Disagree Button

Seriously, I'd like to have a "Disagree" button. That would be a helpful button, but wouldn't be as harsh as a "Dislike" button.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.

Create an Account or Log In

Membership is free. Simply choose your username, type in your email address, and choose a password. You immediately get full access to the forum.

Already a member? Log In.

Initially, I like your idea, however do you think it might discourage the fisticuffs or instead encourage a dogpile? Not sure. What are your thoughts?

(heart)

I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
Remember a lot of times people, at least me people, use the like button in place of a post along the lines of LOL.

While a disagree button sounds easy, it seems it is much more productive for someone to compose a thoughtful post explaining why they disagree. Only then can we have any meaningful discussion or healthy debate.

Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
I'd like to be able to disagree as simply as I'm able to like. I'd like to be able to "disagree" without explaining myself. If I disagree and don't say something, I feel like I've agreed because I let the post slide by. I'd like to hit a disagree button to indicate that I don't agree and that I don't want to argue about it.

I don't think a bunch of "disagrees" on a post would mean the poster had been dogpiled. It would mean simply that a bunch of forum posters don't agree with the post, which to me is preferable to 38 posters saying why they don't agree for this reason or that.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
Most of the time we can't successfully change anyone's mind about anything. I'm beginning to fail to see the point of trying, but some of these posts should not run freely without being checked and I believe a disagree button would address that with minimal effort.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
Since people have changed my mind, I believe in logical arguments. At times people also say things that are not clear and/or just misconstrued. When another member provides a dissenting opinion it gives the author an opportunity to clarify.

And I don't expect to change your mind on this subjectsmiling smiley

Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2014 04:30AM by LisaSTL.
You may be right, Lisa. Perhaps we don't need a disagree button. If I don't care to explain myself, I'm free to type in "I disagree" without added comment. My preference for a disagree button is because I think it would be less confrontational, but maybe not. Then again, less confrontational means less conflict which means less readership of the forum. Therefore, perhaps more conflict is better than less conflict if we prefer a vital forum.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
Here's the solution I've thought about. It's not exactly a disagree button. But, it's a similar button. If enough people press the button, the post would become less visible. If even more people press the button, it might be hidden and referred to the moderators, and if even more people press the button, the post would be removed altogether. In addition, I could set it up so that this button would not be available to everyone, maybe just members that have been around a certain amount of time.

If I did this, I wouldn't be able to implement it right away. But I think it might help filter out the more offensive/combative posts.
Outstanding!

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
I think it's worth a try if it's not too much trouble to implement. Would the OP be able to see the number of "dislikes" or whatever you call it?

Which brings me to another point. Is it possible to be notified if a post is reported? If one person reported my post, I might just shrug it off. But if several people reported one of my posts, I'd take a hard look at myself. I wouldn't want to know WHO reported my post - that could cause hard feelings - but I would like to know if people took so much offense to something I said they felt the need to report me.

ETA: If we had this new feature maybe it would make the report button obsolete.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2014 01:25AM by LJ.
Jacob,
That is a brilliant, well modulated response to some recent issues, IMHO.

Based in MD, near DC
Shopping from the Carolinas to New York
Have video cam; will travel

Poor customer service? Don't get mad; get video.
That's an interesting idea. It may give members a greater sense of setting the tone of the forum. Generally, I favor transparency. But, if something gets ugly, it would be nice to derail it, by virtue of the majority.

I think I also like the idea of being notified if something I post is reported to moderation, as LJ suggested. Maybe I'm not as loved as I think I amsmiling smiley
"If enough people press the button, the post would become less visible. If even more people press the button, it might be hidden and referred to the moderators, and if even more people press the button, the post would be removed altogether."

I agree it is an interesting idea, however I do have a couple of concerns. For example, I'm wondering about how many constitute "enough people", "even more people" and "even more people".

IMHO, if not used properly, it could become an anonymous method of "dogpiling" on unpopular posters, whereas, at least today, we can see who the "dogs" are in the "pile". Just a thought.... smiling smiley

(heart)

I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
What if someone quotes it? will the quote disappear as well?

I think this might empower certain people to band together (and they will) to suppress disagreement. I think having the option to "vote" for the locking of a thread that is spiraling out of control (as opposed to targeting a post someone doesn't like) would do more and in a less censoring manner. Even if it was just locked (or even hidden) for a day or two until people calmed down and moved on to other topics it might defuse some of the feeding frenzies and dogpiles. I think things get out of control when they are constantly being kicked to the top of the thread list instead of aging down a bit. I rarely look past the first page of posts.

Or even limiting everyone to two responses per day on any one thread? one to express an opinion, and a second to clarify it, then not be able to post to that thread again for 24 hours. (Edits okay so if someone realized they worded something badly, they can change it) It would have the effect of separating the combatants by other opinions instead of sniping back and forth.

Time to build a bigger bridge.
Quite frankly, of the two, I like the OP's idea of a "disagree" button, since it is more benign, sends a message and, I assume, identifies the "disagreer". Disclaimer: I'm not a big fan of change and always prefer things the way they are right now.

OTOH, if I was asked what I would change, I would say I would favor the moderators or Jacob sending someone a PM if they are crossing the line or headed in that direction. It might very well nip the "the more offensive/combative posts" in the bud or, at least, give them pause. Just my opinion...

(heart)

I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
(smile) Call me sentimental, but I can't help picturing the "Scheduler of the Year" contest posting getting fainter and fainter and, suddenly, poof! it's gone. smiling smiley

(heart)

I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
Okay, now I admit I don't know what to think. EVERYONE brought up great points and all I kept thinking was on the one hand it's a great idea, on the other hand it could cause this problem, on another hand it could cause that problem and now all I know is I don't have enough hands. I gave up and just liked everyone's post and am going back to the corner to sit and let y'all sort it out.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
I am still in favor of a hide post button. That way you can hide just one post and not the user.

Kim
Yes, I agree.

I agree that a "hide post" button would be a better solution. It would be user generated and user specific. For example, if a thread got hijacked or offensive and a member wanted to block certain posts but keep the initial post, comments, and any subsequent relevant posts visible for future reference, it would be there for that user. A "hide thread" button would be along the same idea as well.

The result is a more relevant display of posts and threads for each user without added censorship.

Happily shopping Rhode Island and nearby Massachusetts and Connecticut
Jacob, it's outstanding you've engaged here and the "fadeaway" button is a great idea but it doesn't exactly address the issue for me.

I would like to be able to disagree with a post without comment but I wouldn't want the post to disappear because I disagreed. If it did that, it would turn into a popularity button used to control who can post and what I'm after is a button that indicates opposing opinions to the post. I'm not interested in throwing the minority off the forum.

I see the fadeaway button as a great idea regarding unsubstantiated rants, personal attacks (defy you to define that one), and posts containing self promotional material and links. However, I don't know how to prevent its use by the unscrupulous to control who can post and what they can post.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
I would love a "hide thread" button. Some have such ambiguous titles I open them over and over even though the content within isn't anything I'm interested in. Being able to just hide those would save me time and make the thread list more meaningful to me. I'd only have to open a thread once then I could close it forever. But I would also like to see a "show hidden threads" button so I could find it again if I wanted to. But that's just because I'm wishy-washy. smiling smiley

Time to build a bigger bridge.
thumbs up Hide thread option.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
I don't how to do that thumbs up thingsad smiley, but the hide thread button would be so useful. I also find myself opening threads with ambiguous and/or misleading subject lines over and over.

Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
Hiding a post/thread would be similar to toggling a member. I can't bring myself to do it for fear of missing a train wreck. True confession.

The fade away feature, by virtue of the majority, would do for me what I cannot do for myself.

Would the fade away have a built-in restrictor plate, so that no member could press the button more than once?
I would hesitate to hide a thread for the same reason Mert chooses not to toggle. A thread that held zero interest can get hijacked into something I'd really hate to miss, so I don't think I'd ever hide a thread. I toggle regularly because I'm such an irritable person I can't put up with irritating posters.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
If the thread held zero interest for me at the outset, I'd never see if it turned into a train wreck because I wouldn't return to the thread again. And every day I mark the entire forum as read. I usually glance at the top 15 threads to see if the title interests me, occasionally I will hunt for tax topics or a thread I started or something that particularly interested me that I want to know the outcome (such as a shopper in an active dispute with an MSC over payment or a rejected report).

But I'm here about 10 minutes a day lately, and even less in the next four months. You all would be free not to hide any threads if you're afraid you'll miss something exciting, but I would like the option to do so if the platform will support that feature.

Time to build a bigger bridge.
The hide button seems to be a popular idea and I think it will work well for a lot of members. I'm not opposed to having it available for the ones who want to use it.

Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
Apparently I peruse the forums in the same way Dspeakes does. I just don't have time any more to keep opening threads I'm not interested in because I forget which ones those were.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login