A thought about thumbs down option

[Helbjorne.9368]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:See? Some kitten moron is just coming through and downvoting every post I make now literally seconds after I post it. This is how it works.

Hey now, there's no need for that sort of negativity, they're just imaginary internet points.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@Helbjorne.9368 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:See? Some kitten moron is just coming through and downvoting every post I make now literally seconds after I post it. This is how it works.

Hey now, there's no need for that sort of negativity, they're just imaginary internet points.

They're not imaginary. That's the point. But, hey, who cares, let's go ahead and turn this all into one big popularity contest! Who cares about substance?

[Helbjorne.9368]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Helbjorne.9368 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:See? Some kitten moron is just coming through and downvoting every post I make now literally seconds after I post it. This is how it works.

Hey now, there's no need for that sort of negativity, they're just imaginary internet points.

They're not imaginary. That's the point. But, hey, who cares, let's go ahead and turn this all into one big popularity contest! Who cares about substance?

Raging about getting 'Thumbs Downed' is substance?

[Menadena.7482]

@SkyShroud.2865 said:Many forums I have visited regularly, really populated forums, they only have like button.

Which is pretty pointless. You can only say you you agree with something but not the reverse? If you have one reaction button to a post you should have the other. Ideally the more reaction buttons the better but I will compromise on 'agree' and 'disagree'. No, I will NOT accept 'strongly agree' and 'mildly agree' as that is not the same thing at all.

We saw on a certain social media site that one reaction button just will not cut it. Suppose someone posts that their cat died. That is not exactly a situation that calls for liking or agreement but some people just instinctively were hitting it anyway because it was the only option.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@Menadena.7482 said:

@SkyShroud.2865 said:Many forums I have visited regularly, really populated forums, they only have like button.

Which is pretty pointless. You can only say you you agree with something but not the reverse? If you have one reaction button to a post you should have the other. Ideally the more reaction buttons the better but I will compromise on 'agree' and 'disagree'. No, I will NOT accept 'strongly agree' and 'mildly agree' as that is not the same thing at all.

We saw on a certain social media site that one reaction button just will not cut it. Suppose someone posts that their cat died. That is not exactly a situation that calls for liking or agreement but some people just instinctively were hitting it anyway because it was the only option.

It's not pointless, because you get just as accurate a gauge with only an upvote system.https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/25v3lv/study_finds_that_downvotes_have_a_large_negative/

[Leo G.4501]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Helbjorne.9368 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Helbjorne.9368 said:I am a simple man. I see posts about removing Thumbs Down, I Thumbs Down.

Thank you for taking a brief moment to confirm my observation of how people use thumb down and why it's a net negative for forums.

If you really wanted I could pretend I have an in-depth knowledge of the human psyche and claim that by allowing people to vote on comments it removes substantial content from the forums as the only people using the voting system are those that have no understanding of the posts they are voting on... Oh wait.

And you'd basically be right! Except voting up is less of an issue because it doesn't result in spreading negativity and is a simple way to draw attention to popular ideas.

Thumbing up only can be just as bad. It's how you have these helplessly sensitive people stuck in their echo chambers unable to take criticism and getting "triggered" at the very notion of opposing opinions.

[crashburntoo.7431]

I'm sorry @Einlanzer.1627; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@Leo G.4501 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Helbjorne.9368 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Helbjorne.9368 said:I am a simple man. I see posts about removing Thumbs Down, I Thumbs Down.

Thank you for taking a brief moment to confirm my observation of how people use thumb down and why it's a net negative for forums.

If you really wanted I could pretend I have an in-depth knowledge of the human psyche and claim that by allowing people to vote on comments it removes substantial content from the forums as the only people using the voting system are those that have no understanding of the posts they are voting on... Oh wait.

And you'd basically be right! Except voting up is less of an issue because it doesn't result in spreading negativity and is a simple way to draw attention to popular ideas.

Thumbing up only can be just as bad. It's how you have these helplessly sensitive people stuck in their echo chambers unable to take criticism and getting "kitten" at the very notion of opposing opinions.

Guys, look, this has been actually studied. I'll link it again. The two or three of you I've been arguing with about this for the last couple of hours just not correct.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/25v3lv/study_finds_that_downvotes_have_a_large_negative/

[Menadena.7482]

@Lambent.6375 said:I post on a few forums with a system like this (not reddit) and disagreeing with a post is generally what the thumbs down button is for.

Though, on those sites nothing happens to your post if it accumulates a lot of dislikes. I don't know if anet had it set up that way.

Hopefully it should do nothing. If it does nothing the incidents of trolls downvoting will dwindle once the novelty wears off. It is a good way to get a quick glance where people stand in a discussion, which is another reason why listing names after reactions is a good idea.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @Einlanzer.1627; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

This is exactly what I do, and I get very frustrated with other people not behaving in the same way. It should be obvious that this is the only way to maintain a healthy, positive community.

[crashburntoo.7431]

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @Einlanzer.1627; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

Woot, my first Thumbs Down! Thanks!

[LUST.2305]

If we want a healthy forum community, certain "options" on posts are arguable on the value. Many forums got rid of this system (ESO for example).

The Thumbs up and Helpful make sense and I'm not against the whole idea of "reactions".

Thumbs Down however...

1. They don't give any badges (A "Controversial Badge" would have been interesting though)
2. They just devalue people's opinion replies
3. Some people use it to "disagree" instead of giving a response or adding to a discussion
4. Negative connotation
5. Troll (which plagued other forums with similar systems)

While there is a value in seeing if someone disagrees with you... since that's anonymous and since you have the option to reply: It's pretty redundant.

[Model No.3461]

I don't get how a thumbs down button is spreading negativity. This isn't reddit, where downvoting hides a comment and lowers account karma. Downvoting has no effect on the account or the comment. Thumbs up also has no effect on the account or comment. The points don't matter in and of themselves.

Having a ratings system that doesn't impact the accounts allows you to show agreement/disagreement with a comment without unnecessary thread bumping and/or spam. Someone on an earlier page said that they felt downvoting functions should be used on abusive content, but that's what the report function is for. There's a benefit to having them there, but I'm failing to see the detriment.

Some people have claimed that it will influence people to not comment due to trolls. I don't see how this would work, since a downvote doesn't impact the account or comment. If the claim is that it will affect them mentally, having their thread posted in with negativity or just mass ignored would be worse, wouldn't it? And if a person is at a place in their lives where a downvote on the forums will seriously impact their decision making, it may be best for them to unplug for a while and ground themselves more firmly in whatever direction they want their lives to head in.

I think we should have both of the buttons, however, if we are to remove one, the other should go as well. There's little point of being able to show agreement or approval if you cannot show the inverse. The only useful role in having a thumbs up without a thumbs down would be in highlighting a comment as helpful, which we already have a button for.

[Leo G.4501]

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @"Einlanzer.1627"; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

Or maybe it's just someone who disagrees with his posts but doesn't feel like typing "I disagree"?

I mean, Einlanzer did make a spam post saying "testing" which no one seemed to care about and got no votes at all. Did that test not mean anything? Or because it doesn't fit your argument, we'll just ignore it completely?

[Helbjorne.9368]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/25v3lv/study_finds_that_downvotes_have_a_large_negative/

"Not only do authors of negatively-evaluated content contribute more, but also their future posts are of lower quality, and are perceived by the community as such. Moreover, these authors are more likely to subsequently evaluate their fellow users negatively, percolating these effects through the community."

Which is certainly something you've demonstrated here today. Because you were posting content that others deemed as low-quality or of low-substance, you were 'Thumbs Downed', which made you upset, so you continued to post negative content, which only further increased the amount of 'Thumbs Down' you received. Then you claimed that anyone that disagreed with you was toxic and stupid, fulfilling the second statement of the quote.

That doesn't prove or disprove that a voting system is inherently negative, but rather shows that those that post low-quality (I'm using that term loosely) content are going to continue to post low-quality content if they're 'downvoted' or 'Thumbs Downed.' That's certainly more of a reflection on the individual and their state of mind rather than on the community.

@Einlanzer.1627 said:I get very frustrated with other people not behaving in the same way. It should be obvious that this is the only way to maintain a healthy, positive community.

So if people don't conform to your standards of behavior they're terrible, stupid, and toxic (your words)? That's certainly not a healthy mindset. Maybe you should try being positive before demanding that others conform to your standards of acceptable behavior.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@crashburntoo.7431 said:

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @Einlanzer.1627; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

Woot, my first Thumbs Down! Thanks!

Hahhah, maybe the secret is to wear your thumbs down as a badge of honor!> @Model No.3461 said:

I don't get how a thumbs down button is spreading negativity. This isn't reddit, where downvoting hides a comment and lowers account karma. Downvoting has no effect on the account or the comment. Thumbs up also has no effect on the account or comment. The points don't matter in and of themselves.

Having a ratings system that doesn't impact the accounts allows you to show agreement/disagreement with a comment without unnecessary thread bumping and/or spam. Someone on an earlier page said that they felt downvoting functions should be used on abusive content, but that's what the report function is for. There's a benefit to having them there, but I'm failing to see the detriment.

Some people have claimed that it will influence people to not comment due to trolls. I don't see how this would work, since a downvote doesn't impact the account or comment. If the claim is that it will affect them mentally, having their thread posted in with negativity or just mass ignored would be worse, wouldn't it? And if a person is at a place in their lives where a downvote on the forums will seriously impact their decision making, it may be best for them to unplug for a while and ground themselves more firmly in whatever direction they want their lives to head in.

I think we should have both of the buttons, however, if we are to remove one, the other should go as well. There's little point of being able to show agreement or approval if you cannot show the inverse. The only useful role in having a thumbs up without a thumbs down would be in highlighting a comment as helpful, which we already have a button for.

Your argument might hold water if it wasn't visible to the entire community how much an individual has been up or down voted. This skews perceptions and interpretations of posts made by different authors and can sway the community in arbitrary directions on important issues.

I'm on the fence about whether or not upvoting is needed, but I think it's been made quite obvious in other communities that downvoting carries more harm than good.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@Leo G.4501 said:

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @"Einlanzer.1627"; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

Or maybe it's just someone who disagrees with his posts but doesn't feel like typing "I disagree"?

I mean, Einlanzer did make a spam post saying "testing" which no one seemed to care about and got no votes at all. Did that test not mean anything? Or because it doesn't fit your argument, we'll just ignore it completely?

As a matter of fact, that was an accidental post that I was trying to delete, but because of the context here you instead assumed that it was an intentional spam post.

[crashburntoo.7431]

@Leo G.4501 said:

@crashburntoo.7431 said:I'm sorry @Einlanzer.1627; it does look like you're being down-vote targeted, and recently. Your count has gone up by several votes in a short period of time, including on some older posts. This has been one of the reasons against the Thumbs Down vote in this thread all along, so it's now being illustrated. As a personal philosophy, I try to avoid the Thumbs Down vote and prefer to provide a response. If I do feel like a Thumbs Down vote is warranted, I would only vote someone (or some idea) down once, even if it's defended several times further down in the thread.

Or maybe it's just someone who disagrees with his posts but doesn't feel like typing "I disagree"?

I mean, Einlanzer did make a spam post saying "testing" which no one seemed to care about and got no votes at all. Did that test not mean anything? Or because it doesn't fit your argument, we'll just ignore it completely?

Possible, but his account went up by nearly 20 down votes in a short period of time. When you actually look at which posts were impacted, it's most of his posts in any thread going up by 1-2 votes. Logically, this is a targeted down-vote blitz.

Skipping the "testing" post makes sense, since it's a bait post! EDIT: Just saw your post @Einlanzer.1627 - noted that it was an accidental post - you should be able to edit it for removal, should a mod care to do so. Cheers!

Overall, I see two voting buttons that could be used constructively. One has a significantly milder chance of being abused, which makes the other a target for removal. Many arguments and great points have been made for both sides. The thread has lost some traction, and I'm not sure we're making any progress any longer. I'd encourage most of the current contributors to move along. @Gaile Gray.6029 , if you agree, would you like to close this one down?

[Model No.3461]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

Your argument might hold water if it wasn't visible to the entire community how much an individual has been up or down voted. This skews perceptions and interpretations of posts made by different authors and can sway the community in arbitrary directions on important issues.

I'm on the fence about whether or not upvoting is needed, but I think it's been made quite obvious in other communities that downvoting carries more harm than good.

That sounds more like an issue with having thumbs up and thumbs down visible on people's profiles than an issue with the thumbs up and down themselves. That said, I wasn't even aware that that was a thing until you mentioned it. I don't think that most people would go through the trouble of checking that, though. Most people are lazy, myself included.

[Einlanzer.1627]

@Helbjorne.9368 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/25v3lv/study_finds_that_downvotes_have_a_large_negative/

"Not only do authors of negatively-evaluated content contribute more, but also

their future posts are of lower quality, and are perceived by the community as such. Moreover, these authors are more likely to subsequently evaluate their fellow users negatively,

percolating these effects through the community."

Which is certainly something you've demonstrated here today. Because you were posting content that others deemed as low-quality or of low-substance, you were 'Thumbs Downed', which made you upset, so you continued to post negative content, which only further increased the amount of 'Thumbs Down' you received. Then you claimed that anyone that disagreed with you was toxic and stupid, fulfilling the second statement of the quote.

That doesn't prove or disprove that a voting system is inherently negative, but rather shows that those that post low-quality (I'm using that term loosely) content are going to continue to post low-quality content if they're 'downvoted' or 'Thumbs Downed.' That's certainly more of a reflection on the individual and their state of mind rather than on the community.

@Einlanzer.1627 said:I get very frustrated with other people not behaving in the same way. It should be obvious that this is the only way to maintain a healthy, positive community.

So if people don't conform to your standards of behavior they're terrible, stupid, and toxic (your words)? That's certainly not a healthy mindset.

In some ways, yes, but context matters. Would you argue that being rude to people who were expressing ideas in person is not toxic behavior?

It's a statement on the community because of how it creates a hivemind, which reddit is universally known for. You see something similar happen in the US political system - people care less and less about actual ideas, and more and more about a largely mindless allegiance to a certain way of thinking or to certain individuals.

[Menadena.7482]

@Erebus.7568 said:now it is always abusable even with names attached, we see this on facebook where even with real identities people don't mind abusing it.

Point of order? There is no equivalent to thumbs down there (although there should be).

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

In debates I've had with people on these forums, I've ended up on response chains that would span 7 or 8 posts per wave. That's 30,000 characters, over and over again. The whole time, shouting down somebody who's clearly too stubborn to listen, perusing my work for nitpicks and forcibly misconstruing what I say. It is a bit silly to demand that everybody on the forums engage in this kind of hullabaloo over every issue. The fact is, not everyone wants to engage a person they disagree with, nor do they want to post simple epithets that serve as food to subsist the ego of that person.

Down votes serve as a simple, yet meaningful way to express dissent or dissatisfaction without having to deal with the usual nonsense that follows.

[Chapell.1346]

Maybe am not to bright at all because i can't seem to find any of those likes and dislikes including up and down vote aswell.Honestly i don't mind Arena.net logo, perhaps Romans can share their insight?

[Helbjorne.9368]

@Einlanzer.1627 said:In some ways, yes, but context matters. Would you argue that being rude to people who were expressing ideas in person is not toxic behavior?

It's a statement on the community because of how it creates a hivemind, which reddit is universally known for. You see something similar happen in the US political system - people care less and less about actual ideas, and more and more about a largely mindless allegiance to a certain way of thinking.

I agree that being rude in response to disagreeing with someone's statement is negative behavior, but I would also agree that calling people stupid, terrible, and toxic in response to them disagreeing with you (and not in a rude manner) is also negative behavior, which you have done multiple times in this thread alone.

It's fine if you want to remove negativity from the community, but removing the voting system wouldn't achieve that goal; nothing would. People will be negative regardless, and that's blatantly obvious by your behavior. You're on a crusade to "purge the negativity" by insulting anyone that doesn't agree with you and raging when you're getting 'Thumbs Downed' for it. Do you not see how hypocritical that is?

[Menadena.7482]

@Panda.1967 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:But at least thumb up responses generate positivity, and also help to give a snapshot of the overall support for an idea. Thumb down reactions don't do much of anything useful and only contribute negativity, IMO.

Only allowing thumbs up does

NOT

give a snapshot of the overall support for an idea. It gives a misrepresentation of the overall support for an idea. If you really want to see the overall support for an idea you

ABSOLUTELY MUST

include a record of those opposed as well as those in favor. Otherwise you're denying a voice to those opposed and only getting a partial view of the overall support. A large number of upvotes doesn't equate to overwhelming support if downvotes are omitted, it only equates to overwhelming support if the downvotes are included and are far exceeded by the upvotes.

Exactly!

To determine if something was favored/not favored you need to provide two options. Say someone posts and there is only a 'thumbs up' reaction. Does that mean nobody liked it or they just could not be bothered to read the post? Now include both a positive and a negative reaction buttons. Unless nobody reacts you can get a snapshot of what people thought.

Or say a post (with only thumbs up) got 10 thumbs up. Would it have gotten no thumbs down, 10, or 1000?