Thumb-up and thumb-down sort of thing? Why just the one? Cool Amazon drone delivery of my Sciforums T-shirt today. Thanks mods.
If you dislike something, explain why. When I "like' something, it's mostly instead of a redundant post saying, "That's what I would have said."
Agree with SSB. Concurring with something and explaining why makes sense. Liking something, with no need to add your own commentary makes sense. Disagreeing with something and explaining why makes sense. But disliking something without an explanation is merely unconstructive cynicism. If you're going to criticize, you owe the target more than a single button click.
Uh what? What if the post you dislike is: A) a complete load of toss written by B) a barely literate/ coherent/ rational half-wit who C) doesn't understand the point and D) has a track record of ignoring refutations (e.g. an explanation of why it's bad post would be the umpty-umpth one in a long series that hasn't made any impression on said half-wit whatsoever)? Some posters should not only not be allowed to post they should also have access to humans severely restricted. (And definitely not allowed to have offspring).
But that would not be the only reason to dislike a post. The possible reasons are myriad. So a 'Dislike' would be ambiguous without an explanation.
Sure. Some crappy posts "deserve" an explanation of why they're crap, but your "If you're going to criticize, you owe the target more than a single button click" doesn't hold true for all posts. Some "targets" aren't owed anything but contempt. A downvote is better (for the forum methinks) than simply ignoring inane tripe. Then again, the recipient will probably be so obliviously unaware that they won't learn even from repeated multiple downvotes...
I don't think contempt should be institutionalized by the software though. On SciFo, it would be invoked so often it might cause a DDOS.
Dywyddyr has said what I had in mind when writing the OP. I was thinking about someway to deter barrages of posts by persons with a ''track record of ignoring refutations'' as Dywyddyr puts it. Sort of less clutter on a thread. In that case better stick with the flaming and bun fights. Personally I could live with ''dislikes'' popping up under my posts if they were from certain people. A ''dislike'' from someone, the opinions of whom I repsect, would make me think. But, The chaps here I don't mind, would respond with a post anyway rather then just hitting ''dislike''. The T-shirt thing, remember The God said something about members receiving T-shirts. Yes, different thread. I couldn't remember what thread, so dumped it here.
We should also remember two aspects about the internet: • The skillset required for software engineering does not include as standard the basic comprehension of words outside the immediate business context; it does not require effort to botch up words such as "like" and "friend", but merely ignorance. • Software executives see no profit in changing this circumstance, and therefore, generally speaking, won't. The Like button takes on powerful symbolic effect in this context; as a behavioral reinforcement, when something important but grim came around on particular socmed feeds, what do people do? Click "Like" or "Heart" ("favorite"). The question itself is illustrative: Christopher was three years old; when you fight that hard, you're supposed to win. Do you know how it feels to "Like" the death notice for a three year-old? It took that particular leading socmed site years to figure this out. And then it turns out they're deliberately unethical, performing improper behavioral experiments through their website, so, you know, maybe there's a reason their change to a range of emotions is such a haphazard adjustment in which the most difficult decision was likely which version of an emoticon to use. And I know I'm being a bit harsh on the industry, but it's also worth remembering remembering that tech is the corner of society where "meme" revival came from; and also that "memes" are now photos with dumb slogans in white letters because all the revival turned out to be was an embarrassingly wrong and uneducated attempt to reconstruct behavioral sciences and semiotics without having studied either, and welcome to the world in which kitteh can haz Richurd Dawkinz. It still feels weird to click "Heart" for a link to a news story about children shelled to death on the beach. You know, "¡I ♥ Atrocity!" or something like that. Remember that any software product delivered unto consumers is not actually for what consumers would otherwise imagine. From there, everything else is a matter of cost. To wit, why do so many websites still use Lucida? It's a cost issue. That's why the one waited until they did to add a range of emoticons to their Like button, and also why it was such a cheap, patchwork change. Business executives aren't generally expected to understand such effects of their doing; they certainly don't want the labor force worrying about it. Ironically, while many have worried over redefinition of family, we've been redefining other fundamental relationships, like friendship and all derived therefrom, and also how we get along with our own emotional lexicon.
People have attacked me for liking posts which disagree with them. A dislike button would be asking for trouble. <>
If say, only dislikes appeared under troll posts, then they wouldn't be achieving their goal of messing up the site. Responding with dislike rather than an off topic post may result in less clutter and less fun for troll. As for persons with ''track record of ignoring refutations'', ignore I suppose. Reading that I would say both a Like/Dislike button is dangerous for you.
I don't think you can pontificate about what a troll's goals are. What you think is trolling, the "troll" might consider brilliant insight. And you can't predict that a poster will get only dislikes. He may not be the only one who thinks he's brilliant.
Historically, the most part of repeat we get comes from the trolls. To wit, just as trolls can register and like each others posts in hopes of boosting reputation, so can they spike dislikes. There is an old poll in a thread about gay rights; back then I would only admit bisexuality, so that's where my vote was filed. Since then, I've acknowledged being gay, yet I only have the one vote in there. And, you know, there might be a few re-registered gay people who multivoted, but far more anti-gay trolls and sock-puppets have done so over the years; the numbers, being skewed, actually overrepresent heterosexuals in the Sciforums context, though the Sciforums context is deviant from the larger societal trend. I don't disagree with the general proposition of likes and dislikes, and greater diversity of why we might otherwise note a post like that. I also think, though, that these reputational systems, like any pretense of unregulated democracy, only really serve those most willing to put the effort into manipulating them.
i have to LAUGH OUT LOUD because you would be surprised who can produce very good offspring. there are barely literate/coherent/rational half-wits who can produce genuises and exceptional human beings because 1) their life circumstances or experiences or proper lack in there life may have contributed to it but they themselves may have excellent genes to offer. this half-wit ( in this case which would be me!) has produced a son who is a genius and could debate with the best of you on this forum (but he's too busy with his life) in the science subfora (something i can't do). he also was was awarded a full scholarship as well as very musically talented/creative as in not just someone who was taught musical instruments but he scores his own music but he is on the more technical side (sound designer). he also has worked with and has connections with those already in the entertainment industry. he is exceptionally bright and creates pc games. he creates special effects and music for games and film. that is his passion for now at least. he is a double threat with his artistic talent and his high intelligence. he has the ability to succeed in most any field he chooses and i mean at the very top if he chooses just by his high iq alone even without his musical genius! he is multi-talented and highly cerebral and he is a very handsome young man. everything that boy does, he is excellent at, almost perfect and i mean everything he attempts and makes it all look easy. besides all that, he also has the heart of a saint as he selflessly volunteers every summer overseas connected with charitable foundations. sometimes i have to rub my eyes or pinch myself i'm surprised and amazed. he is like the proverbial golden boy. be careful who you put down and denigrate. everything i couldn't reach or be, my son has that potential. YEAH, THAT CAME FROM ME! SHOCKING? LMFAO and with all his talent and intelligence, he is so humble, ethical and good-hearted i worry that he will be taken advantage of by those who take kindness as weakness. that is the problem with this world when people like this should be valued and nurtured as they are the ones who make the world a better place. i send him messages all the time to be careful of who he trusts. i feel as though in some way, my son is a living ebodiment of correcting a wrong that was done to me. he is living proof of every good thing this world tried to destroy in me. he doesn't just deserve to make it because he is my son. he deserves to make it because he is deserving and of merit period as well!
Dywyddyr, just likes making a carefully worded wretched stink. But , yes, the last brackets is severely stupid.
