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

[icanhazmac]

Now, if "thumbs down" was just harmless fun and could just be ignored, that's fine

Why can't you just ignore it? The reaction score on this forum means NOTHING! There are no differences or consequenses between +1000 and -1000, honestly I almost never look at mine let alone others.

This means that YOU are placing weight upon your reaction score and take every negative reaction personally.

Here is yet another example:

Current HomePod deal post on the main page, someone posted "$100 too much for a dummy speaker", lazy post, they did not define if they have demo'd one or heard the speaker. The HomePod deal threads usually have a couple of these nonsense posts. As I indicated previously, I have asked for further explanation multiple times in threads like this and the OP never follows up, its an intentional, inflammatory post. This time I disagreed with no further post and I then liked a post by another member who asked if they have ever heard a HomePod.

Case closed, no need for me to also question that member, I disagree with his post, someone else asked for an explanation.

 

[MisterSavage]

Even if you got rid of emojis the text equivalent of some would still exist.

 

[canesalato]

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.

Very well written, personally I couldn't agree more.

 

[maflynn]

Now, if "thumbs down" was just harmless fun and could just be ignored,

It still can be ignored.

 

[theluggage]

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.

...or, instead, you could upvote the first post and add your support to the informed argument. Downvoting the second one is indistinguishable from saying "No, it's not flat because I say so".

Current HomePod deal post on the main page, someone posted "$100 too much for a dummy speaker", lazy post, they did not define if they have demo'd one or heard the speaker.

...and when you "thumb downed" it, how did you define whether you'd even heard the speaker? Two wrongs don't make a right.

As I indicated previously, I have asked for further explanation multiple times in threads like this and the OP never follows up,

So? You had your say. Your positive post is there for all to see (hopefully you took the extra few seconds to argue the case for the Homepod and not attack the previous poster). The original poster doesn't owe you a response.

its an intentional, inflammatory post.

...in which case the troll will be delighted that you took the time to downvote it. This is actually a more important point than the like/dislike debate: trolls are just out to provoke a reaction - a downvote is as good as an upvote. Ignore them and they might go away.

This means that YOU are placing weight upon your reaction score and take every negative reaction personally.

I think I'm big enough and ugly enough to take a few downvotes without crying (setting myself up there, I suspect).

However, there's an important difference between someone who can't take having their arguments criticised versus someone who gets intimidated by cries of "Yah! Boo! Sucks!" from the audience, which have nothing to do with robust debate. A dislike button is just too convenient - yes, people will still post negative things but at least force them to make the minimal effort of typing a few words (and we'll see how many of them spell "sucks" with an "x").

As for these new fangled graphical emojis (as opposed to good old 90º ASCII emoticons) - well, they sux - what a load of @~ (PS: by all means downvote that weak argument!)

 

[TiggrToo]

...or, instead, you could upvote the first post and add your support to the informed argument. Downvoting the second one is indistinguishable from saying "No, it's not flat because I say so".



...and when you "thumb downed" it, how did you define whether you'd even heard the speaker? Two wrongs don't make a right.



So? You had your say. Your positive post is there for all to see (hopefully you took the extra few seconds to argue the case for the Homepod and not attack the previous poster). The original poster doesn't owe you a response.



...in which case the troll will be delighted that you took the time to downvote it. This is actually a more important point than the like/dislike debate: trolls are just out to provoke a reaction - a downvote is as good as an upvote. Ignore them and they might go away.



I think I'm big enough and ugly enough to take a few downvotes without crying (setting myself up there, I suspect).

However, there's an important difference between someone who can't take having their arguments criticised versus someone who gets intimidated by cries of "Yah! Boo! Sucks!" from the audience, which have nothing to do with robust debate. A dislike button is just too convenient - yes, people will still post negative things but at least force them to make the minimal effort of typing a few words (and we'll see how many of them spell "sucks" with an "x").

As for these new fangled graphical emojis (as opposed to good old 90º ASCII emoticons) - well, they sux - what a load of @~ (PS: by all means downvote that weak argument!)

At the end of the day, what does it really matter?

I remember once someone attacked me on Twitter because I had but 20 followers, stating my argument was null and void and he was right because he had 200 or more followers.

I still don’t get that concept. Since when did a Twitter follower count mean anything other than it being a count?

Here, likes are fun, but ultimately utterly meaningless. You don’t win prizes for likes, you don’t get demotions for unlikes.

Just move on.

 

[icanhazmac]

...and when you "thumb downed" it, how did you define whether you'd even heard the speaker? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Seriously dude, READ my post. I clearly said I "thumb downed" an obviously lazy, inflamatory post (that has since been removed I assume by mods) and then "liked" a subsequent post by another member asking if they ever heard HomePod, which is EXACTLY what I would have asked, why should I ask it a second time in a second post? It is the same logic you use for "likes" removing "me too" posts, my dislike and susequent like of the same question I would have asked should suffice! Clicking a "thumbs down" is NOT a wrong!

This time I disagreed with no further post and I then liked a post by another member who asked if they have ever heard a HomePod.

 

[C DM]

...or, instead, you could upvote the first post and add your support to the informed argument. Downvoting the second one is indistinguishable from saying "No, it's not flat because I say so".



...and when you "thumb downed" it, how did you define whether you'd even heard the speaker? Two wrongs don't make a right.



So? You had your say. Your positive post is there for all to see (hopefully you took the extra few seconds to argue the case for the Homepod and not attack the previous poster). The original poster doesn't owe you a response.



...in which case the troll will be delighted that you took the time to downvote it. This is actually a more important point than the like/dislike debate: trolls are just out to provoke a reaction - a downvote is as good as an upvote. Ignore them and they might go away.



I think I'm big enough and ugly enough to take a few downvotes without crying (setting myself up there, I suspect).

However, there's an important difference between someone who can't take having their arguments criticised versus someone who gets intimidated by cries of "Yah! Boo! Sucks!" from the audience, which have nothing to do with robust debate. A dislike button is just too convenient - yes, people will still post negative things but at least force them to make the minimal effort of typing a few words (and we'll see how many of them spell "sucks" with an "x").

As for these new fangled graphical emojis (as opposed to good old 90º ASCII emoticons) - well, they sux - what a load of @~ (PS: by all means downvote that weak argument!)

Based on some past discussions about it all, it mostly comes down this:

Reasoning behind the disagree button

- It's only on news stories
- News stories have a ranked "top" comments under the news article.
- Without negative feedback, it's impossible for a comment to get removed from the page.
- Disagree gives some feedback mechanism and some balance to the voting system for news stories.
- If you feel like someone is abusing it, let us know.

arn

 

[Expos of 1969]

Good lord. If you look back over all these posts, how silly all this back and forth is over such meaningless things. Thumbs up, thumbs down, laughing symbols, frowning symbols and on and on. Most of us are reasonably intelligent adults and with the current state of the world, this topic is taking our attention? Yes, diversions from reality are needed now and then, but THIS?

 

[ThisBougieLife]

To be perfectly honest, I usually skip over the first two pages of a news story. That is where most of the dislikes occur and where most of the comments are attention-seeking nonsense. The real discussion usually begins a few pages in.

 

[TiggrToo]

Most of us are reasonably intelligent adults

I wish to opt out of that classification 🤣

 

[canesalato]

Good lord. If you look back over all these posts, how silly all this back and forth is over such meaningless things. Thumbs up, thumbs down, laughing symbols, frowning symbols and on and on. Most of us are reasonably intelligent adults and with the current state of the world, this topic is taking our attention? Yes, diversions from reality are needed now and then, but THIS?

Having opened the discussion, I can answer that I don't take it very seriously per se, at least when discussing MacRumors. It's just a discussion about a tech forum. As such, it does not need to be heated or controversial or... whatever. The tone is relax and chilled, at least mine. =)

Now, if I wanted to be serious, I would go beyond this forum and highlight how very similar feedback mechanisms apply in a similar way to other platforms, like Facebook, which do have strong influence on the current state of the world.

In my opinion, reactions emoji, seemingly innocent, are contributors to the infamous social network echo chamber effect: popular opinions are promoted, unpopular ones are not, or worse, are exhibited as "rejected by the community", creating or strengthening biases in readers/commenters.
Do we always need to express agreement or disagreement? Do we need to do so as fast as possible in the name of convenience?

All of this to say that I don't believe the discussion is worthless or as uninteresting and shallow as it might seem.

 

[I7guy]

Having opened the discussion, I can answer that I don't take it very seriously per se, at least when discussing MacRumors. It's just a discussion about a tech forum. As such, it does not need to be heated or controversial or... whatever. The tone is relax and chilled, at least mine. =)

Now, if I wanted to be serious, I would go beyond this forum and highlight how very similar feedback mechanisms apply in a similar way to other platforms, like Facebook, which do have strong influence on the current state of the world.

In my opinion, reactions emoji, seemingly innocent, are contributors to the infamous social network echo chamber effect: popular opinions are promoted, unpopular ones are not, or worse, are exhibited as "rejected by the community", creating or strengthening biases in readers/commenters.
Do we always need to express agreement or disagreement? Do we need to do so as fast as possible in the name of convenience?

All of this to say that I don't believe the discussion is worthless or as uninteresting and shallow as it might seem.

The thing is, it doesn't matter what the topic, people take things seriously. (usually more so in a tech forum that has at it's premise some opinion) You can see the wide range of opinions in the news thread about apple removing fortnight. (And that is one of the threads the "haha" emoji is used liberally to denote "I'm laughing at your response) It is a discussion, just a discussion, but people have varied opinions on the matter at hand and everything else.

I don't take it seriously. I don't use facebook, so I can't comment on what it influences or not...all I know it doesn't influence me. But at the same token neither do many of the posts in PRSI, in which there are more than the fair share of trying to prove one right and the other person wrong.

Bottom line the reaction buttons have different meanings for different people. One thing that seems to stand out, is the "like" button, should be called the "agree" button.

 

[Madonepro]

It still can be ignored.

I guess the 'Age of Covid' has provided more mythical creatures and fierce peoples than a recent fantasy series! Hopefully we can all go back to the age of 'Little House on the Prairie', and look for love and peace.

P.S. Unfortunately I cannot downvote my comment, for the outrageous reference to the Little House on the Prairie.

 

[canesalato]

Btw, I didn't realize my post was so fun (however, I am glad to contribute to the general good mood of this forum ). I am now considering a career as a comedian.

 

[Tucom]

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".

Just don't take it so seriously - if someone wants to laugh, they'll laugh. It's a means of expression, not incited trolling every single time. Sometimes less is more, and in this case it's better than someone writing out "LOL" or whatever, while still chiming in with their emotional response or opinion.

How is that not positive? Finally I've yet to see a Thumbs Down option for regular posts, depending on the topic.
[automerge]1599030106[/automerge]

View attachment 949562

Btw, I didn't realize my post was so fun (however, I am glad to contribute to the general good mood of this forum ). I am now considering a career as a comedian.

Hey! THAT'S ME! Likewise, usually I get the ball rolling however, hahahaha!

 

[canesalato]

Just don't take it so seriously - if someone wants to laugh, they'll laugh. It's a means of expression, not incited trolling every single time. Sometimes less is more, and in this case it's better than someone writing out "LOL" or whatever, while still chiming in with their emotional response or opinion.

How is that not positive? Finally I've yet to see a Thumbs Down option for regular posts, depending on the topic.
[automerge]1599030106[/automerge]



Hey! THAT'S ME! Likewise, usually I get the ball rolling however, hahahaha!

I respectfully disagree.
I think laughing at people you disagree with is rude, no matter if you call it "LOL".

The intention may not be "mean", and I am sure it is not, in most cases.
But, if we did it in real life, we would come across as jerks.
And yes, this is not real life, but still...I think that's part of the problem with the current state of the internet.
Somehow, we started believing it is ok to behave online in ways that would make us feel ashamed in real life.

 

[Tucom]

I respectfully disagree.
I think laughing at people you disagree with is rude, no matter if you call it "LOL".

Dude... it's called normal human interaction, and it's perfectly normal - I'm now LAUGHING at this, because I think it's preposterous to have ANY issue with it. No one owes you or anyone else any kind of 'respect' inherently, nor does anyone owe you - or me, or anyone else, a full thought out reply. That's how it works in the real world, but that doesn't mean rude all the time.

This is your perception btw, nothing more.

This has now become a giant cyclical paradox, hahaha, lmao.

IE, lighten up man

Ok you edited your reply so I'll edit mine with more info too: You use WAY too many comma's. I'm guessing there's a level of tone your not seeing, feeling or are missing because inherently it's difficult to follow the natural thought of your sentence. Which kind messes with your argument of premise of proper online etiquette in and of itself. It's sliced up all over the place.

Just breathe, it's allll good. Btw, there's **** happening all over the world so you may want to take as step back and put priorities in order before we get all bent out of shape about reaction emoji's.

 

[canesalato]

Dude... it's called normal human interaction, and it's perfectly normal - I'm now LAUGHING at this, because I think it's preposterous to have ANY issue with it. No one owes you or anyone else any kind of 'respect' inherently, nor does anyone owe you - or me, or anyone else, a full thought out reply. That's how it works in the real world, but that doesn't mean rude all the time.

This is your perception btw, nothing more.

This has now become a giant cyclical paradox, hahaha, lmao.

No one owes you or anyone else any kind of 'respect' inherently -> I disagree completely.

nor does anyone owe you or me, or anyone else, a full thought out reply. -> sure. Never thought otherwise.

IE, lighten up man -> no worries

edit: thank you for your grammar advices. English is not my first language, so I appreciate the opportunity to improve.

 

[Tucom]

No one owes you or anyone else any kind of 'respect' inherently -> I disagree completely.

nor does anyone owe you or me, or anyone else, a full thought out reply. -> sure. Never thought otherwise.

IE, lighten up man -> no worries

Good enough for me - I definitely dig your drive for positive respect however, don't get me wrong Haha. Just sometimes stressing down on little matters makes medium ones bigger and so and so forth. Letting go is the best skill ever, in some ways.

Respect in and of itself should always be offered, and emphatically driven, but I don't - again "owe" you nor anyone else jack and that's simply facts. Period. YOU seem cool, but to be proverbial here: I don't know you - maybe you could be a puppy-kicker, right? Or someone who poops on random peoples ice-cream cones in the park. This all gets assessed in our minds in a matter of NANO-second IRL, but there's no contract that orders respect around. We may have VERY different views on that, but maybe two sides of the same coin. You will never get respect from me if you act like a clown or be all 'gimme gimme', but w/e. Now it's just a dead horse. I think we both get each other.

This was some added info, this topic matters to me too haha.

But with that said, I think you have the right vibes about this. Have a good day man! Seriously

 

[robvas]

It's a good addition with all the mis-information people spread

 

[ChromeCloud]

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.

I believe people should be able to handle their opinions being disliked, no matter how smart or dumb is the reason behind other people's reaction.

 

[canesalato]

I believe people should be able to handle their opinions being disliked, no matter how smart or dumb is the reason behind other people's reaction.

yeah, I believe so too.

 

[PickUrPoison]

I respectfully disagree.
I think laughing at people you disagree with is rude, no matter if you call it "LOL".
<snip>

For me, when I use the laugh emoji for other than a joke I appreciate, I’m not laughing at the person, I’m laughing at the content. There’s a difference.

Say in an article about a dip in AAPL stock price, someone (one who is typically trolling or a newbie, doesn’t matter) posts “The beginning of the end... get out now while you’re still showing a profit”. Then someone replies “Apple’s been going downhill since Cook took over, no innovation... Steve would be rolling in his grave.”

I’m unlikely to bother replying to either (trolling) post, but I may very well give them both the ha-ha. To me, it means “this post is ridiculous”.

But am I laughing at the person themself? I don’t think so, but as we’ve seen upthread, the reactions mean different things to different people.

You may consider it rude, but “rudeness” depends on the setting and the context. Things that would be considered rude at work or at dinner with your family aren’t necessarily rude in a take-all-comers, rather opinionated tech forum.

 

[JBGoode]

I made a statement of fact yesterday - a little anecdote about a family member. Someone actually gave it a thumbs down/disagreed with it out of spite because I gave a valid thumbs down to one of their posts. It was like disagreeing if I had said the sky is blue. While I have no problem at all with the thumbs down/laughing emojis and freely use them myself, they do tend to reveal the immaturity of some people.