Enable "Reaction" feature on forums

[Kovia]

...Are you seriously saying you'd be offended by a stranger putting a "this is spam" sticker on your post? Seriously?

 

Mods would want to know if a post was spammy/offensive enough to tick off a large amount of people. Yeah you can just report but it might be faster, idk.

[Draconiusultamius]

Definite no for spam stickers unless it's restricted to mods only.  Mods are busy enough without having to deal with trolls putting spam stickers on random posts.  No for any type of actual moderator notification regarding stickers.  I prefer the policy of 'if you don't have anything nice or constructive to say, don't say it at all'.  Allowing for negative stickers could be hurtful to some people who think that they were being personally attacked for their message.  If you actually don't like something, then I'd assume you have more to say than 'I don't like it', like why you don't like it and how you would prefer it, as opposed to liking something, where there's only so much to be said and nothing to be added to the conversation.  There's no need for a reaction that could lead to unnecessary negativity or be taken the wrong way by a fragile person.  It's kind of like telling somebody in real life that their project is bad without any context or explanation as to why you disliked it and what they could have done better, which would probably be considered mean.

[HeatherMarie]

31 minutes ago, Kovia said:

...Are you seriously saying you'd be offended by a stranger putting a "this is spam" sticker on your post? Seriously?

 

Mods would want to know if a post was spammy/offensive enough to tick off a large amount of people. Yeah you can just report but it might be faster, idk.

 

You said nothing at all about a 'this is spam' sticker in the post I was replying to, you were talking about a *dislike* reaction. Two very very different things. If something is legitimately spam or against forum rules then of course mods should be told and should take appropriate action. That's not what a dislike button is for, though, nor is it how it's normally used. Dislike buttons are normally used, from what I have seen, as a way of attacking someone you don't like for whatever reason. Sometimes they are used to express genuine dislike in an actual idea, but more often they are simply used as a weapon. There are many, many, many other ways to go about reporting a post that is against the rules that doesn't involve something that is often used in a very mean-spirited way.

 

 

[Fuzzbucket]

8 hours ago, Kovia said:

Meh. Just meh.

 

If it does get added, please add a dislike or thumbs down. Many a site with this feature don't put one and everyone asks for it.

Could even potentially shoot the mods a flag if a post gets severely disliked.

 

No no no. We already DO have a few trolls here who target the posts of people they don't like.

 

3 hours ago, Kovia said:

...Are you seriously saying you'd be offended by a stranger putting a "this is spam" sticker on your post? Seriously?

 

Mods would want to know if a post was spammy/offensive enough to tick off a large amount of people. Yeah you can just report but it might be faster, idk.

 

As someone said - you didn't say spam, you said dislike. There is a button for spam (and for offensive posts). It is quite large and reads "report". Several members posting that something is spam in a thread is in itself spamming and can get you a warn. The same should apply to a reaction - which means - no.

 

Would I be offended. It takes far more than that to offend me. But such reactions would seriously hurt a lot of people here. It would annoy me to see any "reactions" in threads, but this one would actually damage some people.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Fuzzbucket

[MissK.]

As someone who rarely uses reactions on facebook and generally didn't see the point of them, I don't mind the idea. I only started using them a bit more on a messenger group chat recently because sometimes I want to react to multiple things, and there's no other convenient way of doing that. Most of the time it's just a thumbs up for when I agree with something that was said but it wasn't a big enough deal to warrant typing out a whole message about it too, or a laugh reaction when something was funny. In a forum it's slightly easier to respond to multiple messages by quoting a few different people in one post, but I still often see a lot of those being just "this, agreed" or . I don't see how that offers anything more than adding a thumbs up or a laugh reaction to a post.

 

Also, I happen to be a lurker most of the time nowadays, in part because I usually don't have the time to keep checking responses, but also because a bit of social awkwardness often makes me think and overthink before posting anything. Reactions can make it possible to become a little more involved without having to work out the best way to phrase things (also for people who might not be that fluent), and gradually even overcome the anxiety and end up participating more. If this seems like a stretch, I'll just say it's from my own experience when I first joined a discord channel.

 

I don't have a very strong opinion either way on this suggestion, and I do understand some people might react (ha) very differently than me to such a feature to the point of it being anxiety inducing instead of relieving. Just offering a different view of how it could potentially be a positive thing.

[Baynton]

I would find this really useful. I'm not very active anymore, but the times I am active, I often don't have time for big posts. I'd like to be able to leave little bits of reaction-feedback, because otherwise I don't comment at all. I would prefer to be able to contribute something rather than nothing.

[Ashywolf]

I would only be happy with a standard "heart" or "+1" (AKA like) button. Everything else, the emojis/emoticons, are really not necessary in my opinion. They just clutter the posts and they achieve rather little.

 

edit: And maybe a -1 button so users could "vote" on posts...but at most, these two.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Ashywolf

[Keileon]

I wouldn't mind. If nothing else just implement Like/Thank, a lot of forums I've seen have done this and it didn't detract from discussion whatsoever.

[Fuzzbucket]

3 hours ago, Ashywolf said:

I would only be happy with a standard "heart" or "+1" (AKA like) button. Everything else, the emojis/emoticons, are really not necessary in my opinion. They just clutter the posts and they achieve rather little.

 

edit: And maybe a -1 button so users could "vote" on posts...but at most, these two.

 

Why a heart ? I might agree with something but not want to get all fluffy about it... A +1 would be QUITE enough - the number would go up as more people clicked, just like newspaper comment sections....

 

 

 

Not that I want it in the very least, and I DO want an opt out of receiving and of seeing. But that is QUITE enough.

 

[Ashywolf]

9 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

Why a heart ? I might agree with something but not want to get all fluffy about it... A +1 would be QUITE enough - the number would go up as more people clicked, just like newspaper comment sections....

 

A heart or a +1 button. They both accomplish similar things (indicating the "approval" of a comment). The image you linked is about what I envisioned. And, probably as much as I'd tolerate on this forum, ideally.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Ashywolf

[Fuzzbucket]

A heart kind of trivialises the whole thing.

[olympe]

That looks... kinda tolerable?

[HeatherMarie]

18 minutes ago, olympe said:

That looks... kinda tolerable?

 

I agree with that, except I really don't want the negative down arrow. If it was just the green arrow I guess I could live with it. While the red down arrow isn't as bad as some of the 'dislike' reaction icons I've seen, I do still think it's better to err on the side of caution with something that can be used in malicious ways.

 

edit: Having said that, though, TJ's OP shows the 'default' reactions available on this forum and it's nothing like that simple little arrow and it's nothing that I want in any way.

Edited March 1, 2018 by HeatherMarie

[LadyLyzar]

I still maintain that if this is implemented, it should be positive reactions only and preferably anonymous.  Less drama inducing.  It doesn't seem to cause issues on the Howrse forums where there is only an anonymous heart and nothing else.  I always view them as saying "I like this" or "I agree".  Personally, I would rather see that than someone quoting a post and only saying "Support" without further elaboration - that's a pet peeve of mine!  Granted, the userbases of DC and Howrse are quite different, but I've still never seen anyone complain about someone else getting more "likes" than someone else.

 

The word "forum" implies discussion.  You can agree with someone without needing to explain why, but a disagreement usually entails more explanation.  Downvotes IMO only serve to cause issues.

[Fuzzbucket]

As I say - PLEASE not a heart. I still hate the idea, but a little arrow with a number and total anonymity is the only remotely acceptable option.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

12 hours ago, LadyLyzar said:

I still maintain that if this is implemented, it should be positive reactions only and preferably anonymous.  Less drama inducing. 

 

I always view them as saying "I like this" or "I agree".  Personally, I would rather see that than someone quoting a post and only saying "Support" without further elaboration - that's a pet peeve of mine!

Exactly all of this - negative reactions wouldn’t be great because they could create drama, and as Lyz said, a disagreement requires elaboration and an explanation as to why you don agree, whereas you can easily just agree with somebody’s points and have nothing else to say. Anonymity is best, especially considering one of the biggest concerns in this thread is bullying/exclusion/favouritism and ganging up on people.

 

3 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

As I say - PLEASE not a heart. I still hate the idea, but a little arrow with a number and total anonymity is the only remotely acceptable option.

Honestly don’t see why a heart is such a problem. ‘Like’ buttons on Twitter and Tumblr and plenty of sites are a heart, and it’s literally just a symbol to portray liking and agreement. Quite confused as to why it’s unacceptable, especially seeing as we have the wub  emoticon, which much of our community uses to imply that they enjoy an idea or a concept or a request. Hearts are friendly, which seems to be a big concern within this thread - that people won’t be friendly.

[Fuzzbucket]

Hearts rather trivialise serious discussion.

 

isn't usually used as a plain reaction to a suggestion, and an emoticon only post used to be against the rules - I've been modded for it. I was told it adds nothing to a discussion. Which is EXACTLY how I feel about this whole idea.

[HeatherMarie]

4 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Hearts rather trivialise serious discussion.

 

isn't usually used as a plain reaction to a suggestion, and an emoticon only post used to be against the rules - I've been modded for it. I was told it adds nothing to a discussion. Which is EXACTLY how I feel about this whole idea.

 

This so so so so much. I honestly just don't understand how 'reactions' could be a positive thing for the forum... Posts like '+1!' and 'support!' and such used to be warnable offenses because they were considered spam (are they still?), they didn't add anything to the discussion. As Fuzz said, same for posts with only an emoticon. It adds nothing to the discussion, so it shouldn't be there. That's exactly what reactions do, they add nothing to the discussion. They may show that *someone* 'liked' your post, whatever that may actually mean, but it doesn't do anything to forward the discussion or solve the issue or whatever. I get that an actual post like that is 'worse' or something because it's more noticeable and takes up more space and... Whatever... But they seem pretty darn similar to me. Posts that add nothing to the discussion are considered spam. Reactions add nothing to the discussion. I don't get why that *wouldn't* be spam, except for the mentality that a 'like' will somehow show what people think about the post (which isn't really true at all, since 'like' is very very vague as I've noted in past posts).

[hazeh]

Well, considering reactions aren't part of the discussion or in a post themselves, I don't see how that's comparable. You still have the option to post separately if you have something to add. Otherwise, if all you're going to post anyway was a emoji, might as well make a reaction for it so people don't HAVE to get warned for not contributing in the actual discussion forum via post. 

 

I'm game for reactions. Positive ones, though I think it would be fun to have DC-themed reactions versus standard ones. I do see the concern regarding trolling with reactions, so either way I'm not particularly passionate about adding them or not. 

[The_Impossible_Girl]

I would prefer if this was not implemented. Specifically because I feel like it would cause stagnation in suggestion topics, since instead of posting what they feel should be improved upon, or stating that they think a sprite is ready to be moved, they would just "like" or "dislike" a post. I am also mildly concerned that it would encourage spam in the form of emojicons.

[Ashywolf]

On 3/8/2018 at 6:07 PM, w5aw5 said:

I would prefer if this was not implemented. Specifically because I feel like it would cause stagnation in suggestion topics, since instead of posting what they feel should be improved upon, or stating that they think a sprite is ready to be moved, they would just "like" or "dislike" a post. I am also mildly concerned that it would encourage spam in the form of emojicons.

 

I don't believe this would be a problem, although lazier users may well not comment if they can just hit that button instead. What it helps though is show that people appreciate something being posted. Many users won't post anything to begin with.

[HeatherMarie]

1 hour ago, Ashywolf said:

 

I don't believe this would be a problem, although lazier users may well not comment if they can just hit that button instead. What it helps though is show that people appreciate something being posted. Many users won't post anything to begin with.

 

I've seen a lot of people in this thread saying that the issues we bring up 'wouldn't be a problem' here, and that sort of frustrates me. We do not know if these things would be a problem or not. None of us know that until this is implemented, if it actually gets implemented. Trying to shut down concerns by saying it wouldn't be a problem is rather presumptuous. There have been multiple people on this forum recently who have specifically mentioned that they would indeed use reactions *instead* of actually posting. That's not a 'what if', that's something that people have actually said they would do. It's also something that *does* happen on other sites that have reactions/likes. I've seen it. Many of us have seen it. Posts/threads with only one or two actual comments and a dozen 'likes'. Sure, maybe people who wouldn't post either way would now have a reaction option, but some people who otherwise *would* post will instead just use a reaction. 

[Fuzzbucket]

4 hours ago, Ashywolf said:

 

I don't believe this would be a problem, although lazier users may well not comment if they can just hit that button instead. What it helps though is show that people appreciate something being posted. Many users won't post anything to begin with.

 

It doesn't mean anything of the kind though. As I posted about my delightful experience on facebook, where I am not. Someone I know in person, who had been involved in the "liking", actually told me that "that's what you do, you like your friends'' posts, you don't read them" - she was a case in point; she had done exactly that. We already have many actual posts that make it very clear that the poster hadn't actually read the suggestion, but "supported" it.

 

2 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I've seen a lot of people in this thread saying that the issues we bring up 'wouldn't be a problem' here, and that sort of frustrates me. We do not know if these things would be a problem or not. None of us know that until this is implemented, if it actually gets implemented. Trying to shut down concerns by saying it wouldn't be a problem is rather presumptuous. There have been multiple people on this forum recently who have specifically mentioned that they would indeed use reactions *instead* of actually posting. That's not a 'what if', that's something that people have actually said they would do. It's also something that *does* happen on other sites that have reactions/likes. I've seen it. Many of us have seen it. Posts/threads with only one or two actual comments and a dozen 'likes'. Sure, maybe people who wouldn't post either way would now have a reaction option, but some people who otherwise *would* post will instead just use a reaction. 

 

Exactly. I really see no point to this at all.

[MissK.]

4 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I've seen a lot of people in this thread saying that the issues we bring up 'wouldn't be a problem' here, and that sort of frustrates me. We do not know if these things would be a problem or not. None of us know that until this is implemented, if it actually gets implemented. Trying to shut down concerns by saying it wouldn't be a problem is rather presumptuous. There have been multiple people on this forum recently who have specifically mentioned that they would indeed use reactions *instead* of actually posting. That's not a 'what if', that's something that people have actually said they would do. It's also something that *does* happen on other sites that have reactions/likes. I've seen it. Many of us have seen it. Posts/threads with only one or two actual comments and a dozen 'likes'. Sure, maybe people who wouldn't post either way would now have a reaction option, but some people who otherwise *would* post will instead just use a reaction. 

 

In this entire thread the only mentions of people who would use reactions instead of posting were when their post would be just "I agree" or "support" or "congratulations!" or such. I don't see that as a negative thing since short posts like that are often frowned upon for cluttering threads. As fuzzbucket has said, warns have been given before for responses of just an emoticon. Yet it's a natural instinct to want to react somehow and acknowledge what someone said, so I think there should be a way to allow doing that without a bunch of 2-word posts. 

For the record I'm not saying your concerns aren't valid, I don't question that reactions have had a negative effect in other places and the same could potentially happen here. But it's still only an assumption, nobody has said they would refrain from posting their actual opinion if they could use reactions.

 

Personally I'd be in favour of a trial run for a while (which says a lot considering how change-resistant I usually am). However that would require TJ actually taking people's opinion into account after, and I'm not convinced that would happen.

Edited March 13, 2018 by MissK.
typos

[Fuzzbucket]

What has ever been trialled here that didn't stay even if people didn't like it ? This is a genuine question, not a pooh-poohing; I want to know and I can't find anything - I would like to know how sure we can be that this would go away if it were ever enabled, even if a lot of us truly hated it. I know for a fact that I would post less if threads started showing loads of reactions, and I WOULD want a way to disable receiving them for my posts or seeing them under the posts of others. I don't CARE if you "like" my post. I do care what you THINK about it, what you have to SAY about it. I don't care if 9,483 people "liked" someone else's post, either. I don't want to know. It means nothing except that someone passed by and clicked. Did they read a word of it ? We will never know.