Hide reactions of ignored users

[Scepticalscribe]

An alternative here that I think would actually be pretty positive is to not allow negative reactions to be seen by anyone. Perhaps those could just be used to influence up/down location in a "best/most helpful/etc posts" view or something?

Or perhaps some other data view you could dive into if you wanted to re: your posts and reactions to them?

I just don't see how it's helpful to the forum to have negative reactions even be a thing, and definitely not from users you'd chosen to "not see".

Personally, I'd be perfectly fine with this.

Unfortunately, I think that the "down vote" tends to encourage, or enable - or facilitate - the growth of an (unnecessary to my mind) unpleasant and negative atmosphere, or tone, in the wider forum, especially when such down votes occur in the absence of any further post seeking to clarify or argue or explain the poster's particular stance.

 

[russell_314]

Personally, I'd be perfectly fine with this.

Unfortunately, I think that the "down vote" tends to encourage, or enable - or facilitate - the growth of an (unnecessary to my mind) unpleasant and negative atmosphere, or tone, in the wider forum, especially when such down votes occur in the absence of any further post seeking to clarify or argue or explain the poster's particular stance.

I think this is a terrible idea. It’s about like how YouTube removed the down vote so now you can’t tell troll or just wrong videos from the real thing when it comes to looking up some sort of technical help. Before you could tell by multiple down votes.

Have I had someone “disagree” with my post just because they didn’t agree with me sure but that’s just the way it is. Not too long ago guy was claiming that certain Apple charger needed a 20 W adapter to for full speed and I even posted screenshots of the Apple webpage showing him that was incorrect but he still “disagreed” with that post. I’m OK with that because maybe he was having a bad day. It’s the forms and we’re just trying to help people and sometimes they disagree. For some reason people online don’t think others should be allowed to disagree with them. Of course no I said disagree not harassment. That’s a huge difference.

As to trolling if someone is just going through all your posts and reacting to them then just report it to admin. I mean I can react to your comments in the thread I’m in but I’m just continuously following you around on the forms and randomly reacting to your stuff then that’s not acceptable. That’s why we have admin so they can correct this. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[thv]

Not sure why people seem to be taking this so extremely? Wishing a blocking feature could be more robust - like on most other sites, though I understand this seems to be a technical thing, not too easily done, whatever - doesn't mean you're losing your mind over it and need to be told about the revolutionary concept of going outside...I didn't see anyone saying it's ruining their life, just that it can be a bother. Plenty of things in life are going to be a bit annoying regardless of how mature & holy you consider yourself, asking for a fix is not a big deal

As for 'negative' emoticons as a whole, eh. Some people will misuse ofc. I use the laughing 99% for actual funny posts though. And I'm not going to start a debate with someone who calls me a sheep for buying a Studio or whatever. I'd rather dislike and move on

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I think this is a terrible idea. It’s about like how YouTube removed the down vote so now you can’t tell troll or just wrong videos from the real thing when it comes to looking up some sort of technical help. Before you could tell by multiple down votes.

Have I had someone “disagree” with my post just because they didn’t agree with me sure but that’s just the way it is. Not too long ago guy was claiming that certain Apple charger needed a 20 W adapter to for full speed and I even posted screenshots of the Apple webpage showing him that was incorrect but he still “disagreed” with that post. I’m OK with that because maybe he was having a bad day. It’s the forms and we’re just trying to help people and sometimes they disagree. For some reason people online don’t think others should be allowed to disagree with them. Of course no I said disagree not harassment. That’s a huge difference.

As to trolling if someone is just going through all your posts and reacting to them then just report it to admin. I mean I can react to your comments in the thread I’m in but I’m just continuously following you around on the forms and randomly reacting to your stuff then that’s not acceptable. That’s why we have admin so they can correct this. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Let's agree to differ on this subject (the worth of the "down vote").

However, I applaud your post. I applaud (and respect) the fact that you have take the time and trouble to craft, think about and write a civil, courteous reply which sets out an argument - a logical and well reasoned and thoughtful argument - for why you hold the position you do, and you are prepared to make the case for this.

My issue isn't disliking disagreement - that can be a civil and courteous and respectful exchange of opinion (such as was expressed in your post), - but the witless use of the down vote by individuals who strew them around like confetti in a thread without ever bothering to offer a explanation of why they have chosen to register this reaction.

Perhaps it is a generational thing; I will admit that I don't care much for any emojis, and, while I have adjusted to the existence of, and the use of, the "like" button, I would shed no tears were it to be discontinued and dropped by MR.

 

[russell_314]

Let's agree to differ on this subject (the worth of the "down vote").

However, I applaud your post. I applaud (and respect) the fact that you have take the time and trouble to craft, think about and write a civil, courteous reply which sets out an argument - a logical and well reasoned and thoughtful argument - for why you hold the position you do, and you are prepared to make the case for this.

My issue isn't disliking disagreement - that can be a civil and courteous and respectful exchange of opinion (such as was expressed in your post), - but the witless use of the down vote by individuals who strew them around like confetti in a thread without ever bothering to offer a explanation of why they have chosen to register this reaction.

Perhaps it is a generational thing; I will admit that I don't care much for any emojis, and, while I have adjusted to the existence of, and the use of, the "like" button, I would shed no tears were it to be discontinued and dropped by MR.

I think there’s a lot of factors when it comes to how people react to these disagree or down votes. If I know I’m correct about something someone can down vote my post all they want and that doesn’t change anything. Even if I’m not correct I’m not going to get bent out of shape because well people have a right to disagree with me. It’s easy to get upset and even sometimes I get upset when someone makes what I consider a smart and the other word I can’t mention here remark but it’s just life. I think part of living is understanding that not everyone is going to see the things like you do. I look at some people with their opinions and think what is going on inside their head or is there just a light out or something but I’m not sure if that’s the correct way to think about it. People just have different feelings and opinions and I think the obligation to respect them goes both ways. Maybe obligation is the wrong word but basically if I disagree with you I think you should be able to accept that but not necessarily agree with it but also I should accept that you don’t agree with me. Without going into bad subjects people just seems many people are not able to accept others having different opinions and viewpoints. I think some people are just grumpy and that’s OK.

I think long as the mods are checking people that are trying to bully others then I don’t have a problem. It’s like that guy that reacted to my post at first I was like what why is he doing that and I wanted to react to his post but no that’s just silly and I just let it go because there’s no point. I think that’s a situation that could have went the wrong way if I reacted to a bunch of his posts or vice versa but I think both of us just moved on to something else.

I would miss the funny reaction because even when someone says something that I think is crazy I might make that reaction but I think that’s OK because it’s just a reaction. It would be like someone saying Tim Cook is going to lead Apple into bankruptcy. I would have to laugh react because it’s silly to the point of funny. I guess I could write out a post explaining how wrong that guy is but it doesn’t even seem necessary. Also sometimes people post genuinely funny things and if I’m too lazy to comment saying ha ha funny I can just react.

If I had to pick one emoji react that maybe shouldn’t be here is the angry one. I don’t think I’ve ever used it and maybe expressing anger towards someone else’s post is not ideal.

I think ideally people should be civil to each other and that’s why I avoid the politics forms like the plague now. I don’t want someone’s emotions carrying over to the regular forms when I ask a question or reply to one because I said something they thought was wrong politically.

 

[jav6454]

It seems I have run into a stalker in the MBA and News forums who literally goes "disliking" or "Haha" every post of mine. Anyway to block them out?

 

[I7guy]

It seems I have run into a stalker in the MBA and News forums who literally goes "disliking" or "Haha" every post of mine. Anyway to block them out?

Well the dislikes are limited to 10 per 24 hour as I understand it. As far as the "haha" goes, the last laugh is on them, because "haha" increases your reaction score.

But maybe it would be nice to block reactions except for the "like" or "love" reaction.

At least under xenforo one gets to see who is reacting to your post -- no more anonymous reactions.

 

[JM]

Well, I agree with letting fools be fools, but I'd rather hear how this will be handled by the mods than j.random.user.

That’s a really good username. I wonder if “j.random.user” is already taken 😯 haha

 

[JM]

That's my problem with the whole concept: Certain members appear to want to only get "likes" for what he/she/they/it posts...

Well, not everyone agrees with everything that anyone in particular posts. That's just not real life.

And, hiding from responses doesn't help the "town square" feel for the participants as a whole.

Give me a like. Thumbs up. Smash that follow button. ☑️👍🔴

In all seriousness, I don’t do anything for likes. It’s nice to see when my post is appreciated or enjoyed, but I’ll either post for the sheer joy of creating something funny or thought provoking for my own entertainment. I’ll also engage in debates to exercise my mind and, likewise, do so for my own entertainment. (*or answer a rare question that I actually know an answer to.)

I imagine it’s the same for some others on the forum.

I personally think the disagree button is antagonistic… but that’s already being discussed in a different thread.

 

[JM]

What about the concept of limiting the amount of "reactions" folks can use every day?

We do it with the "dislike" and now instead we have lots of folks who troll via the "laugh" emoji

Maybe all reactions should be limited per day, which would encourage more judicious use of them?

(I suppose we could say that thumbs up and heart are fine in endless amounts since they are a positive reaction and the forum could use a lot more positivity - for sure)

No, cause then people who actually deserve a thumbs up or a laugh wouldn’t get it.

Also, I’m disheartened reading this thread that shows how the laugh reaction is being used maliciously. I love giving a laugh to a post that is truly funny.

 

[JM]

Not saying this is you but a lot of people who get bothered by this type of trolling would never survive a Web 1.0 environment.

See there? I avoided giving you a thumbs down

I was there for Web 1.0. Ahhh the avatar chat rooms. Good times. Falling in love with a little cartoon, that who knows! Maybe was actually NOT the A/S/L they said they were.

And those times when my neighbor Jeff would figure out someone’s IP address and send them a “virus” that turned their computer off.

Good times. Good times.

 

[JM]

I didn't realized how some of the reaction emojis can give people the idea that I'm being malicious. I'll try to be careful next time and sorry for those who I offended.

Me too. I am disheartened the laugh reaction being used antagonistically.

 

[millerj123]

That’s a really good username. I wonder if “j.random.user” is already taken 😯 haha

You made me look. It isn't. 😉

 

[JM]

I think this is a terrible idea. It’s about like how YouTube removed the down vote so now you can’t tell troll or just wrong videos from the real thing when it comes to looking up some sort of technical help. Before you could tell by multiple down votes.

Have I had someone “disagree” with my post just because they didn’t agree with me sure but that’s just the way it is. Not too long ago guy was claiming that certain Apple charger needed a 20 W adapter to for full speed and I even posted screenshots of the Apple webpage showing him that was incorrect but he still “disagreed” with that post. I’m OK with that because maybe he was having a bad day. It’s the forms and we’re just trying to help people and sometimes they disagree. For some reason people online don’t think others should be allowed to disagree with them. Of course no I said disagree not harassment. That’s a huge difference.

As to trolling if someone is just going through all your posts and reacting to them then just report it to admin. I mean I can react to your comments in the thread I’m in but I’m just continuously following you around on the forms and randomly reacting to your stuff then that’s not acceptable. That’s why we have admin so they can correct this. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Yeah, but, the intention of the forums should be established: if it’s a place only to get tech help, then yeah the thumbs down makes sense.

But it’s more than just tech help. It’s socializing and commenting on topical posts. It’s in those places that a thumbs down is used mostly as an attack and trolling.

Same as YouTube: if it was just tech help videos, then YouTube’s decision was not helpful and bad.

But since it is also a place (arguably more-so) that is about entertainment, then removing the thumbs down was a good move to cut down on trolling and planned attacks to make something look bad.

Is MR a tech help forum, or a discussion forum? It’s both. Hence the conversation rages on 😆

 

[JM]

You made me look. It isn't. 😉

Okay well keep your eyes open 👀 I hope someone does take it now 🤣

But guarantee it won’t be me, haha. Whoever wields the cape and cowl must do so responsibly 🤣

 

[millerj123]

Okay well keep your eyes open 👀 I hope someone does take it now 🤣

But guarantee it won’t be me, haha. Whoever wields the cape and cowl must do so responsibly 🤣

I leave the power in someone's capable hands...

 

[russell_314]

Yeah, but, the intention of the forums should be established: if it’s a place only to get tech help, then yeah the thumbs down makes sense.

But it’s more than just tech help. It’s socializing and commenting on topical posts. It’s in those places that a thumbs down is used mostly as an attack and trolling.

Same as YouTube: if it was just tech help videos, then YouTube’s decision was not helpful and bad.

But since it is also a place (arguably more-so) that is about entertainment, then removing the thumbs down was a good move to cut down on trolling and planned attacks to make something look bad.

Is MR a tech help forum, or a discussion forum? It’s both. Hence the conversation rages on 😆

I guess so but even then thumbs down it’s just means disagree. It would be like if I thumbs down this I just disagree with it. I know in modern society we’re having a hard time accepting people disagreeing with what we believe but just outright removing any form of communicating that isn’t helpful.

I’m not saying it’s okay to troll people because that’s something the forms mods should deal with. I just think giving people the right to disagree with a statement in a reaction takes away from the forms. If I make a comment such as the Apple M2 processor makes everything before it obsolete and someone wants to disagree then I don’t see a big harm. Even if that got 100 people in the forms to disagree then well they disagreed with my statement. I don’t think a bunch of people disagreeing would be trolling if they are just doing it as a statement to disagree.

I can see somehow in the political forums where it could be (I’m really trying not to get in the politics) considered trolling but I consider the political forums to be the dumpster fire of this page and there’s nothing good there anyway so go ahead and remove all the reactions from that forum 😂😂😂


I’m not sure there’s a perfect answer because I’ve even seen people use the mods to troll. I would post something saying X and someone would reply well prove it. I was newish and didn’t know any better but that was bait. I would just comment look it up it’s common knowledge. Well apparently if someone posts demanding you prove something then you have to show proof. I have since learned to word my posts to state everything is my opinion so that makes it more difficult for me to be trolled in this way.


As to the YouTube thing I think most video content is just entertainment so the thumbs down isn’t important other than just expressing dislike. I feel a more reasonable step YouTube could’ve done was give the content creator the ability to remove the dislike option and that would’ve been indicated where the dislike button should be. That way if it’s just some song that everyone thought was terrible there’s no option to dislike it but if it’s a tech instructions and you see the option for dislike was removed it would be a red flag that the video might be trolling with bad information.

Maybe something similar could be done here but I suspect that would be considerably more difficult and since the forums is probably not managed by Google they don’t have the staff to make that happen

 

[JM]

I consider the political forums to be the dumpster fire of this page and there’s nothing good there anyway so go ahead and remove all the reactions from that forum 😂😂😂

Big lol 😂

I feel a more reasonable step YouTube could’ve done was give the content creator the ability to remove the dislike option and that would’ve been indicated where the dislike button should be.

That would have been a good idea. They give creators ability to disable comments. Why not the dislike? 🤷‍♂️

Maybe something similar could be done here but I suspect that would be considerably more difficult

It seems that way from the comments left by Moderators in this thread.

I have noticed that some threads allow thumbs down, while others don’t; and I haven’t figured out how it’s applied. Someone made the suggestion to disable thumbs down in all except in tech help threads, and that seemed like a decent idea. The threads that lean towards debates and potential trolling (news articles, opinion pieces from forum members, general discussion, etc.) could have the thumbs down disabled.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

No, cause then people who actually deserve a thumbs up or a laugh wouldn’t get it.

Also, I’m disheartened reading this thread that shows how the laugh reaction is being used maliciously. I love giving a laugh to a post that is truly funny.

Me too. I am disheartened the laugh reaction being used antagonistically.

And this is exactly why I will hardly ever (or exceptionally rarely) use the "laugh" emoji, precisely because it does not mean - or, it no longer means - that you find something to be funny, or are applauding wit, but rather that you are laughing at (as in "ha-ha, you complete cretin, what a moronic thing to want to write") - rather than laughing with ("that is clever and witty and funny, and I applaud and appreciate that you have made me laugh") - someone or something.

Thus, the meaning of the laugh emoji - as used in these (and other) online fora has changed, and has been transformed by the way it is used online, and - when using that emoji - it is no longer possible to distinguish between laughing at a post, (and poster) or laughing with the person who made the post.

In practice, nowadays, when seeking to express that I enjoyed the wit of a post, I will use the "like" emoji, and add - in writing - that I think the post is clever and witty.

In fact, I don't use the "laugh" emoji any longer, - or hardly ever - especially if I find a post funny, not least because I prefer not to have the reader of the post (and the original writer of the post) think that I viewed the contents with contempt, rather than with amusement.

Of course, - by declining to use the "laugh" emoji to express joy in wit and laughter - this approach simply serves to reserve the use of that emoji for those who wish to use it to express sarcastic derision.

And so, the use of language - even online language - evolves in response to circumstances, context, environment, and online culture.

My personal preference would be to discard all emojis, or confine the use of them to "likes".

Failing that, a more subtle and extensive emoji vocabulary may need to be developed, one that, for example, allows for a distinction to be drawn, between laughter at something - laughter as disagreement laced with derision and contempt - and laughter as an expression of uninhibited joy and appreciation of wit.

 

[I7guy]

And this is exactly why I will hardly ever (or exceptionally rarely) use the "laugh" emoji, precisely because it does not mean - or, it no longer means - that you find something to be funny, or are applauding wit, but rather that you are laughing at (as in "ha-ha, you complete cretin, what a moronic thing to want to write") - rather than laughing with ("that is clever and witty and funny, and I applaud that you have made me laugh") - someone or something.

Thus, the meaning of the laugh emoji - as used in these (and other) online fora has changed, and has been transformed by the way it is used online, and - when using that emoji - it is no longer possible to distinguish between laughing at a post, (and poster) or laughing with the person who made the post.

In practice, nowadays, when seeking to express that I enjoyed the wit of a post, I will use the "like" emoji, and add - in writing - that I think the post is clever and witty.

In fact, I don't use the "laugh" emoji any longer, - or hardly ever - especially if I find a post funny, not least because I prefer not to have the reader of the post (and the original writer of the post) think that I viewed the contents with contempt, rather than with amusement.

Of course, - by declining to use the "laugh" emoji to express joy in wit and laughter - this approach simply serves to reserve the use of that emoji for those who wish to use it to express sarcastic derision.

And so, the use of language - even online language - evolves in response to circumstances, environment, and online culture.

My personal preference would be to discard all emojis, or confine the use of them to "likes".

Failing that, a more subtle and extensive emoji vocabulary may need to be developed, one that, for example, allows for a distinction to be drawn, between laughter at something - laughter as disagreement laced with derision and contempt - and laughter as an expression of uninhibited joy and appreciation of wit.

The “haha” emoji as it is seems mockingly derisive. I like the concept of an emoji that conveys the spirit of “rofl” but dont like the current emoji.

So maybe the powers to be could change the emoji to more reflect “rofl”.

 

[Weaselboy]

I have noticed that some threads allow thumbs down, while others don’t; and I haven’t figured out how it’s applied.

Thumbs down is only enabled in news threads.

 

[JM]

Thumbs down is only enabled in news threads.

Thank you. The more you know 😄

 

[turbineseaplane]

In practice, nowadays, when seeking to express that I enjoyed the wit of a post, I will use the "like" emoji, and add - in writing - that I think the post is clever and witty.

In fact, I don't use the "laugh" emoji any longer, - or hardly ever - especially if I find a post funny, not least because I prefer not to have the reader of the post (and the original writer of the post) think that I viewed the contents with contempt, rather than with amusement.

Right there with you on this

The laugh being used in two very opposite ways essentially renders it functionally useless (beyond trolling), as I share your concern about using it to express genuine laughter and enjoyment at a post ... for fear of misinterpretation by the poster.

 

[JM]

And this is exactly why I will hardly ever (or exceptionally rarely) use the "laugh" emoji, precisely because it does not mean - or, it no longer means - that you find something to be funny, or are applauding wit, but rather that you are laughing at (as in "ha-ha, you complete cretin, what a moronic thing to want to write") - rather than laughing with ("that is clever and witty and funny, and I applaud that you have made me laugh") - someone or something.

Thus, the meaning of the laugh emoji - as used in these (and other) online fora has changed, and has been transformed by the way it is used online, and - when using that emoji - it is no longer possible to distinguish between laughing at a post, (and poster) or laughing with the person who made the post.

In practice, nowadays, when seeking to express that I enjoyed the wit of a post, I will use the "like" emoji, and add - in writing - that I think the post is clever and witty.

In fact, I don't use the "laugh" emoji any longer, - or hardly ever - especially if I find a post funny, not least because I prefer not to have the reader of the post (and the original writer of the post) think that I viewed the contents with contempt, rather than with amusement.

Of course, - by declining to use the "laugh" emoji to express joy in wit and laughter - this approach simply serves to reserve the use of that emoji for those who wish to use it to express sarcastic derision.

And so, the use of language - even online language - evolves in response to circumstances, environment, and online culture.

My personal preference would be to discard all emojis, or confine the use of them to "likes".

Failing that, a more subtle and extensive emoji vocabulary may need to be developed, one that, for example, allows for a distinction to be drawn, between laughter at something - laughter as disagreement laced with derision and contempt - and laughter as an expression of uninhibited joy and appreciation of wit.

I added to my signature a * explaining that the laugh emoji isn’t meant for derision/antagonizing. Haha not that it does any good for a reaction only to a post

But yeah I’m with you try to explain the reaction, ESPECIALLY if I give it a thumbs down. It’s rare… wielded with responsibility 😁

How about stickers, a la’ iMessage? That can’t go wrong in any way, can it. And it’ll look amazing. Just imagine. Lol.

 

[turbineseaplane]

^^ See what I did there?



Who knows what I meant with that laugh...right?