Reactions–Yea or Nay?

John Hudson

With regard to the Like/Dislike flags, I find that I often refrain from using them because a post contains both statements with which I agree and those with which I do not. On the same grounds, I'm sometimes left wondering with which parts of a post others are indicating they agree or disagree. With all of it? With some part of it?

The 'Insightful' flag seems most useful overall.

Craig Eliason

With regard to the Like/Dislike flags, I find that I often refrain from using them because a post contains both statements with which I agree and those with which I do not.

In critique threads I've been tempted to put every suggestion in a separate comment just to head off that very ambiguity.

Ben Blom

Being able to express approval via a simple ‘agree’ mark gives valuable feedback about the quality of a post

When a post is basically an opinion, an "agree" reaction means just that. Even when a post is not like an opinion, an "agree" reaction means just that. Quality cannot be defined as something that people agree with.
Knowing that people agree with a post, or like it, or disagree with it, can be valuable feedback — when its value is not overstated.

Paul van der Laan

Good point. The amount of agrees does indeed not indicate much about the quality of the post. But as you can also see *who* agrees, that does make it valuable.

Thomas Phinney

Jan: Going in and trying to sell *anything* in the middle of that meeting would be intrusive. Using the built-in feedback mechanism that James put in place to give feedback to James seems useful. This discussion board is not a democracy, which is fine. But clearly James thinks feedback is useful, and like Frode and others I think that it is a fine thing to let him know when we agree with him—or don’t.

There are a variety of blogs and other media that I either own outright or am an administrator on. Recently somebody pointed out that something I said seemed condescending. I really appreciated it, as I had not intended to come across that way on that issue. I changed it.

Feedback is good.

Chris Dean

@Jan: I’m indifferent on the reaction features, but I have strong feelings on trash-talking people behind their back.

Jan Schmoeger

Chris, you have just recently used all the reaction features to the hilt yourself: no one before you used the troll and abuse marks as much. And, you used the troll mark on me too. I take that personally, especially from someone who is purportedly "indifferent" to the reaction features. Did you not just "trash-talk me behind my back" yourself, to paraphrase your quote?

I feel that you think you are here to "moderate" Typedrawers (including the rightful owner/moderator James P.), as well as you are "moderating" Typophile. I do not like being moderated by you. I do not think you qualify, and I did not sign up for that. Whatever your motivation might be, and I admit it might even be honourable, you have overstepped the mark.

Chris Dean

I don’t consider responding to posts to be moderating. Simply voicing an opinion on statements. Nor do I consider voicing an opinion through use of a consciously implemented feature to be overstepping my bounds. As far as my role on Typophile, I don’t think you understand what I do. I sincerely hope your “moderating” comment to that effect was not intended as passive-agressive sarcasm.

Chris Goodwin

Did you not just "trash-talk me behind my back" yourself, to paraphrase your quote?

Not at all. You're able to see he's tagged you, so it's completely transparent.

With regard to your disgust that someone would have the temerity to flag James on his own forum, I'd contend that someone who was genuinely interested in productive interaction would not abuse their position. It's telling that he's weighing up the idea of scrapping the tagging feature now he's been at the sharp end of it.

Chris Dean

As a result of our conversation, something just occurred to me. Here is my thought process: If I read something, and have the option/feel the need to voice opinion on it, I am going to do so through use of the Reaction feature. If this results in a perception of an attempt to moderate or overstep my bounds, so be it. The fact that you can see who agrees, disagrees, considers something to be abusive, &c may have the potential to foster animosity between individuals. If this is the case, then perhaps the Reaction feature might be somewhat problematic (it is my understanding that the Reaction feature is a plugin of sorts, and cannot be modified without significant effort). I guess we’ll just have to see how it plays out. I do know from other conversations however, that people feel somewhat slighted when their honest reactions are moderated and edited. At this point I may be moving towards “nay.”

Paul van der Laan

Best to switch off reactions *and* comments altogether then. That will make sure nobody gets hurt...

Jan Schmoeger

The reaction feature was no problem until Chris started abusing it.

Jan Schmoeger

You're able to see he's tagged you, so it's completely transparent.

So is a signed, public comment about any topic, which started this whole mess. What are you complaining about?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Jan Schmoeger

the "Flag" button is the only one that is visible

That may be just to reduce the visual clutter on the page. Unfortunately, it contains the spam, abuse and troll marks, so perhaps it is too attractive at first glance. Oops, another troll mark coming …

Chris Dean

If you consider my using the Reactions feature as abusing it, that’s your prerogative. And I find your “oops” style remarks infantile, painfully rhetorical, and text-book Troll. I’m not going to bother dignifying your further remarks on this subject with any attention.

Jan Schmoeger

Infantile? Me? No attention?
Thanks for obliging with the troll mark so promptly. Yes Chris, you are indifferent.

Jackson Showalter-Cavanaugh

Is it possible to add a "you post too much, it's annoying" button?

Chris Goodwin

"So is a signed, public comment about any topic, which started this whole mess. What are you complaining about?"

Well, I'm not actually making a complaint am I? I'm simply drawing your attention to the fact that a tag made on your own post, that was bound to be seen by you, does not really count as 'behind your back'.

John Hudson

Can we perhaps agree -- and maybe have it stated in the forum rules -- that the 'Spam', 'Abuse' and 'Troll' flags should be used responsibly and for serious purpose, i.e. to flag something that should potentially be removed by the moderator. This is why they are grouped together under the flag dropdown, and are not grouped with the other feedback buttons.

If you approach the flag options as specifically for communicating to the moderator that you think a post contravenes forum rules against spam, abuse or trolling, and hence should be removed, that will hopefully make you think carefully before using these options. I expect different members will also have differing sensibilities with regard to free speech and censorship, and some might refrain from using these options altogether. Personally, I'd happily flag spam as such, but would be much more cautious about using either the abuse or troll flags.

Nick Shinn

Is it possible to add a "you post too much, it's annoying" button?

LOL. A major reason for TypeDrawers was to create an environment safe from Hrant Papazian’s inescapable moralizing. What would a “get down off your soapbox” button look like?

George Thomas

Frode, personal attacks are covered in James' basic rules for the board.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Jan Schmoeger

tag made on your own post, that was bound to be seen by you, does not really count as 'behind your back'

Chris, when it happens retrospectively, on older entries in threads which you are unlikely to check until you have a reason to, it's not exactly obvious. I'll shut up now :-)

Mark Simonson

I think the "troll" and "abuse" flags should be reserved to indicate bad forum behavior, i.e., not following the rules of the forum. Using them for other purposes makes them less meaningful. What's wrong with the "disagree" button?

James Puckett

Can we perhaps agree -- and maybe have it stated in the forum rules -- that the 'Spam', 'Abuse' and 'Troll' flags should be used responsibly and for serious purpose, i.e. to flag something that should potentially be removed by the moderator.

Good idea! The rules have been updated.

A major reason for TypeDrawers was to create an environment safe from Hrant Papazian’s inescapable moralizing.

The major reasons for TypeDrawers were spam and technical issues on Typophile. Being able to block Hrant is just an added benefit.

Max Phillips

What's wrong with the "disagree" button?

It would be nice if there were a way to flag a post as uncivil: a dislike/thumbs down button. It's possible to be both correct and a jerk. Jerkish comments don't always rise (sink?) to the level of trolling or abuse, but they're still an issue in any forum of this sort.

Scott-Martin Kosofsky

I'm new to this board, having signed on just today. I'm afraid that, as the board grows, the number of buttons and flags and pictures may eventually overwhelm the content. This page has a pretty high noise to signal ratio. (It might help to bump up the type size a notch.) I'd hate to think what will happen when the lunatic and lonely from Typophile get their hands on those flags . . . As the late, great Hunter S. Thompson observed: "When the going gets weird, the weird go pro."

Nick Shinn

John Hudson deserves a free coffee for his last post.

Craig Eliason

@James Montalbano
Okay, it's driving me nuts: what does WTFRC mean?
(Besides Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission, which is all Google gets me.)