Disagree

Have we lost the ability to see who has clicked "Disagree" on posts?
«1

Comments

  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    edited June 8
    Indeed it seems so...
    (Unsurprisingly also true of the Abuse flag.)

    Along with news of the horrible Ignore plug-in
    http://typedrawers.com/discussion/comment/41590/#Comment_41590
    it's almost like Twitter bought Vanilla...  :-/

    Feelgoodism truly is a disease of the times.

  • George ThomasGeorge Thomas Posts: 512
    edited June 8
    Feelgoodism truly is a disease of the times.

    No disagreement on that. From me, at least. Anyway, there's a pill for it.

  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    edited June 8
    George Thomas said:
    there's a pill for it.
    I've heard they only have blue pills now, just half of them are colored red. A resistance placebo.
  • Dyana WeissmanDyana Weissman Posts: 288
    Hmm. Yeah, @Craig Eliason, that's weird. I'll nudge the Admins. I don't see anything in the Vanilla forums about it, maybe we need to reset some cache or something. 
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    edited June 8
    BTW it's interesting to considering what flagging anonymity enables. Although it eliminates the possibility of retaliation (except by moderators, who I presume can still see the flaggers) it also removes accountability (at least publicly) for abusive flagging; somebody with more animosity than self-control is much more likely to start dishing out Abuse flags with abandon. And somebody who keeps receiving Abuse flags without knowing they're all from the same two antagonists will acquire an unduly negative image of how fellow members generally perceive them. Obfuscation.

    Basically maintaining a balanced environment is a job moderators are much better at, and really what they're there for, versus this whitewashing. Paradoxically, although feelgoodism might make the job of moderators easier on the surface, they will have to keep a closer eye on flagging abuse...

    Also, if this reverts in the future, will anonymous flaggers be unmasked? I know an Armenian politician who made anonymous anti-Turk comments on YouTube that went too far, but when Google bought YouTube the identities of anonymous commenters were exposed... And it came close to sinking his career. (Frankly, I wish it had.)

    Lastly, does flagging anonymity really jibe with TypeDrawers (nicely) insisting on real names on accounts?
  • Cory MaylettCory Maylett Posts: 155
    edited June 8
    Triggering a flag of disagreement seems a bit vacuous without also explaining the reasoning behind the differing opinion. Doing both seems redundant, so I've never paid much heed to the flag.

    Feel free to disagree, of course.  ;)
  • Dyana WeissmanDyana Weissman Posts: 288
    Tagging @Tiffany Wardle and @James Hultquist-Todd to make sure they see this and check in with Vanilla. 
  • Jacob CasalJacob Casal Posts: 95
    Perhaps selecting disagree could trigger a obligatory comment box to pop up for someone to explain themselves. For those who would already comment after disagreeing it would save them the (albeit small) amount of time of scrolling down to do so; for any who accidentally click on disagree they could just click it off; and for any who try to leave a blank comment, it would post a blank comment making them look a little silly and add weight to their decision. Also, if they simply leave the page it would be saved as a draft and the disagree would not appear nor count.
    (A setback could be that these blank comments could be little annoying when reading through a thread though—save the seldom blank comments currently that are honest mistakes that occasionally happen now and then—but in my little time here I haven’t seen disagree used too often. Perhaps if they wanted to remove their disagree they could have a mod remove the blank comment as well.)
    I’m probably just over complicating it and making it an obtuse process.
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    I was gonna hit disagree then I read your last sentence!  :-Þ
  • Jacob CasalJacob Casal Posts: 95
    @Hrant H. Papazian Whew, close call! :)
    Yeah, it dawned on me that it was a teeny bit superfluous after I went into all the details, hence the last sentence, but I decided to post it as food for thought regardless.
    @Thomas Phinny I agree with you on selectivity and highlighting, the first thought that popped into my head after reading with Hrant’s reply was of him agreeing with 1% of my post haha. Though if one were to bring it up with Vanilla, they may rebut by noting the quotation feature for highlighting. However, that works for elaborations and not so much for the simple agree and/or disagree.
  • ... But again, this is a feature request for Vanilla, rather than Typophile, I think.
    I think you're a bit too late to suggest improvements to Typophile ...  >:)

    Google doesn't seem to notice, but the last few times I followed links there, they were all as dead as AskJeeves.
  • Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 1,685
    Type-something. You know, the forum where all the kids hang these days.
  • John SavardJohn Savard Posts: 467

    Also, if this reverts in the future, will anonymous flaggers be unmasked? I know an Armenian politician who made anonymous anti-Turk comments on YouTube that went too far, but when Google bought YouTube the identities of anonymous commenters were exposed... And it came close to sinking his career. (Frankly, I wish it had.)

    Lastly, does flagging anonymity really jibe with TypeDrawers (nicely) insisting on real names on accounts?
    Initially, at least, I found it hard to see that making the "disagree" flag anonymous should be an issue.

    Accusing someone of abuse is a serious charge. Even if it makes sense to make that anonymous to protect those reporting actual abuse from retaliation, there is a reasonable expectation that the moderators will make up for this by being vigilant about false abuse reports.

    Of course, people can click on the wrong button by accident.

    But if someone simply indicates that he disagrees with a comment... presumably, if he clicked on the disagree button on a comment with abusive or malicious intent, he would still, in fact, disagree with the comment, thus he is foiled and fails to use it for more than its intended purpose!
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    Accusing someone of abuse is a serious charge.
    For some people it's a serious ego-boost!
    there is a reasonable expectation that the moderators will make up for this by being vigilant about false abuse reports.
    An expectation that's been reasonable from way before this.
    Of course, people can click on the wrong button by accident.
    It's easy enough to click it again to undo it.

  • Tiffany WardleTiffany Wardle Posts: 239
    I do see these. They are shown as pop-ups. Does this help? 
  • Dyana WeissmanDyana Weissman Posts: 288
    Moderators can see them but regular members cannot. 
  • Tiffany WardleTiffany Wardle Posts: 239
    #facepalm I do not see anything in the dashboard. @Stephen Coles @James Puckett does this ring any bells for either of you?
  • James PuckettJames Puckett Posts: 1,660
    I've got no clue. It's been years since I poked my head under the hood.
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    edited June 11
    Sounds like something Vanilla itself has changed across the board (pardon the pun). After all feelgood is the in thing. Hopefully though there's a "I Can Handle The Truth" plug-in.
  • Stephen ColesStephen Coles Posts: 770
    I’m sorry, I don’t know. I recommend contacting Vanilla support who are usually pretty responsive.
  • I see four "disagree" points on the first post by Hrant (as expected? LOL).
    Not seeing any "flag" anyway, at least not here.
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    There are people on this forum who almost exclusively hit buttons versus actually saying things.

    BTW, I guess I shouldn't be calling all of them flags... But what? "Points" seems awkward.
  • BTW, I guess I shouldn't be calling all of them flags... But what? "Points" seems awkward.
    It’s “Papazian Punishment Points” (PPP), just for you. :-) LOL
  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 925
    There are people on this forum who almost exclusively hit buttons versus actually saying things.
    Some talk less than one would like, some talk more. C’est la vie!

    BTW, I guess I shouldn't be calling all of them flags... But what? "Points" seems awkward.
    Reactions. 
  • edited June 16
    Some of my posts and comments have been flagged, which in this forum means a bad thing (in other places, such as Apple Mail, it means “important”, in Todoist it means “higher in relevance”). The meaning is ambiguous across platforms and tools. And unfortunately, there seems no way to remove these flags.

    I have asked the admins several months ago to look into it and no one seems to know how to remove flags. And no one seems to be able to understand why or how my posts had been flagged, not even by whom, or what the issue was. Look me up and decide for yourself. I can come across opinionated sometimes (maybe that’s why I seek all your company ;) ), but I am generally a kind person and if I upset someone or hurt them, I apologize.
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 1,568
    edited June 16
    The meaning is ambiguous across platforms and tools. And unfortunately, there seems no way to remove these flags.
    The ambiguity is OK.

    A flag can be removed by the person who deployed it (for example by duly being pressured to). I'm surprised moderators cannot undo a flag. They've done various reconfigurations before:
    http://typedrawers.com/discussion/2481/changes-to-reactions-redux/p1
    And no one seems to be able to understand why or how my posts had been flagged, not even by whom, or what the issue was.
    I'm pretty sure moderators can see who did it.
    http://typedrawers.com/discussion/comment/42103/#Comment_42103

    As for the why:
    Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point...
    Especially a heart bent on revenge.
  • edited June 16
    Maybe the person who flagged me is no longer a member? Only two of the respective comments are still available, and yet the count remains 3. In either case, I disagree that ambiguity of what the icon communicates is a good thing or even “ok”. In user profiles, it is shown as “abuse”. To my knowledge, I did not abuse anything or anyone and the context doesn’t reveal a hint what it was about.

    I would know what I did wrong if I actually did it. I asked for removal and it didn’t happen, but I wasn’t given a reason why. I guess I’ll have to live with being shown as “abusive” until an admin decides they want to remove those flags.
  • Cory MaylettCory Maylett Posts: 155
    edited June 16
    Before selling it, I was the owner and admin of a good-sized outdoor recreation forum with about a half dozen moderators. I'm currently a moderator on a popular graphic design forum.

    Neither of these forums ran/run on Vanilla, so I can't speak to the specifics of how the flags and buttons work here or what the moderators/admins can, can't or don't do. I can, however, speak to the importance of these kinds of flags, badges, likes, dislikes, etc., and my advice is don't take them too seriously.

    People click buttons and check boxes for all kinds of reasons — some helpful, some thoughtful, some random, some mean-spirited and some are just plain inexplicable. The helpful ones are addressed by the moderators. The understandable ones are acknowledged. The others are simply dismissed and ignored.

    The only ones remembered are the low-level repeat offenders and trolls. The only people remembering the rest are those who were falsely accused of some unknown something or other they did not do. All considered, my advise is to simply dismiss it all as a temporary bit of meaningless static because in all likelihood that's all it is.
Sign In or Register to comment.