Agree and disagree button

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

Exactly...

I'm hijacking AH but yet you respond "Exactly" when I say that I get on with the vast majority of people there.

My point is, if what you say was true, I would not get along with the majority.

I've said all I have to say to you.

I leave as I came in.

I think Tar's idea is a cracking one.

A number's system would vastly better than the current system I think, which is all to easily abused.

Dudess

Oh that's another thing you do - twist words. I said "exactly" to the bit about you not getting on with three or four people.

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Just as a thought exercise, could all the people who oppose the 'no' button please briefly outline why their argument does not apply to opposing the 'yes' button?

In a nutshell: this is a discussion forum, not an "agreement"/"liking" forum.

Agreeing with posters/liking their posts rarely requires explanation but it's good to be able to express this, so the thanks button diminishes +1 type posts.

Disagreeing doesn't require explanation (nobody's putting a gun to the person's head) but it will invariably be asked for, and it makes for better discussion.

My take on it anyway...

Dohnny Jepp

I dont support or oppose the thanks button. It has it's benefits yet also has its negatives.

However its negatives don't go so far as to alienate and bully posters. If a No-Thanks button is brought in, the forums will become a circus. It will become bad blooded, people going out of their way to give negative thanks for the sake of revenge. People no longer contributing because of precieved disrespect at their efforts.

Actually just a thought, Can you imagine this negative thanks in the soccer forum?

I'd quicker support getting rid of the thanks button altogether then bringing in a negative thanks button.

Bonito

Nyla Deafening Nature wrote: »

OutlawPete and Dudess should just fuck and get it over with.

Thanks whoring smug bastard

Why don't you join in and make it a three way :pac:

4zn76tysfajdxp

I like to watch.

Dohnny Jepp

Bonito wrote: »

Thanks whoring smug bastard

Why don't you join in and make it a three way :pac:

Then that'd be too much ego for one bed :pac:

Bonito

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Just as a thought exercise, could all the people who oppose the 'no' button please briefly outline why their argument does not apply to opposing the 'yes' button?

Karsini wrote: »

Sure.

Thanking a post implies that you agree with what the poster said. By it's very nature it doesn't necessarily require additional input, as what needs to be said has already been said. But to "no thanks" a post you'd be expected to explain why; it hasn't been covered.

Exactly. This works both ways. As I said earlier if you disagree with a post you have two options. 1) Make a post and say why you disagree. People who agree with your disagreement will then be able to thank you to say they share your views or 2) See if there's already a post on the thread that disagrees with the post you also disagree with and covers all your views as to why you disagree and thank it. Simples.

OutlawPete wrote: »

I think Tar's idea is a cracking one.

A number's system would vastly better than the current system I think, which is all to easily abused.

You must have missed my post on the previous page

Gordon

OutlawPete and Dudess, quit arguing with each other and being off topic, it's getting stale. If you can't do this, please stop posting on Feedback.

4zn76tysfajdxp

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

Then that'd be too much ego for one bed :pac:

Flamed Diving

Karsini wrote: »

Sure.

Thanking a post implies that you agree with what the poster said. By it's very nature it doesn't necessarily require additional input, as what needs to be said has already been said. But to "no thanks" a post you'd be expected to explain why; it hasn't been covered.

Dudess wrote: »

Oh that's another thing you do - twist words. I said "exactly" to the bit about you not getting on with three or four people.

In a nutshell: this is a discussion forum, not an "agreement"/"liking" forum.

Agreeing with posters/liking their posts rarely requires explanation but it's good to be able to express this, so the thanks button diminishes +1 type posts.

Disagreeing doesn't require explanation (nobody's putting a gun to the person's head) but it will invariably be asked for, and it makes for better discussion.

My take on it anyway...

The thanks button exists for people who want to say they lean positively towards the post without providing an explanation. There are those people reading posts who lean negatively away from the same post, but don't feel so compelled to post (same as yes brigade). Therefore the existing system has a bias towards people who agree with posts and away from those who disagree.

Yes, it is a discussion forum. But sometimes you just want to say 'bollocks'.

Dudess

And then you'll get "why do you disagree with me?" whereas you're not going to get "why did you thank my post?".

Flamed Diving

Dudess wrote: »

And then you'll get "why do you disagree with me?" whereas you're not going to get "why did you thank my post?".

Hence the number/grade system.

Bonito

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Hence the number/grade system.

Ok and would you want that number grade system anonymous or public and why?

Flamed Diving

Bonito wrote: »

Ok and would you want that number grade system anonymous or public and why?

Anonymous, just so we don't have the problems outlined above. Who needs to know who graded them, and why?

fonecrusher1

FFS lads in all fairness how many times do i have to update everyone. We're moving away from the idea of just having a 'no thanks' button. As it might possibly upset certain people.
Its now about incorporating a numerical tag to each post instead of pinning names to them.

The value of the number would be indicative of whether or not people agree with or disagree with the post. ie; if a post has a value of [+22] that means lots of people like/agree with the post. If it had a value of [-2] then most people don't like/disagree with the post. Yes similar to youtube, but i don't like associating the idea with youtube because its not a forum with rules & bans & therefore attracts comments from morons.

The reason i wouldn't have a poll on this issue in feedback is because i think its a fairly in-active area of the forum that possibly does not represent a typical cross-section of the boards.ie community.

If i tried it in AH would it get shot down in flames? - This question is aimed at the administrators or whoever has the ability & authority to lock threads in AH.

WindSock

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Anonymous, just so we don't have the problems outlined above. Who needs to know who graded them, and why?

I'd like to know who is dissin on my posts. It may be the same person who has a vendetta against me, or has used multiple accounts to prevent me from getting my potd fix :mad:

Flamed Diving

WindSock wrote: »

I'd like to know who is dissin on my posts. It may be the same person who has a vendetta against me, or has used multiple accounts to prevent me from getting my potd fix :mad:

Such is life...

Bonito

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Anonymous, just so we don't have the problems outlined above. Who needs to know who graded them, and why?

That'll avoid these so called "cliques" I've been hearing about but it may create paranoia. Say some clicks a -1 on a post and then they make a post. The person who has been disagreed with may lash out with an "Oh, so it was you who clicked -1"

Obviously it's not a problem unless the person is a thanks whore but, there are some people who get out branded and labeled a thanks whore and then people tend to avoid them. Then you'll get the day were they'll post something a lot of people will agree with and they'll get no thanks at all. Even though other postsers will say "Yes I completely agree" they might go "Oh, it's just him/her they're just looking for thanks".

I think a +1/-1 system would create too many one liners and things would get a tad boring =/

I'm curious as to whether the Op and fonecrusher1 mean having this system site wide or just a certain forum/fora.

Flamed Diving

Bonito wrote: »

That'll avoid these so called "cliques" I've been hearing about but it may create paranoia. Say some clicks a -1 on a post and then they make a post. The person who has been disagreed with may lash out with an "Oh, so it was you who clicked -1"

Obviously it's not a problem unless the person is a thanks whore but, there are some people who get out branded and labeled a thanks whore and then people tend to avoid them. Then you'll get the day were they'll post something a lot of people will agree with and they'll get no thanks at all. Even though other postsers will say "Yes I completely agree" they might go "Oh, it's just him/her they're just looking for thanks".

I think a +1/-1 system would create too many one liners and things would get a tad boring =/

I'm curious as to whether the Op and fonecrusher1 mean having this system site wide or just a certain forum/fora.

Well, this is all speculation on both sides. We could have a trial run in a popular forum, see what happens.

4zn76tysfajdxp

I would disagree with the anonymity thing because of abuse from dupe accounts.

Flamed Diving

Question:

How does having public grading prevent "dupe account" voting, working from the assumption that mods have access to who is voting, either way?

Bonito

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

FFS lads in all fairness how many times do i have to update everyone. We're moving away from the idea of just having a 'no thanks' button. As it might possibly upset certain people.
Its now about incorporating a numerical tag to each post instead of pinning names to them.

The value of the number would be indicative of whether or not people agree with or disagree with the post. ie; if a post has a value of [+22] that means lots of people like/agree with the post. If it had a value of [-2] then most people don't like/disagree with the post. Yes similar to youtube, but i don't like associating the idea with youtube because its not a forum with rules & bans & therefore attracts comments from morons.

The reason i wouldn't have a poll on this issue in feedback is because i think its a fairly in-active area of the forum that possibly does not represent a typical cross-section of the boards.ie community.

If i tried it in AH would it get shot down in flames? - This question is aimed at the administrators or whoever has the ability & authority to lock threads in AH.

You can't just take the thanks system away and not replace it with something. The reason the thanks feature is there is to stop all the +1 posts.

Dudess

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

We're moving away from the idea of just having a 'no thanks' button. As it might possibly upset certain people.

Nobody'd be "upset" - many people just disagree with it as they feel it's pointless. They gave numerous explanations as to why.

If i tried it in AH would it get shot down in flames? - This question is aimed at the administrators or whoever has the ability & authority to lock threads in AH.

Just to add to that: has a feedback thread ever been allowed in After Hours?

fonecrusher1

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Well, this is all speculation on both sides. We could have a trial run in a popular forum, see what happens.

Exactly. Whats the harm in trying it. I genuinely think it could make the forum better.
If it fails then i'l be the first to accept that the current system works better.

But until its given a trial & fails or succeeds, not one of us can predict what will happen.

Bonito

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Exactly. Whats the harm in trying it. I genuinely think it could make the forum better.
If it fails then i'l be the first to accept that the current system works better.

But until its given a trial & fails or succeeds, not one of us can predict what will happen.

Look. The topic of this thread is "agree/disagree" button whereas originally you were saying just get rid of the thanks button. Which is it? Do you want thanks gone altogether or replaced with a different system like agree/disagree?

I think applying it to a popular forum would be throwing it in the deep end. It should be introduced to a somewhat small but semi popular forum/fora to start with.

TBH the only place I can see this working is the threads of NSFW were we trick people. eg. Man gets hit by train and horrific F1 accident. You know something is up when you see a load of thanks but when you see a load of -1's you're going to fall for it :pac:

Also what's to stop people completely boycotting the disagree button and only using the agree button? I think it's lazy. If I agree with someone and have something to add I'll do it. I'm not thanks whoring from the person I agree with it. I'm adding info as to why I agree and they might just happen to thank me as in to say "Good point to add, why didn't I think of that?"

If I see something I disagree with I wont bother clicking disagree because if I do disagree I'll make a post why I disagree. Yes, I know some people wont but just because they're lazy doesn't mean we should change the system IMO.

Bottom line if you disagree tell us why. If you agree click thanks. If you agree but have something to add then do both. Don't just click disagree or -1 and then run off. What's the point in that? Obviously someone may come along later and make a post that highlights why you disagree and then you'll agree with them but why wait for someone else to do it? Why be lazy and not get the finger out and do it yourself and state why you disgree with someone rather than relying on a little button?

A thanks system keeps boards at a positive attitude. There'll be more aggro with a +1/-1 or agree/disagree system.

Here's what happens without a thanks button:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055249267

Flamed Diving

Bonito wrote: »

Bottom line if you disagree tell us why. If you agree click thanks. If you agree but have something to add then do both. Don't just click disagree or -1 and then run off. What's the point in that? Obviously someone may come along later and make a post that highlights why you disagree and then you'll agree with them but why wait for someone else to do it? Why be lazy and not get the finger out and do it yourself and state why you disgree with someone rather than relying on a little button?

Do you always respond to every single post you disagree with?

Bonito

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Do you always respond to every single post you disagree with?

Yes. Hence why the multi quote feature is a doddle.

Bonito

Karsini wrote: »

Here's what happens without a thanks button:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055249267

TBH It wasn't pigheads fault the Q was asked there :pac:

fonecrusher1

Bonito wrote: »

Look. The topic of this thread is "agree/disagree" button whereas originally you were saying just get rid of the thanks button. Which is it? Do you want thanks gone altogether or replaced with a different system like agree/disagree? I mean a numerical value system instead of just "thanks".

I think applying it to a popular forum would be throwing it in the deep end. It should be introduced to a somewhat small but semi popular forum/fora to start with. Agreed.

TBH the only place I can see this working is the threads of NSFW were we trick people. eg. Man gets hit by train and horrific F1 accident. You know something is up when you see a load of thanks but when you see a load of -1's you're going to fall for it :pac:

Also what's to stop people completely boycotting the disagree button and only using the agree button? I think it's lazy. If I agree with someone and have something to add I'll do it. I'm not thanks whoring from the person I agree with it. I'm adding info as to why I agree and they might just happen to thank me as in to say "Good point to add, why didn't I think of that?"

If I see something I disagree with I wont bother clicking disagree because if I do disagree I'll make a post why I disagree. Yes, I know some people wont but just because they're lazy doesn't mean we should change the system IMO.

Bottom line if you disagree tell us why. If you agree click thanks. If you agree but have something to add then do both. Don't just click disagree or -1 and then run off. What's the point in that? Obviously someone may come along later and make a post that highlights why you disagree and then you'll agree with them but why wait for someone else to do it? Why be lazy and not get the finger out and do it yourself and state why you disgree with someone rather than relying on a little button?

A thanks system keeps boards at a positive attitude. There'll be more aggro with a +1/-1 or agree/disagree system.

Yeah but why should we be able to agree & just run away but not be able to disagree & just run away? I think agreeing with someone deserves as much of an explanation as disagreeing with someone.

Ok if its a silly or trivial thread that doesn't deal with particularly serious matters then of course thank away. It just means you like ice cream as well or whatever the subject of the original post is.
But if it is a thread with a serious theme then i don't think its good enough that we're able to just agree with someone & slip away quietly but to express disagreeing you have submit a separate post?