Adding 'disagree' to the reactions choices

[Blessed Weather]

We are trying out a new reaction option and have added a 'disagree' button to the choices when reacting to a post. However, we felt it appropriate to make all reactions anonymous to avoid possible ill feeling if someone doesn't agree with your post. Please use this thread to provide feedback to the team. Alternatively feel free to message any team member.

[danm]

@Paul i think it's valuable to see who agrees with your post. Could you make that open to view and then just hide who disagrees? Not sure if it's technically possible. 

[Buzz]

A wise choice to hide those who Disagree, because otherwise that would cause some flack here (and there's enough of that already due to the highly immature nature of some posters).

I do though agree with danm about making those who Agree visible.

[Daniel Finch]

If you're going to have a disagree option then perhaps make it a requirement for the person disagreeing to explain why he/she does. Otherwise it's just a tool for people to abuse. 

[snowdog]

Would the reaction also imply that you dislike the post?, as well as /or disagree?

[Cheshire Freeze]

1 hour ago, danm said:

@Paul i think it's valuable to see who agrees with your post. Could you make that open to view and then just hide who disagrees? Not sure if it's technically possible. 

Agree.

Have we really gone that soft that we have to hide who has disagreed with a post?!

I’m guessing it’s not possible to hide the disagrees only and that if you hide one reaction then you have to hide them all? If that’s the case then maybe ditch the disagree reaction altogether until the forum software provider can sort it so that you can hide who disagrees only.

 

[Blessed Weather]

4 minutes ago, snowdog said:

Would the reaction also imply that you dislike the post?, as well as /or disagree?

No, not necessarily a disliking of the post. The Oxford dictionary gives the meaning of disagree as "have a different opinion", so I'd prefer to think that it's being used to express a differing opinion to the poster. 

[weirpig]

Not sure why you need a like or dislike button really.  

[Paul]

1 hour ago, danm said:

@Paul i think it's valuable to see who agrees with your post. Could you make that open to view and then just hide who disagrees? Not sure if it's technically possible. 

It's not, unfortunately.

[Methuselah]

15 minutes ago, weirpig said:

Not sure why you need a like or dislike button really.  

I can't see the point TBH.

[danm]

11 minutes ago, Paul said:

It's not, unfortunately.

Ok. Personally I would leave as is then, but others may have a different view. 

[Paul]

6 minutes ago, Methuselah said:

I can't see the point TBH.

This coming from the person who's given over 100,000 reactions to posts 

[mushymanrob]

The problem is..... are they agreeing/disagreeing with what the posts says or the posters analysis?...

Ive "liked" posts that were well reasoned and constructed even though i dont like what was said... i mean, the times a well constructed, reasoned post has said something the general crew dont like (mild in winter, cool in summer) gets hardly any reaction ... but a BLAH post, sayiing "boom" or "its coming" , something trite like that gets loads of "likes".

The "like" and now "dislike" will have little bearing on the quality of the post, but will be determined by what it says.

[Northwest NI]

I think it’s pointless. The forum is mostly cordial most of the time. I see this option as sowing discord. But that’s just my view, feel free to agree or disagree

Edited July 18, 2023 by Northwest NI

[Scuba steve]

I suppose it’s better than an angry face ,lol  did this feature exist in the past ? I can’t remember 

[Paul]

To add some context to this. The problem we're trying to solve is that with no ways to react in a negative way to a post, something, which for arguments sake 100 people agree with and 1000 people disagree with, gets 20 'likes', appears as a 'popular' post but is in fact not a reflection of the wider views of the community. So, we feel the system could use a balance of some sort. 

Whether this method is the long term way forward, we'll find out - but that's one of the main reasons we think it's worth a try. 

[Northwest NI]

2 minutes ago, Paul said:

To add some context to this. The problem we're trying to solve is that with no ways to react in a negative way to a post. Something, which for arguments sake 100 people agree with and 1000 people disagree with, gets 20 'likes', appears as a popular post and is in fact not a reflection of the wider views of the community. So, we feel the system could use a balance of some sort. 

Whether this method is the long term way forward, we'll find out - but that's one of the main reasons we think it's worth a try. 

Don’t have “popular posts” then. It’s not like Facebook here surely?

[Nick L]

Just to add, nobody is being forced to use these reactions...

[Scuba steve]

5 minutes ago, Nick L said:

Just to add, nobody is being forced to use these reactions...

I think you got the first one

[Paul]

7 minutes ago, Northwest NI said:

Don’t have “popular posts” then. It’s not like Facebook here surely?

That's an option, but we've had the system in place for years, so would rather work with it than remove it at this point. 

[Nick L]

15 minutes ago, Scuba steve said:

I think you got the first one

To whoever gave it, I am flattered 

[Norrance]

1 hour ago, Blessed Weather said:

No, not necessarily a disliking of the post. The Oxford dictionary gives the meaning of disagree as "have a different opinion", so I'd prefer to think that it's being used to express a differing opinion to the poster. 

I think that it is important that it is not overused because people don't like the message. For example a factual post in the model thread showing that the weather is likely to be cold and wet should not get dislikes just as a 'fantasy' post stating that it is going to be hot and sunny for the next few weeks should not get likes imo.

[matty40s]

I dont think this is a good idea, we used to give out freebies on another forum I use which operates on the same platform as this one. Originally, there were reddies(angry face) as well, but this was abused by some against people they didnt like and dragged their reputation into negative figures.

[Nick L]

Just now, matty40s said:

I dont think this is a good idea, we used to give out freebies on another forum I use which operates on the same platform as this one. Originally, there were reddies(angry face) as well, but this was abused by some against people they didnt like and dragged their reputation into negative figures.

Just to clarify, this addition does not introduce a reputation-based system like Reddit uses.

[rwtwm]

1 hour ago, Paul said:

To add some context to this. The problem we're trying to solve is that with no ways to react in a negative way to a post, something, which for arguments sake 100 people agree with and 1000 people disagree with, gets 20 'likes', appears as a 'popular' post but is in fact not a reflection of the wider views of the community. So, we feel the system could use a balance of some sort. 

Whether this method is the long term way forward, we'll find out - but that's one of the main reasons we think it's worth a try. 

I can see a benefit in giving people a way to negatively respond to a post without having to hit reply. I'm not sure what you've written seems a particular problem though? 

Take Coldplay for example. They aren't very good, but you'd struggle to argue that they aren't popular.