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

[LeeW]

I kind of like the dislike, sometimes I just want to register my disagreement without needing to explain myself.

I disagree with your comment, wanted you to know but I am not getting into a debate about it.

I think many use dislike that way, more effective than commenting why as too often it just ends up in a to and fro with no purpose and adds nothing but more posts which end up with the thread going off track, happens too often in fact.

Exactly the same as liking a comment, I don't feel I need to explain myself but feel it was worthy of being acknowledged.

 

[iOS Geek]

I think many use dislike that way, more effective than commenting why as too often it just ends up in a to and fro with no purpose and adds nothing but more posts which end up with the thread going off track, happens too often in fact.

Good point. It is a good way of keeping a thread from turning into a never ending battle that leaves none involved with a different opinion than they started with. More than that though, it can be beneficial when everyone involved is willing to both talk AND listen. For all you know, you could end up having a great conversation with someone and actually learn something!

 

[maflynn]

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.

Nope, I've not looked into any newer versions of xenforo.

 

[C DM]

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.

I think some of that was discussed in a few threads about downvoting, like a recent one at https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/downvoting-more-cons-than-pros.2244775/

 

[I7guy]

Good point. It is a good way of keeping a thread from turning into a never ending battle that leaves none involved with a different opinion than they started with. More than that though, it can be beneficial when everyone involved is willing to both talk AND listen.

In my experience, the MacRumors main new forum, Political Forum and PRSI (no surprise) have the most divisiveness with many discussions being one way or the other and very little compromise. The community forum (and some of the other specialized forum) are more like a roundtable with good discussions.

For all you know, you could end up having a great conversation with someone and actually learn something!

Far and few in-between but it does happen.

 

[ActionableMango]

Likes and Dislikes are just popularity metrics. If you have one, you should have the other. With no Dislike function, this effectively silences one side.

Imagine I post "All MacBooks should be purple." Let's say 14 people agreed with me and 4000 did not. You'd only see 14 Likes and no Dislikes. It's skewed.

 

[iOS Geek]

In my experience, the MacRumors main new forum, Political Forum and PRSI (no surprise) have the most divisiveness with many discussions being one way or the other and very little compromise. The community forum (and some of the other specialized forum) are more like a roundtable with good discussions.


Far and few in-between but it does happen.

Agreed on both points. Wish it happened more often than it does. I truly enjoy good discussion.

 

[theluggage]

Likes and Dislikes are just popularity metrics. If you have one, you should have the other. With no Dislike function, this effectively silences one side.

Except the two things are not equal. If I agree with a post but don't have anything to add then I might not have anything more to say beyond "what they just said". If I disagree with a post then the onus should be on me to reply and explain why I think it is wrong (...then other people can agree with that if they want).

Basically, why should anybody give a wet slap if you disagree with something unless you have a valid counter-argument?

"Agree" avoids a lot of "Me too" posts, but "Disagree" is a lazy option that adds nothing of value to the argument. If you really want an opinion poll, there's an App for that.

Imagine I post "All MacBooks should be purple." Let's say 14 people agreed with me and 4000 did not. You'd only see 14 Likes and no Dislikes. It's skewed.

Well, in that case what it really represents is 4014 people who should really learn that the correct response to trolls is to ignore them - because they are attention seekers who whom a dislike is as good as 100 likes.

It's only skewed, however, if you think that an unqualified, "disagree" vote has the same value as either a positive "agree" or a reasoned, dissenting argument.

 

[Ambrosia7177]

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

Disagree.

As someone who receives lots of fire in certain forums, I see that emoji 110% as "laughing AT you (and your thoughts)"...

@TiggrToo hit the nail on the head!

 

[D.T.]

Except the two things are not equal. If I agree with a post but don't have anything to add then I might not have anything more to say beyond "what they just said". If I disagree with a post then the onus should be on me to reply and explain why I think it is wrong (...then other people can agree with that if they want).

Basically, why should anybody give a wet slap if you disagree with something unless you have a valid counter-argument?

"Agree" avoids a lot of "Me too" posts, but "Disagree" is a lazy option that adds nothing of value to the argument. If you really want an opinion poll, there's an App for that.

Right. Agree mostly seems to be just that, I'm in agreement with your assertion, the fundamental concept of your post. Disagree seems to be used often times as "I don't like your post", that's clearly not the "equivalent opposite" to Agree, it's often used as DISLIKE.

"Apple should make a 17" Macbook Pro again"

Agree == Yes, they should, I __agree__ with your perspective

Disagree ?=

I think you're a poopy head for wanting that, it's stupid because I don't want one ...

I think that doesn't make sense is there a market

I don't like you very much, so I think your opinion is *dumb*, and it's kind of for / against Apple / whoever


It's even worse when it's a really subjective post:

"I like large phones" ... DISAGREE

So are you saying you don't? Or are you saying my preference is wrong? Are you making some inference that I'm being negative towards people who like small phones?

 

[Expos of 1969]

Right. Agree mostly seems to be just that, I'm in agreement with your assertion, the fundamental concept of your post. Disagree seems to be used often times as "I don't like your post", that's clearly not the "equivalent opposite" to Agree, it's often used as DISLIKE.

"Apple should make a 17" Macbook Pro again"

Agree == Yes, they should, I __agree__ with your perspective

Disagree ?=

I think you're a poopy head for wanting that, it's stupid because I don't want one ...

I think that doesn't make sense is there a market

I don't like you very much, so I think your opinion is *dumb*, and it's kind of for / against Apple / whoever


It's even worse when it's a really subjective post:

"I like large phones" ... DISAGREE

So are you saying you don't? Or are you saying my preference is wrong? Are you making some inference that I'm being negative towards people who like small phones?

So is there a need for any of these symbols? If one cannot disagree on equal footing (all threads with no limit per day) with agree, we are operating in a make believe land. Why have thumbs up, a smile, a laugh, a frown etc? If some posters have thin skin and feel insulted by a thumbs down or if the community and MR staff have very different views on what a thumbs down may mean every time it is used, get rid of these symbols. If dialogue and constructive back and forth is the goal, force the issue and eliminate all these non verbal options. Communications in years past certainly did not require these modern "advances".

 

[annk]

I think they both serve a purpose. I like being able to show my agreement with a "like". And though I don't bother disliking posts (I simply scroll on by or post a reply), the "dislike" button has a useful purpose in news threads. The fact that it's limited in regard to how many posts you can dislike per day is because we've had problems with serial disliking, which is a form of trolling. I don't think users are being grossly inconvenienced because they have a quota on how much they can use the "dislike" button.

I've never even considered using the "laugh" icon to laugh at or make fun of another user. I use it to show my appreciation of humor when the post makes me laugh or is particularly clever.

If on the other hand I'd like to express more than simple agreement, I post a reply.

It comes down to being civilized. Don't use the "dislike" button because you don't care for or want to irritate a user, use it if you actually disagree with what's been posted. If you have time and are so inclined, maybe write a line or two about why you disagree, if you'd like your view to be part of the discussion. Don't use the "laugh" icon to laugh at another user.

It's not rocket science, just plain good manners.

 

[Ambrosia7177]

It comes down to being civilized. Don't use the "dislike" button because you don't care for or want to irritate a user, use it if you actually disagree with what's been posted. If you have time and are so inclined, maybe write a line or two about why you disagree, if you'd like your view to be part of the discussion. Don't use the "laugh" icon to laugh at another user.

The only problem with that is that there *are* lots of people on MacRumors that do use it to be malicious and "troll" and their constant bad behavior doesn't get punished (or even acknowledged) when reported...

There are lots of "passive-aggressive" personality types out there just looking to knock other people down because they themselves are filled with self-loathing...

And until that starts getting addressed, people will keep using that emoticon for the wrong reasons...

Personally, I think what needs to be addressed more than which emoticons or whatever are available, is to start addressing the core rot more around here, and to apply rules evenly to everyone...

 

[rumorguy]

emojis? 👎

 

[icanhazmac]

If I disagree with a post then the onus should be on me to reply and explain why I think it is wrong (...then other people can agree with that if they want).

I feel like there are times where a simple thumbs down is sufficient.

Example:

Thread - Homepods $199
Post #1 - I hate homepods
My reply - Thumbsdown or angry

I have tried numerous times to get a better response from people that post "no-content" comments, oddly they have mostly been about homepods, but the original posters never reply so now I use driveby negative downvotes as a way to show my disdain for no-content posts. If you are too lazy to articulate your point then the onus should not be on me to try and get a better response from you.

In other cases the topic is clear enough that a nuanced rebuttle is not necessary.

Example:
Thread - Epic games loses developer account
Post #1 - I love Fortnite, Apple sucks for doing this.
My reply - Thumbsdown

The original post was lazy and I disagree, simple as that. Would it really have made a difference if I wrote a wall o' text explaining that I never played Fortnite, I think Epic is wrong and I don't think Apple sucks? Maybe but I feel some people post things in a "trolly" way on purpose and aren't looking for conversation so I reward them as such.

P.S. - As the reaction score carries no real consequenses here I fail to see how the community is degraded.

 

[ThisBougieLife]

Well, I like that "disagree" is not an option in PRSI. What a nightmare that would be.

In general I think dislike buttons fuel negativity and many sites I post on do not have one for that very reason.

 

[theluggage]

The original post was lazy and I disagree, simple as that. Would it really have made a difference if I wrote a wall o' text explaining that I never played Fortnite, I think Epic is wrong and I don't think Apple sucks?

And how does someone know if your thumbs-down means "I hate Fortnite", "I love Apple" or "Your post is lazy and poorly argued" or some permutation thereof?

Instead, you could:
(a) contribute to the conversation by writing a post (who said it had to be a wall of text?), or
(b) thumbs-up someone who has posted an an opposing argument (then it is clear to all what you agree with).
(c) Ignore the worthless post.

Meanwhile, if you step back and try and take an impartial view, neither:

"I love xxx, zzzz sucks for doing this"
or:
"I never used xxx, I think yyy is wrong and I don't think zzz sucks"

...add anything of value to the argument. At least the first poster is negatively affected by the issue so there is an implicit argument there as to why it might be a bad thing - the second one admits that they have no knowledge of, no interest or stake in xxx and hence won't be affected - so, frankly, what weight does their opinion carry? Write something, and we can make that judgement (maybe you have some insights on the right to exploit your property and products and make binding contracts vs. the need to regulate monopolistic practices to ensure free trade?)

 

[TiggrToo]

Still remember when I posted what my personal opinion was on a subject, even making it clear this was my opinion and not a statement of fact, and someone came along and downvoted it.

Another time I quoted an absolute verifiable fact that was not under dispute and...yup, someone downvoted it (eventually 3 people did, along with about 30 ‘likes’).

It’s a strange world...

 

[icanhazmac]

Instead, you could:
(a) contribute to the conversation by writing a post (who said it had to be a wall of text?), or
(b) thumbs-up someone who has posted an an opposing argument (then it is clear to all what you agree with).
(c) Ignore the worthless post.

While I do A and B most of the time I feel no need to do C as sometimes a simple ‘thumbs down’ is all I care to or have the time do do in that moment.

 

[theluggage]

While I do A and B most of the time I feel no need to do C as sometimes a simple ‘thumbs down’ is all I care to or have the time do do in that moment.

...which is exactly the problem with "thumbs down" - it's a lazy way to try and influence the discussion (and feed the trolls) without contributing.

 

[icanhazmac]

...which is exactly the problem with "thumbs down"

That would be in your opinion! In my opinion there is nothing wrong with saying "I disagree".

I find your opinion hypocritical as you are ok with a "lazy" agreement:

If I agree with a post but don't have anything to add then I might not have anything more to say beyond "what they just said".

"Agree" avoids a lot of "Me too" posts

However you want to deny others the right to simply say "I disagree". If I driveby disagree with a post I would say 90+% of the time I have liked another post in the thread so I have fulfilled your criteria above. Someone else articulated my disagreement, there is no need for me to type it again.

Furthermore IF I choose to do a flyby disagree I'm not influencing anything, nor am I feeding trolls, I'm simply registering my opinion on the matter in the best way can in that moment.

YMMV

 

[theluggage]

However you want to deny others the right to simply say "I disagree".

Well, yes, because I think "I disagree" - without any justification, counter-argument or alternative proposal that other people can judge - is a worthless argument. Removing it does not in any way affect your right to contribute to the discussion - just hit reply and state your case (or thumbs up someone who's already done so) - if you don't have anything to contribute, that's your problem.

Now, if "thumbs down" was just harmless fun and could just be ignored, that's fine - but if people are abusing it to harass and ad-hom people, or to turn a reasoned debate into a reality TV popularity contest, you have to ask "what are the benefits of this feature that outweigh these disadvantages". Currently, I'm not seeing any benefits.

If, for the sake of equity, that means losing "Thumbs up" then so be it - but that's a false equivalence: disagreeing for unknown and unspecified reasons is not the same as supporting someone else's specific argument. Problem is, if you disagree then nobody else can guess what was in your head and evaluate your reasoning.

 

[Madonepro]

Well, yes, because I think "I disagree" - without any justification, counter-argument or alternative proposal that other people can judge - is a worthless argument. Removing it does not in any way affect your right to contribute to the discussion - just hit reply and state your case (or thumbs up someone who's already done so) - if you don't have anything to contribute, that's your problem.

Now, if "thumbs down" was just harmless fun and could just be ignored, that's fine - but if people are abusing it to harass and ad-hom people, or to turn a reasoned debate into a reality TV popularity contest, you have to ask "what are the benefits of this feature that outweigh these disadvantages". Currently, I'm not seeing any benefits.

If, for the sake of equity, that means losing "Thumbs up" then so be it - but that's a false equivalence: disagreeing for unknown and unspecified reasons is not the same as supporting someone else's specific argument. Problem is, if you disagree then nobody else can guess what was in your head and evaluate your reasoning.

What is wrong with wanting to disagree, but not wanting to possibly being involved in a protracted discussion about your view. Agree to disagree.

 

[diego.caraballo]

I never saw the laugh emoji, as a "laughing at you"...first time that I realize that someone could have interpreted in that way. For me, is the one I use when someone says something funny. Maybe MR could use a new emoji that better reflect that intention. Maybe two emojis laughing together?

 

[TiggrToo]

Well, yes, because I think "I disagree" - without any justification, counter-argument or alternative proposal that other people can judge - is a worthless argument

It can be seen as that.

Or if someone has posted something like “the earth is not flat, and here’s why” then someone constantly posts “the earth is flat because I say so”, then downvoting the second may been seen as fair game.

Not every downvote needs to be instantly justified. Many times it’s simply a difference of opinion, other times it’s continued baseless statements that can be seen as valid enough to warrant a downvote.