Post Dislikes

[Egan]

Hey folks! Today we're implementing a site feature that many of you have wanted for quite some time now - a "disagree" rating. This can be applied to posts in the same way as a Thank or a Like, with a couple of other changes:

• It doesn't add to the "positive ratings" count under a member's name (of course!) but it doesn't subtract either.
• You can't Disagree with posts in the map workshop subforum - we might change this later, but for now we're cautious about people misusing it to be mean to map updates or similar.
• You need to have more than 100 posts to rate Disagree - this is so we're sure everyone has a better grasp of how it should be used before using it.

So how should it be used? The Disagree button should be used to indicate that you think the content of a post is unhelpful, low-value or spam, to mark factually incorrect posts as such, or to add your voice to one or other side of an ongoing discussion. It's also useful for disagreeing with posts without dragging the thread off on a tangent.

It should NOT be used:

• To troll or abuse other users - we'll be keeping a close eye on who dislikes what in the near future.
• To "Dislike" map posts, creative works or screenshots. Make a post with constructive criticism instead.
• To "Disagree" without a good reason. Marking a factually wrong post as such is okay, but it should never be used instead of debate - if someone is saying something that you disagree with, discuss it!

If you think someone is Disliking your posts unfairly, you can go to their profile page and report them from there. This should be considered a test of the feature - if people are abusing it, we're not afraid to remove their ability to rate, apply warning points, or in the most extreme case remove the feature entirely.

 

[SC PL]

It's happening. Oh god, it's happening!

Oh wait, disagree rating only works here, so it's not happening

No wait, IT"S HAPPENING

Damn, I just cannot stop using Impact font since I saw that we can use it

 

[Kube]

I respectfully disagree with this decision. Before the change, when you disagreed with someone, you had to put your thoughts to words. On a site so centered around constructive feedback, each disagree was valuable. I fear that a disagree button will dissuade users from describing their specific criticisms.

I see that the disagree button is disabled on the Map Workshop subforum. As it should be, you don't want users bashing entire map updates for the reasons stated above. However, when we have a thriving WiP thread that features more than simply mapping work, it's hard to say that each member's creative output is limited strictly to one subforum. I'm in better favor of a system that reflects this crucial detail.

However, I am eager to see how this experimental feature turns out. I'm probably much more opposed to this change in theory than in practice.

tl;dr It should take a lot more work to disagree than to agree.

 

[Davekillerish]

Someone disagrees with the disagree post, SAVAGE!

Edit:
Ninja'd

 

[EksCelle]

To "Disagree" without a good reason. Marking a factually wrong post as such is okay, but it should never be used instead of debate - if someone is saying something that you disagree with, discuss it!

I feel like not enough people are going to follow this guideline, turning what could be a very useful tool into a subtle downvote.

Otherwise, this is a good change. Posts not relevant to the discussion can be disagreed with and it invites more debates and discussion.

 

[Egan]

Before the change, when you disagreed with someone, you had to put your thoughts to words. On a site so centered around constructive feedback, each disagree was valuable. I fear that a disagree button will dissuade users from describing their specific criticisms.

That's a good point, and is one the staff thought of as well, however we had noticed that in some instances the act of disagreement would spark multiple more posts than what were needed (or could be needed using this system) and would derail the thread.

I see that the disagree button is disabled on the Map Workshop subforum. As it should be, you don't want users bashing entire map updates for the reasons stated above. However, when we have a thriving WiP thread that features more than simply mapping work, it's hard to say that each member's creative output is limited strictly to one subforum.

Do you mean that users should be allowed to 'Disagree' with posts in the WiP thread? Since the WiP thread is outside of the map workshop subforum this is already doable. Correct me if I'm misinterpreting.

 

[Muddy]

tl;dr It should take a lot more work to disagree than to agree.

In some cases, sure, but there are times when simply rating down a shitpost is enough, and writing a response would simply further derail the thread

 

[Kube]

That's a good point, and is one the staff thought of as well, however we had noticed that in some instances the act of disagreement would spark multiple more posts than what were needed (or could be needed using this system) and would derail the thread.

Do you mean that users should be allowed to 'Disagree' with posts in the WiP thread? Since the WiP thread is outside of the map workshop subforum this is already doable. Correct me if I'm misinterpreting.

Regarding the first point:

I certainly see where you're coming from on this one. I've seen many a discussion wind on and on unnecessarily. However, I'm not sure if this is a problem the Disagree button fixes? You could've always Agreed with whatever side of the discussion you favor. Now I'm hoping discussions aren't stifled, with a ton of Disagrees on a post followed by a ton of Agrees on the first reply.

Regarding the second point:

I wasn't very clear on what I said, but to put it briefly: TF2Maps members are very creative people, who show their creativity in a lot of different ways. The type of full-fledged content shared around the forums is similar to the type of content shared in the Map Workshop. I'm afraid of "Respectfully Disagree" becoming equivalent to "Dislike," thumbs-down and all, and I'm not sure what kinds of precautions would prevent this from happening. (Edit: @Izotope's comment explains this well)

In some cases, sure, but there are times when simply rating down a shitpost is enough, and writing a response would simply further derail the thread

This is a very valid reason for an alternate ratings button, but I'm not sure if "Respectfully Disagree" does the trick.

 

[Izotope]

I think it's good that the disagree-button doesn't subtract from the user's ratings.
This can be abused way too easily and should therefore never change.

I also want to suggest to change the icon for the disagree button to something else,
because right now it looks like a downvote option, not a disagree option.
This can be especially bad in the WiP thread when people might use it to downvote art or any other kind of contribution.
It should only be used to disagree with something that has been said while avoiding potential thread-derails.

 

[Muddy]

This is a very valid reason for an alternate ratings button, but I'm not sure if "Respectfully Disagree" does the trick.

It'd send a message to the poster. If their post gets a bunch of disagree ratings, they'll likely think twice before posting something like that again

 

[Dr. Spud]

Arguments just got at least 2x more entertaining. Popcorn will be through the roof.

 

[Kube]

It'd send a message to the poster. If their post gets a bunch of disagree ratings, they'll likely think twice before posting something like that again

I just think that, if a new ratings button is added, there's a better balance to achieve between informational and polarizing, i.e.

I don't "Disagree" with the post, I don't particularly "Dislike" the post, I just don't think it adds anything to any sort of discussion.

I think this is closer to what we're trying to achieve? Which is similar to Reddit's downvote button in theory.

Arguments just got at least 2x more entertaining. Popcorn will be through the roof.

Which is exactly the sorta polarizing arguing this community has been trying to stay away from. We're all just looking to different means for the same end.

Edit: Looks like the "Respectfully Disagree" button is now an X? IMO that's a good, positive change, so thank you for that.

 

[fubarFX]

don't mind the disagrees but if they appear in my notification feed then that's dumb and I want them gone.

Tagging serious posts with the "funny" emote was sufficient for all my disagreement needs

 

[Another Bad Pun]

Knowing TF2M, my first reaction is that this is a bad idea, but I'll wait to see what actually happens before I judge

edit: oh good, they show up in alerts

 

[Cartfridge]

Can't wait for all my old useless posts to get the axe.

 

[Mikroscopic]

It seems like the only legitimate reason for this would be posts that are off topic or try to derail the conversation. Why not then have it be simply "off topic"?

 

[NotSoHoriz]

For some reason I find this new feature useful even if at first I thought it's going to be harmful. Now it's time for people to start disagreeing with my posts.

 

[Jethro]

Fact of the matter is, some people had already been using some of the other ratings (Funny, Useful, Artistic) as a makeshift Dislike button. Better to have a proper one that you can then keep a proper eye on rather than people snarking with a Funny.

 

[Zed]

It seems like the only legitimate reason for this would be posts that are off topic or try to derail the conversation. Why not then have it be simply "off topic"?

Misinformation.

It's much easier for a new user to discern that information given to them by one member is incorrect if it has a high number of disagree ratings.

 

[MaccyF]

I think that it should be "Incorrect", not "Disagree", taking away the negative or "down-vote" aspect of the rating and instead telling the poster clearly and respectfully that they are misinformed