on folks.
    Beastmen

  • saweendrasaweendra Registered Users Posts: 12,665

    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.
    Fair enough but for me , those who disagree with are well. You know
    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc
  • korradokortokorradokorto Registered Users Posts: 383
    Why you cant see who disagree with you ?
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 22,507

    Why you cant see who disagree with you ?

    I guess to prevent people antagonising each other.

    Like “Hey X always disagrees with me so I do the same now”.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 5,644
    ArneSo said:

    Why you cant see who disagree with you ?

    I guess to prevent people antagonising each other.

    Like “Hey X always disagrees with me so I do the same now”.
    Aww really? I was hoping to get to laugh openly at those who disagree. :(
    Beastmen

  • korradokortokorradokorto Registered Users Posts: 383
    Well i prefer when you have to take responsibility for your actions, even in a forum about a videogame.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,153

    Surge_2 said:

    Imagine being intimidated by a disagree!

    Come on folks.

    Yeah, because making people feel alone and isolated is definitely not something that's been used and abused in human history to silence dissent. I mean, it's only what Jehova's Witness and other sects use to keep their folks under control.

    I see nothing positive to come from this.
    The mentality that you’re advocating for is by far the more dangerous form of modern censorship imo.

    I’d say the far more prevalent use of ‘social control’ in modern times is actually the phenomenon where we’re supposed to blindly respect everyone’s over-sensitivity. The ‘overly sensitive/everyone’s a victim’ movements where we’re all supposed to cater to everyone’s potential triggers and the ‘fear of offending someone’ becomes so suffocating that nobody is allowed to speak.

    Not that I think the Total War forums are a meaningful part of the social milieu; but in general, I’m going to favor any system where people can share their honest opinion, rather than options for opinion expression removed because of some: ‘risk that it might offend someone’.

    Let them be offended and learn to healthily deal with it. That’s life. As much as the ‘modern woke’ want to remove all potential offense from the universe, I personally feel that learning how to healthily disagree and take offense is a useful skill. And a gaming forum seems as harmless a place as any for people to learn the skill.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 10,552
    In celebration, I have either agreed or disagreed with every post in this thread above this one! Unless new ones appear while I'm writing it, in which case I'll go in and fill them in.

    Seriously, though, I think it probably would be better if the "Disagree" button told you who disagreed as well as who agreed. While I can see @ArneSo 's scenario of tit-for-tat disagreement playing out a few times, if the disagree-ers are identified, people will have the opportunity to go "oh, that's X, they always disagree with what Y posts". Making it public means that the functions can make for a means of quickly showing who, well, agrees or disagrees with a particular point.

    When it comes to starting disagreement exchanges... well, a disagreement fight is probably still better than false flagging or an actual flamewar.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 10,552
    Valkaar said:

    Surge_2 said:

    Imagine being intimidated by a disagree!

    Come on folks.

    Yeah, because making people feel alone and isolated is definitely not something that's been used and abused in human history to silence dissent. I mean, it's only what Jehova's Witness and other sects use to keep their folks under control.

    I see nothing positive to come from this.
    The mentality that you’re advocating for is by far the more dangerous form of modern censorship imo.

    I’d say the far more prevalent use of ‘social control’ in modern times is actually the phenomenon where we’re supposed to blindly respect everyone’s over-sensitivity. The ‘overly sensitive/everyone’s a victim’ movements where we’re all supposed to cater to everyone’s potential triggers and the ‘fear of offending someone’ becomes so suffocating that nobody is allowed to speak.

    Not that I think the Total War forums are a meaningful part of the social milieu; but in general, I’m going to favor any system where people can share their honest opinion, rather than options for opinion expression removed because of some: ‘risk that it might offend someone’.

    Let them be offended and learn to healthily deal with it. That’s life. As much as the ‘modern woke’ want to remove all potential offense from the universe, I personally feel that learning how to healthily disagree and take offense is a useful skill. And a gaming forum seems as harmless a place as any for people to learn the skill.
    Had to add to this that given some of the personal attacks that get launched occasionally in this forum, someone getting upset over a few clicks of a disagree button is going to have a really tough time when someone REALLY disagrees with them. Not going to name any names here, but some people get really nasty when someone posts something in opposition to what they think.
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 22,507
    Draxynnic said:

    In celebration, I have either agreed or disagreed with every post in this thread above this one! Unless new ones appear while I'm writing it, in which case I'll go in and fill them in.

    Seriously, though, I think it probably would be better if the "Disagree" button told you who disagreed as well as who agreed. While I can see @ArneSo 's scenario of tit-for-tat disagreement playing out a few times, if the disagree-ers are identified, people will have the opportunity to go "oh, that's X, they always disagree with what Y posts". Making it public means that the functions can make for a means of quickly showing who, well, agrees or disagrees with a particular point.

    When it comes to starting disagreement exchanges... well, a disagreement fight is probably still better than false flagging or an actual flamewar.

    Yeah that’s a very good point. It would’ve been better if the disagrees were public too.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 1,358
    edited April 14

    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.
    Throwing wall after wall of text at people and treating debates as a battle of attrition are also forms of intimidation. If I know that disagreeing with a particular user will result in a multi-day, multi-page, back-and-forth I may be intimidated from posting my disagreement in the first place.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 5,644
    Even agrees are hidden? (I'm on a phone)

    Beastmen

  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 22,507
    Surge_2 said:

    Even agrees are hidden? (I'm on a phone)

    It was always like that. Even likes were only visible on PC for some reason.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 10,552
    Surge_2 said:

    Even agrees are hidden? (I'm on a phone)

    Yeah, I don't think there's a way to view them on phones? Maybe it depends on the phone in question. But you can see agrees on a PC by hovering over it with a cursor, same as the old Likes.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 5,644
    Draxynnic said:

    Surge_2 said:

    Even agrees are hidden? (I'm on a phone)

    Yeah, I don't think there's a way to view them on phones? Maybe it depends on the phone in question. But you can see agrees on a PC by hovering over it with a cursor, same as the old Likes.
    OK got it. That was the confusion on my part as on a phone I cannot see it regardless.
    Beastmen

  • korradokortokorradokorto Registered Users Posts: 383
    Seriously CA let me see my kill count i mean the disagree name list...
  • BonutzBonutz Registered Users Posts: 4,213
    The disagree button is either going to be a blessing in disguise or a Greek tragedy lol.
    I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass...and I’m all out of bubblegum.
  • NemoTheElf101NemoTheElf101 Registered Users Posts: 1,924
    As a regular Reddit user, like all gremlins, the dislikes and negative karma doesn't disuade most people at all. I wish more users could take a hint, but honestly there are just people who thrive from being told they're wrong. This forum is no different, and unlike Reddit you can post your heart out no matter how much people dislike it.

    Really, I'm pretty sure this addition was to mitigate people from abusing flagging, which was an actual problem.
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Registered Users Posts: 2,444
    I've already used it and regret doing so.

    Upvotes and downvotes are the reason why Reddit is a cancerous site, not simply because unpopular posts are subjected to crowd-sourced censorship, but because of 'psychic wounds' and emotional poison.

    You do not have to be 'over-sensitive' to feel the effects of a pile-on. Systems like this were designed with normalised individuals in mind; how they effect the average person. You only need to not deviate from that too far for the intended effect to work.

    What is the intended effect? In a practical sense specific to this forum, it's to stop people using the flag button on posts they simply disagree with it rather than ones that are uncivil, by giving them this as an alternative.

    I think this overlooks a possibly unintended chilling effect on forum users. On most sites that have implemented this, like Reddit, the intent is to modify behaviour and it is designed by behavioural psychologists to be effective on as many people as possible. If you make a popular post, you get rewarded with not only attention(humans crave this) but are informed of it's approving nature. If you make an unpopular post, there is also attention but depending on what the goals of your post were, it can be hurtful or corrupting to receive dislikes/disagrees.

    People who care about what others think, are conditioned to follow the crowd or stay silent. Other people are actively encouraged to behave worse, because any attention is better than no attention.

    In the absence of any specific explanation for why a post is down-voted, a good-faith poster is pushed towards reducing their participation. People will 'disagree' for *any* reason and without having to give a voice to it, the targeted person has to fill in the blanks. Replies that articulate a disagreement might be of low-quality, but can hoover up plenty of up-votes simply because they disagree; distorting and ruining any hope for constructive discussion.
  • NemoTheElf101NemoTheElf101 Registered Users Posts: 1,924

    I've already used it and regret doing so.

    Upvotes and downvotes are the reason why Reddit is a cancerous site, not simply because unpopular posts are subjected to crowd-sourced censorship, but because of 'psychic wounds' and emotional poison.

    You do not have to be 'over-sensitive' to feel the effects of a pile-on. Systems like this were designed with normalised individuals in mind; how they effect the average person. You only need to not deviate from that too far for the intended effect to work.

    What is the intended effect? In a practical sense specific to this forum, it's to stop people using the flag button on posts they simply disagree with it rather than ones that are uncivil, by giving them this as an alternative.

    I think this overlooks a possibly unintended chilling effect on forum users. On most sites that have implemented this, like Reddit, the intent is to modify behaviour and it is designed by behavioural psychologists to be effective on as many people as possible. If you make a popular post, you get rewarded with not only attention(humans crave this) but are informed of it's approving nature. If you make an unpopular post, there is also attention but depending on what the goals of your post were, it can be hurtful or corrupting to receive dislikes/disagrees.

    People who care about what others think, are conditioned to follow the crowd or stay silent. Other people are actively encouraged to behave worse, because any attention is better than no attention.

    In the absence of any specific explanation for why a post is down-voted, a good-faith poster is pushed towards reducing their participation. People will 'disagree' for *any* reason and without having to give a voice to it, the targeted person has to fill in the blanks. Replies that articulate a disagreement might be of low-quality, but can hoover up plenty of up-votes simply because they disagree; distorting and ruining any hope for constructive discussion.

    You guys give Reddit way too much credit. The website hardly has ad revenue and you make it sound like its creators are social engineers who want to condition humanity, and not a bunch of libertarians that got bored with Facebook.

    Honestly if you can't handle people disagreeing with you on social media, you shouldn't use social media.
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Registered Users Posts: 2,444
    The issue is not 'disagreement'. The issue is something else, which is then dishonestly called 'disagreement'.

    It exists because it does what it's intended to and it works; it would not exist otherwise.

    Just think why Reddit is a cesspit. Good people, gentle people, kind people, thoughtful people, who just so happen to say the 'wrong' thing, are discouraged from posting.

    Spiteful people, angry people, creatively abusive people, who said something attention-grabbing, regardless of whether anyone agrees or disagrees, are rewarded for posting and motivated to do more.
  • NemoTheElf101NemoTheElf101 Registered Users Posts: 1,924

    The issue is not 'disagreement'. The issue is something else, which is then dishonestly called 'disagreement'.

    It exists because it does what it's intended to and it works; it would not exist otherwise.

    Just think why Reddit is a cesspit. Good people, gentle people, kind people, thoughtful people, who just so happen to say the 'wrong' thing, are discouraged from posting.

    Spiteful people, angry people, creatively abusive people, who said something attention-grabbing, regardless of whether anyone agrees or disagrees, are rewarded for posting and motivated to do more.

    This sounds more like personal experience than anything that's an actual problem. Again, I use Reddit often and while this is 100 percent ancedotal, I have never had this problem. Every sub-reddit is more or less its own community, so any mass dislikes are either a result of brigaiding, or just deliberately going against the grain, and it's always obvious.

    People are going to agree and disagree for whatever reason. We just get to see it now.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 14,317
    DeadbyDawn forum looks ok, gives no info on 'flags' and just gives info on upvotes. In that sense flags or complaints can't be misused.

    I get some won't like being downvoted (a lot) but it really doesn't bother me. My primary concern is not to get a personal stroke from people I don't know, just giving an opinion, If I think I'm right I'll say it, if people don't agree - shrug.
    Interested in Sea Elves? Did you just call me a simpleton?

  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 5,644

    DeadbyDawn forum looks ok, gives no info on 'flags' and just gives info on upvotes. In that sense flags or complaints can't be misused.

    I get some won't like being downvoted (a lot) but it really doesn't bother me. My primary concern is not to get a personal stroke from people I don't know, just giving an opinion, If I think I'm right I'll say it, if people don't agree - shrug.

    Indeed so. I accept disagreements as people who just want to acknowledge that they are wrong.
    Beastmen

  • korradokortokorradokorto Registered Users Posts: 383
    Can we also get disagree badges ? Thanks.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 5,208
    Surge_2 said:

    DeadbyDawn forum looks ok, gives no info on 'flags' and just gives info on upvotes. In that sense flags or complaints can't be misused.

    I get some won't like being downvoted (a lot) but it really doesn't bother me. My primary concern is not to get a personal stroke from people I don't know, just giving an opinion, If I think I'm right I'll say it, if people don't agree - shrug.

    Indeed so. I accept disagreements as people who just want to acknowledge that they are wrong.
    I mean... Sometimes people may also just... You know... Disagree? Everything isn't always binary..
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 5,598
    *Sees a message about the forums*



    "Disagree button"


Sign In or Register to comment.