announcement Sad Trombone time

[+Warwagon MVC]

7 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

Well, people mustn't forget that certain people threatened to (and did) leave the site if we kept the "ignore"  option disabled, so we have some active members that can't operate without an ignore function, how will those same people take being downvoted, and knowing who does it? I know what happened last time we enabled it lol!

 

There's a reason Facebook refuses to add unlike/dislike or downvote.

I tried using the ignore, I really did. But because it didn't hide the post completely and it always showed me that the person posted something but it was just not being displayed, I found my self always wondering what stupid ###### this troll person was saying, that more often than not would unhide the post. So I ended up unignoring them.

[DConnell Member]

51 minutes ago, shockz said:

Why is that a bad thing? If they agreed with said opinion, they'd have liked it instead of down voting... wasn't that the point?

Valid point. At their most basic, the like/dislike reactions are just a way to say I agree/disagree without adding another post to the thread just to say it.

[DConnell Member]

2 minutes ago, warwagon said:

I tried using the ignore, I really did. But because it didn't hide the post completely and it always showed me that the person posted something but it was just not being displayed, I found my self always wondering what stupid ###### this person was saying, and more often than not would unhide the post. So I ended up unignoring them.

I'm often the same, but at least with the post content hidden, you have the choice of whether to view it or not. I often end up uncovering posts from ignored members to get the full thread of a discussion, but it's nice to have the choice.

[+Warwagon MVC]

3 minutes ago, DConnell said:

I'm often the same, but at least with the post content hidden, you have the choice of whether to view it or not. I often end up uncovering posts from ignored members to get the full thread of a discussion, but it's nice to have the choice.

If Neowin would hide it completely where you don't even know they posted anything, I would re-ignore them.

[DConnell Member]

1 minute ago, warwagon said:

If Neowin would hide it completely where you don't even know they posted anything, I would re-ignore them.

Ah, but to fully do that, Neowin would also have to hide any replies that quote the hidden message. You'd still know that person posted, and at least part of the content, due to the reply/quote.

 

I rather like how it's handled now - you see that something was posted, but you can just skip over the narrow bar. Or uncover it if you're morbidly curious ...  ?

[Brandon H Supervisor]

I've never used the ignore feature myself. I've always been of the classic "If I don't like what an individual is saying just ignore it and go on with your day" I'd rather get the full scope of the discussion/conversation personally.

 

If someone has ever been truly bad or annoying I've done my justice and reported their posts for review.

Now that I AM a mod and can see the back end workings of things I can tell you not enough people take this approach. The reports section is mostly spammers and true rule breakers; we don't get too many grey area reports anymore for situations where discussion is just being interrupted by an annoying individual.

 

The only real area that still gets these types of reports is the RWI section because we've been lax in the political threads

 

 

/end of rant. just wanted to give my 2 cents on the ignore situation

[Brandon H Supervisor]

6 minutes ago, warwagon said:

If Neowin would hide it completely where you don't even know they posted anything, I would re-ignore them.

there are userscripts for stylish and tampermonkey for that; haven't used them myself but I know they exist

[Xenon]

Personally I think we need this. I know half the posts I make would qualify. 

 

 

[dead.cell]

2 hours ago, warwagon said:

So? Honestly, who cares. It was neutral! So there were thumbs down next to peoples post, it didn't count for or against their like count. 

Same goes for Sad, Sad actually ADDS a like.. I mean, if every single person could be sad about my post that would be amazing!!!!! I'd win every week!

You could use the same exact argument to justify removing the feature altogether though. Who cares if you get a thumbs up?  

 

The reality is that people do care and we really don't need to be encouraging the little trolls who sit in the corner, being as petty as can be. Personally, I wouldn't mind having reaction emotes tied to your posts, just to encourage people to actually post what they think, instead of having the guy with 100 posts clicking the "AYE, WUT HE SED!" button to everything, contributing nothing.  

[timster]

4 hours ago, PsYcHoKiLLa said:

Any plans to add this one?

 

Only if it's an animated gif. the mouth has to move and a ridiculous tweet has to be sent out.

[DConnell Member]

30 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

I've never used the ignore feature myself. I've always been of the classic "If I don't like what an individual is saying just ignore it and go on with your day" I'd rather get the full scope of the discussion/conversation personally.

 

If someone has ever been truly bad or annoying I've done my justice and reported their posts for review.

 

Bad, as in breaking rules or attacking other members is one thing, but I'm not the  type to report a post because I find it annoying. That's more the type that I tend to block.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

Just now, DConnell said:

Bad, as in breaking rules or attacking other members is one thing, but I'm not the  type to report a post because I find it annoying. That's more the type that I tend to block.

if it's one occurrence that's one thing but if i notice an individual having a bad attitude consistently in multiple threads then that's when i think about reporting a few posts for mods to review and make a decision

 

why brush under the rug what you can actually clean properly; maybe that mindset is why they decided to make me a mod last year.

A good example of an acidic personality from several years back that I feel I helped the overall decision to ban was Andre Borman if you remember that individual; I won't go into details but things were heated around here while that member was around.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

9 minutes ago, timster said:

Only if it's an animated gif. the mouth has to move and a ridiculous tweet has to be sent out.

also needs animated text about building a wall coming out of the mouth as it moves

[dipsylalapo Supervisor]

I think the bottom line is, is that regardless of what we do we're probably going to annoy/displease someone. 

 

We'll try something, see if it works and adjust as needed ☺️

[+Warwagon MVC]

49 minutes ago, dead.cell said:

You could use the same exact argument to justify removing the feature altogether though. Who cares if you get a thumbs up?  

 

A thumbs up increases your like count.

[timster]

 

38 minutes ago, warwagon said:

If Neowin would hide it completely where you don't even know they posted anything, I would re-ignore them.

so, like Reddits shadowbanning?

[CrashG]

10 hours ago, dipsylalapo said:

Dislike was taken away because there were members that were abusing it and going through other members post history and disliking everything.

Dayum, I knew mods had a thankless job here, but wow. Someone/s had WAY too much free time. How childish and petty

[adrynalyne]

10 hours ago, Steven P. said:

Well, people mustn't forget that certain people threatened to (and did) leave the site if we kept the "ignore"  option disabled, so we have some active members that can't operate without an ignore function, how will those same people take being downvoted, and knowing who does it? I know what happened last time we enabled it lol!

 

There's a reason Facebook refuses to add unlike/dislike or downvote.

If you are referring to me, I *did* leave and came back a while later when I found that

some people had gotten off their butts and cleaned out a lot of riffraff. 

[+Raze Subscriber²]

47 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

If you are referring to me, I *did* leave and came back a while later when I found that

some people had gotten off their butts and cleaned out a lot of riffraff. 

You left for a while?  Damn didn't notice.  Sorry.

 

Bring back the ❤️.

[Circaflex]

Annnnndddd my point was just proven.

[adrynalyne]

47 minutes ago, Raze said:

You left for a while?  Damn didn't notice.  Sorry.

 

Bring back the ❤️.

I like to stay under the radar when possible ?

[+Raze Subscriber²]

3 hours ago, adrynalyne said:

I like to stay under the radar when possible ?

A safe place to be sure.  ?

[Brys]

I'm clearly going to abuse this emote on this particular thread for the sake of it but I don't really see a use for it anywhere else. I don't think I've seen many posts really make me sad. Annoyed ? Yes. Angry ? Perhaps. Butthurt ? Hell yeah, I get butthurt over dumb stuff like pineapple on pizza. But sad ? I don't think I've seen one thread making me really sad on this forum.

Still, nice to have the option. I'm still not sure I like the emoticon reactions, although I use them a lot, I do find that the upvote/downvote of answers à la stackoverflow that was put in some forums made more sense, but it's good to try things out and see what works and what doesn't.

[DConnell Member]

18 hours ago, Brandon H said:

if it's one occurrence that's one thing but if i notice an individual having a bad attitude consistently in multiple threads then that's when i think about reporting a few posts for mods to review and make a decision

 

why brush under the rug what you can actually clean properly; maybe that mindset is why they decided to make me a mod last year.

A good example of an acidic personality from several years back that I feel I helped the overall decision to ban was Andre Borman if you remember that individual; I won't go into details but things were heated around here while that member was around.

I see your point. I just don't think that "annoying Dave" qualifies as a report-able infraction in most cases, even though it might annoy others as well. A lot of the times the annoyance is just from a difference of opinion. I may not like the other person's opinion but there's no rule against that. ?

 

As I said, I generally only report those who attack/mock/flame others.

[Mr_Rogers]

no happy only sad