I think "disagree" (thumbs down) and laugh emojis degrade this community

[canesalato]

I am afraid it was not a good idea to introduce "dislikes" (thumbs down) and "laugh" emojis in this forum.

I admit, I am guilty of using them (the moment something is introduced, users will use it), but I would like to take a moment and reflect on what they provide to us and what are instead their negative consequences.

I believe they make the forum a more toxic place, where I can just thumb down opposite opinions while barely reading them, and without losing any second writing a rebuttal, or expressing any idea at all.

Quick, easy, and stupid.
What do we get in exchange? Where is the added value?

If I could choose, I would remove "likes" as well, but I understand they serve a function, they can provide a positive value.
But "dislikes/disagrees/thumbs down/laughs are something particularly toxic and silly, in my opinion. We are not mature enough, as a community. And If such a mature community exists on the internet, I still have to see it...

 

[arn]

FWIW I don’t think the laugh reaction is typically a negative one. It’s when you find something funny.

 

[canesalato]

FWIW I don’t think the laugh reaction is typically a negative one. It’s when you find something funny.

True, I am aware of that.
It's supposed to mean "I am laughing WITH you". Alas, it is quite often used to say "I am laughing AT you".

 

[TiggrToo]

FWIW I don’t think the laugh reaction is typically a negative one. It’s when you find something funny.

You must be new around here, then...

Joking aside, I often see the LOL as a lesser or greater version of a “disagree”.

For example, if I see a post that I feel is so wrong that it’s not salvageable then I go for a LOL as opposed to a “dislike”. Don’t really think about the points position, more how do I feel about the post.

 

[canesalato]

Example: I went to the MR homepage just now, opened the most recent news (https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/27/iphone-12-no-charger-in-box-rumor/), looked at the FIRST comment....and... here it is. Human nature, it can't be helped:

 

[jbachandouris]

I disagree. I think the thumbs down is the best way to state not agreeing with someone without engaging in an argument as it seems many don't know how to have a civilized discussion.

 

[ericgtr12]

FWIW I've always been a proponent of the thumbs down icon. However, I've experimented with implementing it elsewhere and can tell you that I haven't seen it used once, and this is in a place with a lot of heated debate. I am quite surprised by this result TBH. Would be interested to know how much it's used here in the news forum.

 

[canesalato]

I disagree. I think the thumbs down is the best way to state not agreeing with someone without engaging in an argument as it seems many don't know how to have a civilized discussion.

I don't think laughing at what people write or adding thumbs down is so civilized. Nothing wrong in disagreeing but let's discuss, maybe we can find a common ground. Isn't discussion the whole point of a forum?

Anyway, I see your point and it's a good one. I wonder, and maybe moderators and admins can contribute to our conversation, because they frequently monitor the forums: did you notice that the discussion, on average, has become more civilized after dislikes and laughs were introduced?

 

[canesalato]

FWIW I've always been a proponent of the thumbs down icon. However, I've experimented with implementing it elsewhere and can tell you that I haven't seen it used once, and this is in a place with a lot of heated debate. I am quite surprised by this result TBH. Would be interested to know how much it's used here in the news forum.

Interesting.
Is it a small community were users know each other?

 

[jbachandouris]

I don't think laughing at what people write or adding thumbs down is so civilized. Nothing wrong in disagreeing but let's discuss, maybe we can find a common ground. Isn't discussion the whole point of a forum?

Anyway, I see your point and it's a good one. I wonder, and maybe moderators and admins can contribute to our conversation, because they frequently monitor the forums: did you notice that the discussion, on average, has become more civilized after dislikes and laughs were introduced?

Although I don't necessarily agree, I certainly do see your points.

 

[ericgtr12]

Interesting.
Is it a small community were users know each other?

To an extent but a lot of disagreement, thousands of posts and I haven't seen it used a single time. However, I do see the LOL icon is used derisively all the time as they do here.

 

[Weaselboy]

I wonder, and maybe mods can contribute to the discussion because they frequently monitor the forums: did you notice that the discussion, on average, has become more civilized these dislikes were introduced?

I cannot say I have noticed a difference either way.

 

[canesalato]

To an extent but a lot of disagreement, thousands of posts and I haven't seen it used a single time. However, I do see the LOL icon is used derisively all the time as they do here.

That one really comes across to me as needlessly rude. Ironically, its intent is supposed to be a positive one, but ends up being worse than the thumb down.

 

[Expos of 1969]

If the thumbs down is to be used to show one disagrees with a comment made by someone, why are we limited in where we can use it and how often? There is no limit on use of the thumbs up symbol. Is Arn saying we must agree more often than disagree? Makes no sense. Unless the thumbs down is treated the same as the thumbs up, get rid of it.

 

[I7guy]

That one really comes across to me as needlessly rude. Ironically, its intent is supposed to be a positive one, but ends up being worse than the thumb down.

I agree 100% the "haha" emoji has been misappropriated to laugh at the poster rather than to laugh with the poster. My guess is due to the limits placed on "disagree", MR participants have used the "haha" emoji in it's place.

 

[I7guy]

If the thumbs down is to be used to show one disagrees with a comment made by someone, why are we limited in where we can use it and how often? There is no limit on use of the thumbs up symbol. Is Arn saying we must agree more often than disagree? Makes no sense. Unless the thumbs down is treated the same as the thumbs up, get rid of it.

One reason could be why would one serially go about "liking" posts, especially if the MR participant didn't really like the posts? Do you think the "like" has the potential for being abused?

 

[MacRazySwe]

I agree with you, it only feeds negativity. I'm not a fan!

If you don't like a post, you simply choose to not click the "like" button. No need for a "dislike" button. Simple as that!

 

[maflynn]

I like the idea of the thumbs down, I feel, that I can provide an opinion with the post thumbs down, much how people like to give the thumbs up. Both are useful imo

 

[Expos of 1969]

One reason could be why would one serially go about "liking" posts, especially if the MR participant didn't really like the posts? Do you think the "like" has the potential for being abused?

Don't quite get your point. If i can like 10 posts a day in a variety of threads, why should I not be able to disagree with 10 or 8 or 20?

 

[Expos of 1969]

I like the idea of the thumbs down, I feel, that I can provide an opinion with the post thumbs down, much how people like to give the thumbs up. Both are useful imo

Exactly. So why a limit on one and not on the other?

 

[I7guy]

Don't quite get your point. If i can like 10 posts a day in a variety of threads, why should I not be able to disagree with 10 or 8 or 20?

That requires an official MR answer, but my MR member answer, is that like fosters community (even if one doesn't agree in a hotly debated thread), dislike fosters discord.

 

[Expos of 1969]

That requires an official MR answer, but my MR member answer, is that like fosters community (even if one doesn't agree in a hotly debated thread), dislike fosters discord.

So then drop the dislike possibility entirely. Keeping it but telling people they can only use it sparingly is nonsense.

 

[I7guy]

So then drop the dislike possibility entirely. Keeping it but telling people they can only use it sparingly is nonsense.

it's not an all or nothing decision. It seems, based on the misappropriation of using "haha" to signify "laughing at one", a limit may be the right thing. The disagree button is definitely useful in certain contexts and takes the temperature of the community of a specific post.

All of the reactions can be abused, but at some point management makes the decision the good outweighs the bad.

 

[ericgtr12]

I like the idea of the thumbs down, I feel, that I can provide an opinion with the post thumbs down, much how people like to give the thumbs up. Both are useful imo

Have you seen the upvote system built in to the new beta version of Xenforo? Would be interesting to see it in use on a forum of this magnitude.

 

[iOS Geek]

That requires an official MR answer, but my MR member answer, is that like fosters community (even if one doesn't agree in a hotly debated thread), dislike fosters discord.

I agree there. My opinion on the "like" button is the same as my opinion of a "like" on Facebook. I don't look at the "like" as necessarily saying I "like" what was said. Given all the other options we have now (laugh, sad, wow, angry, etc), I view the "like" as more of a generic acknowledgement that someone read the comment or story.

Could it mean you actually DO "like" what was said? Absolutely! I just think of it more as acknowledgement of the post or story itself, more than anything else. It's really the only reaction choice there that says "yes, I did read this". If I want to say more than just an acknowledgement that I read it...then I go with one of the other reactions. It also depends on the story though. If it's a post or a comment about something funny, or something sad for example...I won't use the "like" reaction. I'll use the "laugh" or "sad" one instead.

More so on Facebook than here, but I definitely see the "laugh" reaction get used as more of a "laughing at you" kind of reaction than a "laughing with you" reaction (and I doubt that laughing AT you was the original intent behind it). I see that one a LOT when it comes to posts/comments about politics in particular when someone says something that doesn't quite line up with what other people are saying. I don't think I would go so far as to say these reactions should be removed. I see the good and bad behind each. I do, however, wish whenever one of those were used, whether here or on Facebook, the person who reacted that way...actually explained why. Sometimes you do see that. A lot of times, you don't. You (not you specifically. Just people in general) can laugh at my comment, disagree with my comment, or angry react to my comment all you want. But tell me why. I'm happy to learn more about your reason for reacting that way if you're willing to tell me about it, but when someone leaves one of those reactions and says nothing...it gives me the idea that you/they are NOT open to listening to other opinions. If your mind is made up and you aren't open to other opinions, you're probably better off just staying out of it entirely...which is something that I will admit I need to get better at myself. I've done my fair share of reacting without explaining.