Enable "Reaction" feature on forums

[tjekan]

Eh, a person is just as likely to have their feelings hurt by a typed response as by a reaction. It's easy to be misconstrued on the Internet. I don't think that's the issue.

 

The issues are

1) Will allowing emoji-only replies have a suppressing effect on actual substantive replies?

2) Will judging every post with likes/dislikes make the environment more stressful and popularity-based?

3) Will people incorrectly mistake the like count for a valid measure of support for an idea or validity of an argument, thus causing increased fractiousness as they yell at each other about who has more likes and/or falsely inflate their own likes to 'win' arguments?

 

None of these very negative outcomes would necessarily happen, but I think they're clearly all at least distinct possibilities which need to be considered seriously before any change is made.

[Fuzzbucket]

53 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

But how many people would be crying over this? How many people would care that much to actually cry over this? I won’t deny feelings will get hurt, but that happens with everything. Preventing one feature because someone might cry is silly.

 

I rest my case. It's the attitude showing in your comment that I find so extraordinarily thoughtless. But thoughtless is how people are with buttons.

 

I agree with tjekan that posts can also cause hurt, but even so - the number of  people who click lol or like without reading is legion.

[purplehaze]

37 minutes ago, tjekan said:

The issues are

1) Will allowing emoji-only replies have a suppressing effect on actual substantive replies?

2) Will judging every post with likes/dislikes make the environment more stressful and popularity-based?

3) Will people incorrectly mistake the like count for a valid measure of support for an idea or validity of an argument, thus causing increased fractiousness as they yell at each other about who has more likes and/or falsely inflate their own likes to 'win' arguments? 

 

None of these very negative outcomes would necessarily happen, but I think they're clearly all at least distinct possibilities which need to be considered seriously before any change is made.

I think this is a very good summary of our concerns about this.

And I would add:

4. Will there be more misunderstandings and hurt feelings because the meaning of a reaction is so uncertain? (because, yes @Sextonator feelings do matter.)

 

This is not, as someone said earlier in the thread, just a "fun" little feature to add to the forum. It could have wide-ranging repercussions and I think we need to consider that.

[Uther_Pendragon]

First, Heather Marie, thank you so very much for your willingness to push past your anxiety and strong hesitation of reactions to possibly reach a compromise for someone like me, who has the anxieties from the other angle. Your post, a few pages back, made me feel heard and understood. Thank you.

 

Second: No, reactions should not be counted up for use as a poll. They should be a lightweight tool, for allowing someone who feels unable to write out and defend a post, for whatever reason, feel involved in a discussion or just feel a tiny part of this big forum animal.

It really shouldn't matter if I liked someone's post because they have a cute avatar, or because I want to like everything. Or because I don't want to write a post restating something someone already said better than I could.

 It's just a reaction of what I felt at that particular moment. If something I wrote gets zero reactions or 30, that's fine! it's not about *me*, it's about the person clicking a reaction feeling involved in a small way.

 Reactions are also not anonymous. and there can be rules defined just as we do with other features. 

I spend so much time reading over what I type out, trying to see if there's anything at all that will get unintentionally misconstrued. Are there parts that could be quoted and then used to undermine what I actually meant? Is there something that may read harshly to someone who may not have English as their first language? It's a lot to worry about, added on top of the already huge anxiety I have about posting at all. Sometimes clicking agree or a heart, or whatever form reactions take, takes that intense pressure off my shoulders. (I do agree with whoever said the little faces are kinda pffft though, if that's the only choice, then forget I ever spoke up, lolol!)

 

Seeing this huge divide between opinions makes me wonder if this particular group of people aren't ready at this particular time to add reactions, and that's absolutely fine, too. As long as the option is there to revisit the subject in the future?

 

[Fuzzbucket]

I do get where you are coming from, @Uther_Pendragon

 

But perhaps you could handle an emoticon only post ?

[Uther_Pendragon]

Thank you, Fuzz. That means a great deal.

 

I was under the impression that emoticon-only posts weren't allowed? If they are, would I have to later explain or defend why I chose a specific one? It does get a little steamy in places, and someone demanding I explain myself is giving me sweaty hands just imagining it, lol! 
 

I'm totally game for whatever could take pressure off responding, but gives the currently voiceless a very small way to feel they're a part of the group.

[Sextonator]

Reactions are not a post!! They are something that is added to a post, like a badge!

 

And even then, I suspect many people can handle an emote only response, I use them in daily conversation. If someone in my family’s group chat gives good news, or sends an adorable picture of my cutie pie nephews, I’ll send a smiliy face, because it’s quick and easy, and if that’s not enough, I’ll put my thoughts to word. If someone’s snarky, I send an upset emote that better gets across my thoughts than using bad language, or having to take the time to find an appropriate .gif.

 

Sorry if I sound angry, I am tired, and I am done with repeating things. I really do not understand how reactions are so absolutely terrible that they’ll ruin the forums, halt all discussion, and make everyone cry the minute they’d be implemented. At this point, after all this discussion, is there really any point to continuing the debate anyway?? I doubt with all this tj would implement them. More trouble than they’re worth. 😑

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

1 hour ago, purplehaze said:

This is not, as someone said earlier in the thread, just a "fun" little feature to add to the forum. It could have wide-ranging repercussions and I think we need to consider that.

 

I just... What? Of course it is a fun little feature, that's the point of it... So many other Invision boards have this system and they aren't crying because they're being bullied over it? Sorry, I just really agree with Sextonator:

 

9 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

Sorry if I sound angry, I am tired, and I am done with repeating things. I really do not understand how reactions are so absolutely terrible that they’ll ruin the forums, halt all discussion, and make everyone cry the minute they’d be implemented.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

I really think a trial run would be the best way to see how this goes. @TJ09 Is it something you'd be willing to consider?

Edited November 21, 2019 by RealWilliamShakespeare

[tjekan]

16 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

Reactions are not a post!! They are something that is added to a post, like a badge!

 

Badges make some people feel rewarded and happy, and they make others feel judged and uncomfortable. That's their nature. I say that as a neutral observer of them (it doesn't affect my mood either way if someone gives me a virtual thumbs up or not.) A badge means your post is being graded by someone. Some people enjoy that validation and others don't.

 

This aspect of the problem could be largely solved if there were some way to disable the emoji-leaving/like-displaying mechanic on the posts of those who would feel judged/hassled/annoyed by it.

 

The rest of the problems would be, at minimum, extra work for the mods. Once users start gloating about their like count, arguing about whose position is more valid due to likes, or bothering each other for likes--and unlike people crying over emojis, those ARE issues I've personally seen elsewhere--the mods are going to have to declare talking about likes illegal and then police that. And it won't be intuitively obvious, so there would be daily violations for them to shut down by people who weren't even trying to blow everything up.

Edited November 21, 2019 by tjekan

[Fuzzbucket]

11 minutes ago, tjekan said:

 

Badges make some people feel rewarded and happy, and they make others feel judged and uncomfortable. That's their nature. I say that as a neutral observer of them (it doesn't affect my mood either way if someone gives me a virtual thumbs up or not.) A badge means your post is being graded by someone. Some people enjoy that validation and others don't.

 

 

Exactly. (And as an aside, as I am not going to be hurt or anything else by it) I object to knee-jerk responses; what I value is an actual response. I simply do not want to see or receive button-clicks. Or the inevitable (and it will be inevitable) competitive feel they WOULD engender. LadyLyzar said it all beautifully a couple of pages back.

 

Quote

. So many other Invision boards have this system and they aren't crying because they're being bullied over it? Sorry, I just really agree with Sextonator:

 

I'm on two forums - one invision and one proboards - wait, and one on forumotion as well -  where they got rid of them (after they had been running) because the "responses" were meaningless, but did in fact lead to significantly fewer posts.

 

28 minutes ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

Thank you, Fuzz. That means a great deal.

 

I was under the impression that emoticon-only posts weren't allowed? If they are, would I have to later explain or defend why I chose a specific one? It does get a little steamy in places, and someone demanding I explain myself is giving me sweaty hands just imagining it, lol! 

 

Sadly you're right - they aren't allowed as things stand. But I'd be game for that,

Edited November 21, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[Uther_Pendragon]

9 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

I'm on two forums - one invision and one proboards - wait, and one on forumotion as well -  where they got rid of them (after they had been running) because the "responses" were meaningless, but did in fact lead to significantly fewer posts.

Alternatively, I am also on two forums -one huge and one small, both consisting of ppl from all over the world-and two different discord servers, and there has been zero manifestation of the worries and concerns mentioned in this thread. Zero. And reactions haven't slowed the amount of posting whatsoever.

Edited November 21, 2019 by Uther_Pendragon

[olympe]

 @Fuzzbucket @Uther_Pendragon Personally, I'd prefer "quote + emote"-only responses. This way, you can/must show exactly what you agree/disagree with, are angry/happy/confused/unsure about - and people can even make very good and understandable points this way. I've seen it happen on a fanfic message board where one person - a non-native and not very fluent speaker/writer of English - posted her feedback just like that. Quote, emoji (or a string of emojis), rinse and repeat. Her "comments" were very much spot-on, easy to understand and very much valued in the community. So, yes, quote&emote, please.

 

36 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

 I really do not understand how reactions are so absolutely terrible that they’ll ruin the forums, halt all discussion, and make everyone cry the minute they’d be implemented.

I think this is a gross misrepresentation of what is being said. But I'm not willing to re-iterate every point any more than you are.

 

[Ruby Eyes]

Coincidentally, I've been on a forum where "like", "dislike", "agree", "disagree", "love this" etc. could be clicked on for each post, where people actually got into fights over the numbers of those (nearly forgot: people also started spamming specific members with "dislikes" and "disagrees" on EVERY post just because those members had stated a differing opinion once), which ultimately lead to the options for reacting being reduced to just "like" and nothing else (besides posting).

 

Clearly, there are samples for all possible outcomes of this. The question is really, what kind of people are on *this* forum, and would we want to risk finding out?

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Ruby Eyes

[tjekan]

8 minutes ago, Ruby Eyes said:

Clearly, there are samples for all possible outcomes of this. The question is really, what kind of people are on *this* forum, and would we want to risk finding out?

 

Eh, well, we've had people do viewbombing over forum comments before. Viewbombing is against the rules and leaving likes/dislikes in manipulative ways wouldn't be, so if people would do the former they would surely do the latter, for which they wouldn't even risk getting banned.

 

Are the likes anonymous on this system, btw? Or is your forum name attached to every like you leave? I could see the latter being a deterrent to more obnoxious behavior, as well as forum sockpuppetry.

[Uther_Pendragon]

Olympe, the quote & emote (very well coined, btw) could work, but will take more thread space than a small reaction in the bottom corner of a post that's already there-BUT, yes, could cut down on possible confusion of what the reaction is for, if it must be specified.
*We'd actually need a anxious lurker to speak up here to say if this would help, because while I do have the dread of posting, I can sometimes push past it to do so.*

 Also to my previous q: would stronger personalities demand an explanation of my quote & emote responses? How does that work for the person on the fanfic message board?

Tjekan, the reactions are NOT anonymous. Whatever you click has your name attached to it.

 

[Fuzzbucket]

29 minutes ago, tjekan said:

 

Eh, well, we've had people do viewbombing over forum comments before. Viewbombing is against the rules and leaving likes/dislikes in manipulative ways wouldn't be, so if people would do the former they would surely do the latter, for which they wouldn't even risk getting banned.

 

Are the likes anonymous on this system, btw? Or is your forum name attached to every like you leave? I could see the latter being a deterrent to more obnoxious behavior, as well as forum sockpuppetry.

 

If they aren't anonymous - that is asking for trouble IMHO. "You liked that post from fgh57 - how absolutely dare you." I can see it leading to viewbombing, just as post can do.

 

54 minutes ago, Ruby Eyes said:

Coincidentally, I've been on a forum where "like", "dislike", "agree", "disagree", "love this" etc. could be clicked on for each post, where people actually got into fights over the numbers of those (nearly forgot: people also started spamming specific members with "dislikes" and "disagrees" on EVERY post just because those members had stated a differing opinion once), which ultimately lead to the options for reacting being reduced to just "like" and nothing else (besides posting).

 

Clearly, there are samples for all possible outcomes of this. The question is really, what kind of people are on *this* forum, and would we want to risk finding out?

 

 

Yeah....

 

Quote + emote would work OK. How would that be for you, @Uther_Pendragon ?

[olympe]

Well, nobody ever asked her to specify in the years we've both been there because her responses were really spot-on and pretty much impossible to misinterpret. Everybody knew exactly what amused her (and how much - varying degrees of laughing emojis from a smile to full-out laughing to "laughing my butt off" and "rolling on the floor laughing". It was obvious which passages made her sad (because she obviously felt for the characters), angry, happy and so on. People even quoted her in order to reply on occasion. On the other hand, the atmosphere there was much more relaxed than things are here in D&R. So, uhm, I can imagine someone asking for clarification if you quote someone else bashing another player and add a thumbs up emoji to it... That kind of thing. As long as you don't quote&emote thoughtlessly, things should be clear.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

13 minutes ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

Tjekan, the reactions are NOT anonymous. Whatever you click has your name attached to it.

 

Yup.

 

39 minutes ago, tjekan said:

Viewbombing is against the rules and (1)leaving likes/dislikes in manipulative ways wouldn't be, so if people would do the former they would surely do the latter, for which (2)they wouldn't even risk getting banned.

 

1) I'm... Pretty sure it would be. If one person was doing nasty stuff on EVERY person's post, you could report them for that reason and I'm sure our mods would take it seriously. It's not like there wouldn't be a consequence for abusing a system.

2) Since reactions aren't anonymous, they could run that risk.

 

Anyway, I don't think dislike is even an option. It isn't in the first post anyway. So, no need to worry about abusive disliking

 

6 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

If they aren't anonymous - that is asking for trouble IMHO. "You liked that post from fgh57 - how absolutely dare you." I can see it leading to viewbombing, just as post can do.

 

Isn't this helpful? If someone is (somehow, considering dislikes weren't an option) reacting in a rude manner to one person's every post and then they get view bombed, it's kinda leading us right to the view bomber. Then they could get in trouble  

Edited November 21, 2019 by RealWilliamShakespeare
wrong "there". YUCK!

[tjekan]

10 minutes ago, RealWilliamShakespeare said:

I'm sure our mods would take it seriously. It's not like there wouldn't be a consequence for abusing a system.

 

The more subjective a task you ask mods to do, the more unfair a burden it is on them and the more possibilities for miscarriage there are on the system. Assuming there were a dislike button (or an eyeroll button, or a yuck face button,) how would you propose issuing warnings for someone who gets a group of their friends together to use those buttons on the post of someone he is arguing with? Whatever buttons exist on the system, it's inherently legal to click on them. Asking mods to guess what the clciker's intentions are and whether he's doing it too often or too indiscriminately would be a nightmare. You either have the button and are allowed to use it, or you don't.

 

If the system is not anonymous, then there would be social motivation against doing this. Other posters would see what was happening and say "Ugh Jane, stop stalking Tarzan around downvoting all his posts." But then, of course, we're back to Uther_Pendragon's issue that someone might confront responders and ask them to explain themselves.

 

Allowing only likes would reduce the problem of using the reactions to actively bully someone, but would not prevent anyone from begging/trading for likes, gloating about having more likes than someone else, bringing in outside friends to like their posts, arguing about their popularity based on likes. Mods would have to police that if it happened in public and could do nothing if it happened in private. They can't be playing Sherlock Holmes about why Jane is suddenly liking all Tarzan's posts and whether it has anything to do with the shiny new gold egg on her scroll or if she just thinks he's swell now.

TL;DR: Some of this stuff mods can't reasonably give any consequences for. Other stuff they theoretically could, but it would take a ton of effort on their part and not be uniformly successful.

[Fuzzbucket]

If it were helpful (and I don't see clicking a button as helpful) that wouldn't stop competitiveness or targeting people who disagree with your POV.

 

And as TJ has said many many times - you can't reliably identify determined viewbombers. Even I know to use a VPN if I wanted to do such a thing (which I don't.)

[Sextonator]

Ruby eyes is right, we need to think about the users and how they may or may not benefit from this. I feel there is way more good to come from this than not, and don’t see this becoming a problem a la fishing for likes.

And what reactions are necessary? Like? Love? Thank? Congrats?? Certainly not dislike, or yuck, or anything negative.

[Fuzzbucket]

If ANYTHING AT ALL, a simple up arrow for agree. None of the others is necessary; if you need to thank someone it is only decent to do exactly that. Also congrats - and as for love - that's just like with bells on.

 

But I can't agree that there is way more good in it.

[tjekan]

3 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

But I can't agree that there is way more good in it.

 

Yeah, it seems like so far we've got

 

GOOD:

1) Some people think it's cute and fun

2) It would give people who are too timid to post a chance to participate

3) It encourages feedback on posts that otherwise go unacknowledged (like the Congrats thread)

 

BAD:

1) Some people think it's judgy and stressful

2) It might discourage more substantial posts in favor of emoji reactions

3) It might give users the incorrect impression that getting more likes means winning an argument

4) It might cause hurt feelings in people who weren't getting enough likes or got a like on a sad topic

5) People might start misusing it in one of several frustrating ways

6) It's easy to misinterpret what exactly a person is liking or agreeing with from a generic emoji

7) Since it's not anonymous people might confront you about what you liked, thus negating Good Point #2 anyway.

 

I'm not seeing the "way more good." It's not evil, but it's not obviously way more good either. Are there more things to add to the "good" column that I failed to notice?

 

Also, the good things would seem to be equally accomplishable by Olympe's "quote-n-emote" proposal.

Edited November 21, 2019 by tjekan

[Fuzzbucket]

If it's not anonymous, will people who are too scared to post really be OK with their names showing ?

 

@Uther_Pendragon - your comments are particularly useful here.

[Shadowdrake]

2 hours ago, tjekan said:

I'm not seeing the "way more good." It's not evil, but it's not obviously way more good either. Are there more things to add to the "good" column that I failed to notice?

3) It allows posts that otherwise go unacknowledged (such as in the Congrats thread, etc) to be acknowledged by multiple people without inflating the thread full of otherwise pointless posts.

4) Assuming there isn't any sort of dislike emoji, this is a "safer" and more likely way to gain positive feelings and validation for the poster, whereas being quoted or pinged has a good chance of being argued at or otherwise discouraged. case in point

 

 

2 hours ago, tjekan said:

Also, the only two good things would seem to be equally accomplishable by Olympe's "quote-n-emote" proposal.

I genuinely do not understand why people keep conflating a reaction (a footnote) with a whole post complete with avatar and signature stretching the page. Every time someone posts, this much space gets taken up, and every page only allows 10 or 20 or whatever number of posts.

 

If everyone who wanted to agree with a post did so by quoting and emoting, the majority of a thread's page would be regurgitated text and emoticons. They're not at all equivalent and I wish "react with an emoji post" would stop being brought up as anything but spam. As the forum guidelines say, "Posts that do not contribute to the topic or forum may be removed and/or result in a warning". Textless emoji posts would absolutely fall under that and shouldn't be encouraged because if they spread I imagine mods would have to crack down hard on them. Imagine if the suggestions forum was full of quoteposts and thumbs up emotes! On the flipside, reacts would take up much less space than any signature or avatar and dozens, hundreds or more can be displayed without any extra space than one react would be.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

If it's not anonymous, will people who are too scared to post really be OK with their names showing ?

 

Usually, yes. It's a lot less pressure than posting, which by design show the person's name, avatar, signature, etc. whereas reacts only show names and only if you care enough to click. Obviously there will always be a few whose anxieties prevent them from contributing even in this way but that can't be helped.