Withdrawn from sale on MR

[LeeW]

I can understand the point of it in the news articles, I just don't think it works as well as perhaps intended.

MR posts an article, by the time I read it there are already 400 replies. I am not reading all of them but I am interested in the general thoughts of others towards the article. So the intention I would imagine is for the most popular responses out of those 400 to be relevant and representative of what people feel about it.

The disagrees reaction filters out anything that members strongly don't agree with for whatever reason. If they don't like it I probably won't either, so good, tuck it away out of sight.

But, the issue is that the most liked responses tend to be:

"Wow, Amazing!"
"Take my money"
"Dream on x provider, Apple is still the bestest in the whole wide world"
and so on.

Nothing that actually provides me with anything helpful out of those 400 replies. The issue is that the most useful ones are there but they are too far down the "ranking" to see them on the Front page due to the "Wow, Amazing" with 100 likes vs the real ones that only get 40 likes because they are made hours after the ones replying the fastest, for? Likes. After the first page or two, people are less enthusiastic to like.

Not the fault of MR, just the way it is.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Get rid of all reacts, including "likes". The invention of "likes" was when the internet went downhill. I know this will never happen... not just here but anywhere. But one can dream of returning to a less toxic and addictive internet.

I agree, and I wish that this option had been available.

However, failing that, I think that it might perhaps be possible to reduce this problem - for those who perceive it a problem - or address this issue, by declining to tally, or enumerate, or count, the number of "likes" (or "dislikes") a post, or a poster, receives.

 

[mollyc]

I agree, and I wish that this option had been available.

However, failing that, I think that it might perhaps be possible to reduce this problem - for those who perceive it a problem - or address this issue, by declining to tally, or enumerate, or count, the number of "likes" (or "dislikes") a post, or a poster, receives.

How often are you looking at the reaction score of other posters? Or even of yourself? They are hidden by default. Just don't click on them.

 

[Analog Kid]

It's a little weird that you chose my comment to give this reply to. The point I was making is that I have much more nuanced views than the poll permits me to express. I was in favor of agree/disagree in all threads mainly because, while I think "disagree" is problematic as the first response, I think it is useful in being able to end a discussion loop once one's views have been fully expressed.

That option wasn't offered. Of the remaining two, I think we can by with only "like" if it means getting rid of the more ambiguous ones.

All of that said, and poll aside, I disagree with much of what you've said.

Providing FEWER ways to express those feelings will simply cause those feelings to be amplified in the fewer ways available to express them. We lose the granularity of response.

Having a "Like only" reaction system restricts the expression of emotions into only direction.

So with one button, we get one available response. With two buttons we get two responses.

If only we could find a way of combining, I dunno, say 26 buttons in a way that allowed greater richness and granularity in responses...

If a person gets their feelings hurt by a thumbs-down reaction, it is a guarantee they'll have a meltdown if the only way to express disagreement is to post a comment saying so.

Hurt feelings. Triggered. Traumatized. These aren't the words people opposed to thumbs-down are using. Applying these interpretations to other peoples arguments are an attempt to denigrate those arguments.

What is being argued, by me included, is that a simple "disagree" button doesn't lend itself to a high quality discussion-- it encourages sniping from the sidelines. It's the equivalent to heckling the speaker from the back of the room.

So no, people aren't sobbing into their pillow because someone disagreed. And nobody is going to melt down if that disagreement is specified in actual words explaining the counter point.

The natural response to a disagreement is to become defensive.

Only if you are going into the discussion viewing it as fight to be won. If you're actually having an open conversation then the natural response to disagreement is interest.

And if the poster wants to know why someone thumbs-down the post and didn't post why... there's a reason they chose not to explain it.

What would that reason be? If you don't have the courage of your convictions to subject them to the scrutiny of others, maybe you shouldn't be responding at all...

Don't be the guy in the back of the room going <cough> <cough> <********!>

One's experience on MacRumors forum comes down to... self-control and developing a thick skin.

Sure, and some helpful regulation of civility by the mods and the forum rules.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

They are hidden by default. Just don't click on them.

Not if someone - inexplicably - chooses to include them in psychedelic colours as a part of his (or her) signature.

In any case, they didn't exist when I first joined MR, and, personally, this remains my preference.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It's a little weird that you chose my comment to give this reply to. The point I was making is that I have much more nuanced views than the poll permits me to express. I was in favor of agree/disagree in all threads mainly because, while I think "disagree" is problematic as the first response, I think it is useful in being able to end a discussion loop once one's views have been fully expressed.

That option wasn't offered. Of the remaining two, I think we can by with only "like" if it means getting rid of the more ambiguous ones.

All of that said, and poll aside, I disagree with much of what you've said.



So with one button, we get one available response. With two buttons we get two responses.

If only we could find a way of combining, I dunno, say 26 buttons in a way that allowed greater richness and granularity in responses...



Hurt feelings. Triggered. Traumatized. These aren't the words people opposed to thumbs-down are using. Applying these interpretations to other peoples arguments are an attempt to denigrate those arguments.

What is being argued, by me included, is that a simple "disagree" button doesn't lend itself to a high quality discussion-- it encourages sniping from the sidelines. It's the equivalent to heckling the speaker from the back of the room.

So no, people aren't sobbing into their pillow because someone disagreed. And nobody is going to melt down if that disagreement is specified in actual words explaining the counter point.



Only if you are going into the discussion viewing it as fight to be won. If you're actually having an open conversation then the natural response to disagreement is interest.



What would that reason be? If you don't have the courage of your convictions to subject them to the scrutiny of others, maybe you shouldn't be responding at all...

Don't be the guy in the back of the room going <cough> <cough> <********!>



Sure, and some helpful regulation of civility by the mods and the forum rules.

An excellent, thoughtful and well argued post with which I find myself in complete agreement.

 

[mollyc]

Not if someone - inexplicably - chooses to include them in psychedelic colours as a part of his (or her) signature.

In any case, they didn't exist when I first joined MR, and, personally, this remains my preference.

Well luckily you can hide signatures also. Problem solved on an individual basis.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

I’m fine with the options that are there. What I’d like to see added is a simple thumbs-down, “I disagree” option. Sometimes I’m not angry, I’m not sad, it’s not funny, I simply… disagree.

 

[laptech]

Any system that offers 'dislike/disagree' features will always be abused. It is very obvious to see in MR if someone makes a post that disagrees with another, you will find the disgruntled member will start to put dislike/disagree emoji's on that persons posts. It is their way of saying 'I dislike you, I do not like you' and use emoji's to indicate that fact without breaking forum rules. Yes you can report it to the mods but how many people here have done so only to be told 'no action will be taken'.

We've seen it time and time again, someone will make a post saying 'I love that colour' or 'I love that design' and then we will see people post like emoji's or love emoji's. I mean, come on, really!!!. The whole like system needs to be overhauled.

 

[adrianlondon]

But, the issue is that the most liked responses tend to be:

"Wow, Amazing!"
"Take my money"
"Dream on x provider, Apple is still the bestest in the whole wide world"
and so on.

An automated system which gives 1000 thumbs-down and a 7-day ban for anyone who posts those, including that irritating "Fry" meme, "How's battery life?" an hour after a release comes out, "Safari is snappier hehehehe", "You're xxxxx ing it wrong", "... rolling in his grave", "... gate".

I'm grumpy today

 

[LeeW]

"How's battery life?" an hour after a release comes out

Exactly this. or I especially like:

Is 8GB of Ram enough for me?

Help me decide what to buy - followed by zero information or even another reply to the thread whilst a dozen other people still try and argue out what that person should buy based again on zero information.

 

[icanhazmac]

Y'all forgot "can an iPad replace my desktop/laptop"!

I'm the last person to call for the removal of meme's but people need to at least try to be witty.

I used to be sick of the Tim Cook "Its happening" meme, but since it is very rarely used anymore I kind of miss it.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

An automated system which gives 1000 thumbs-down and a 7-day ban for anyone who posts those, including that irritating "Fry" meme, "How's battery life?" an hour after a release comes out, "Safari is snappier hehehehe", "You're xxxxx ing it wrong", "... rolling in his grave", "... gate".

I'm grumpy today

Oh, yes.

Ban all emojis, ban all memes, and remove the tallies for "likes" and "dislikes".

Actually, - bearing in mind that old saying that "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" - I suspect that I may be more than a little grumpy, today, too.

 

[Weaselboy]

I used to be sick of the Tim Cook "Its happening" meme, but since it is very rarely used anymore I kind of miss it.

You are making my eye twitch...

 

[KaliYoni]

Now this thread is turning into one of our infinite Annoying XXX That Bugs You™ threads...
;-)

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Now this thread is turning into one of our infinite Annoying XXX That Bugs You™ threads...
;-)

I think that this was almost inevitable, given, firstly, the topic, and secondly, the reactions to the topic.

 

[mollyc]

Oh, yes.

Ban all emojis, ban all memes, and remove the tallies for "likes" and "dislikes".

Actually, - bearing in mind that old saying that "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" - I suspect that I may be more than a little grumpy, today, too.

I can't believe someone who professes to be so liberal in thought and discussion wants to ban forms of communication, and emojis at that. Admittedly this is a private site and the owner and moderators steer the direction of speech, however free or not. But to speak of banning things is ludicrous in my opinion.

Emojis are not the problem here, nor are like and dislikes. The real world out there is far uglier than a message board about Apple products. If tallying likes and dislikes and seeing some graphics a couple of times a day on this site is so troublesome, maybe you need to look elsewhere for discussion. Because if everyone just agrees all the time, nothing new ever happens and no one ever opens their mind to new thoughts.

 

[LeeW]

The real world out there is far uglier than a message board about Apple products.

I am not sure some of the members know of the real world..

 

[Analog Kid]

Emojis are not the problem here

It seems the forums are of two minds on that point... They love their reaction emoji, but hate that Apple maintains Unicode compliance...

The real world out there is far uglier than a message board about Apple products. If tallying likes and dislikes and seeing some graphics a couple of times a day on this site is so troublesome, maybe you need to look elsewhere for discussion.

Everything can be improved. There's no harm in discussing how that might happen. The real world is a pretty low bar to clear if you're trying to build a better community.

Because if everyone just agrees all the time, nothing new ever happens and no one ever opens their mind to new thoughts.

You're going to have to show me where anyone anywhere in this thread has advocated for everyone agreeing all the time... Nobody wants that.

The debate about the "disagree" button isn't that we want less disagreement, it's that we want more robust disagreement. Clicking a thumbs down isn't disagreement, it's heckling. If you disagree, say why and open your own opinions up for debate-- that's how you open minds to new thoughts.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It seems the forums are of two minds on that point... They love their reaction emoji, but hate that Apple maintains Unicode compliance...



Everything can be improved. There's no harm in discussing how that might happen. The real world is a pretty low bar to clear if you're trying to build a better community.



You're going to have to show me where anyone anywhere in this thread has advocated for everyone agreeing all the time... Nobody wants that.

The debate about the "disagree" button isn't that we want less disagreement, it's that we want more robust disagreement. Clicking a thumbs down isn't disagreement, it's heckling. If you disagree, say why and open your own opinions up for debate-- that's how you open minds to new thoughts.

Bravo, and very well said.

 

[maflynn]

It seems the forums are of two minds on that point... They love their reaction emoji, but hate that Apple maintains Unicode compliance

Why are you bringing that up? This is about the use of the thumbs down not Unicode compliance. Beside your argument is flawed. I'm pro-emoji and I'm not against apple Unicode compliance.

Everything can be improved. There's no harm in discussing how that might happen. The real world is a pretty low bar to clear if you're trying to build a better community.

I'm all for improving but its clear that there are members who want to ban a form of communication. That's not improvement but rather an impairment. Why impede member'ss ability to communicate?

Clicking a thumbs down isn't disagreement, it's heckling.

You may need to look up the definition of heckle, the disagree button is not interrupting, rude comments or shouting. They're conveying their disagreement pure and simple

If you disagree, say why and open your own opinions up for debate-- that's how you open minds to new thoughts.

You mean like this:

Bravo, and very well said.

How is that post any better then just clicking the like button? There are plenty of times where using the disagree button is sufficient to convey your thoughts without needlessly creating word soup

Ban all emojis, ban all memes, and remove the tallies for "likes" and "dislikes".

But yet you use them? I don't understand how people are coming out against the use of emojis, but yet use them in their day to day activity here at MR? Seems hypercritical to me

 

[mollyc]

You're going to have to show me where anyone anywhere in this thread has advocated for everyone agreeing all the time... Nobody wants that.

The debate about the "disagree" button isn't that we want less disagreement, it's that we want more robust disagreement. Clicking a thumbs down isn't disagreement, it's heckling. If you disagree, say why and open your own opinions up for debate-- that's how you open minds to new thoughts.

Well to be fair I extrapolated the post advocating "banning" everything as wanting everyone to agree. Why else would you want to ban forms of expression?

I have honestly been a part of numerous conversations over the years here with multiple people on multiple topics. I have frequently found that people don't want an educated discourse, they just want to be "right." They have no interest in opening their minds. Frankly there is some of that on this thread. Those of us who don't mind the current emoji system, and perhaps believe the addition of another would be beneficial, seek only to expand the ability to express an opinion. Believe it or not, opinions do not have to be diatribes. No is a complete sentence, and similarly a Like or Dislike reaction can be all that is needed. And alternatively, if people do want to flesh out their opinion, there is an entire reply box with which they may do so - and they can at the same time avoid using an emoji reaction if it goes against their principles. Removing, or "banning" as as been advocated, removes an option to convey an opinion.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Why are you bringing that up? This is about the use of the thumbs down not Unicode compliance. Beside your argument is flawed. I'm pro-emoji and I'm not against apple Unicode compliance.


I'm all for improving but its clear that there are members who want to ban a form of communication. That's not improvement but rather an impairment. Why impede member'ss ability to communicate?

If that form of communication is confined to what @Analog Kid (correctly, to my mind) describes as the equivalent of an online heckle from the back row, then, yes, I do favour curbing the use of it.

You may need to look up the definition of heckle, the disagree button is not interrupting, rude comments or shouting. They're conveying their disagreement pure and simple
View attachment 2224610



You mean like this:



How is that post any better then just clicking the like button? There are plenty of times where using the disagree button is sufficient to convey your thoughts without needlessly creating word soup

Because I had a four hour Zoom meeting this morning/afternoon, and had not the time to enumerate just exactly how much I found myself in agreement with @Analog Kid, and preferred not to simply repeat what he had said, not least, as I lacked the time to do so.

Anyway, I wished to signal my whole-heated approval of what he had written.

That still stands.

But yet you use them? I don't understand how people are coming out against the use of emojis, but yet use them in their day to day activity here at MR? Seems hypercritical to me


View attachment 2224608

Yes, I do use them, as I have found myself imitating - perhaps adapting to - some of these changes in how one communicates on social media.

However, that doesn't alter the fact that I cannot abide them, and would far prefer if they didn't exist and were excised (yes, they are a convenient, fashionable - and, I would argue, sometimes intellectually lazy - short-hand).

Nevertheless, they do exist, and, I expect that they shall continue to exist

I am merely expressing a preference - one, for that matter, that I do not expect to be heeded, as emojis drive traffic and encourage posters to reply with the use of such an easy response.

Of greater concern is the use of the "dislike" emoji; as currently used, I believe that it contributes little except by adding an unpleasant tone of nihilistic negativity to some threads.

As @Analog Kid has already pointed out, nobody at any time has advocated for complete unanimity, or complete agreement. Instead, I would prefer to see argument, which, in fairness, is exactly what has taken place on this thread on the part of those who have disagreed with what I have written.

 

[mollyc]

The irony is so strong here.

 

[maflynn]

Because I had a four hour Zoom meeting this morning/afternoon, and had not the time to enumerate just exactly how much I found myself in agreement

I understand life happens, and too bad there's not way to show a positive reaction, perhaps something like a thumbs up, so you can show your agreement without adding to the thread bloat.

I'm being facetious of course and I'm not trying to pick on you, but rather point out, your very actions are evidence to why using reactions can and does make so much sense - whether they're positive reactions or negative.

Nevertheless, they do exist, and, I expect that they shall continue to exist

I think that in of itself shows the value in having such, which is why its confusing where you and others stated that banning people ought happen over the use or the harsh negative towards emojis

describes as the equivalent of an online heckle from the back row, then, yes, I do favour curbing the use of it.

I don't want to split hairs but its not disruptive which is part of definition of the word heckle. To me heckle is used to belittle, stop or interfere with someone. That's simply not the case with the disagree reaction. I get that many people (including me) don't like it when an opinion is offered and its attacked, or disagreed with. Having a post provides an avenue for a rebuttal, where as a thumbs down would not. Yet I think its evident that the majority of people value the very action you're calling heckling. I can and do use the disagree emoji, and for a variety of reasons it makes more sense then writing a post.

I mean I could possibly just post "No I disagree" it's within the rules, it provides no details, causes bloat, it does not add to the conversation and its not helpful. The disagree reaction solves all of that imo