The "Respectfully Disagree" reaction is cringe.

[Breton_Lord]

Many will "Respectfully Disagree" on this and that's OK , but I saw posts where clearly people have spent a lot of time writing them only to have a swarm of disagree reactions with 0 substance to them.

Like one post had around 4 replies , but over 11 disagree reactions , so at least 7 people didn't even care to elaborate and express why they disagree. some childish people also use it to troll or to get back at someone who "Respectfully Disagreed" with them , I once disagreed with a reply I saw on a CK3 thread , and actually took my time to explain why , then the author of that post actually went into my profile and disagreed on everything I posted !

I think this behavior is childish and cringe , and it also makes the purpose of this reaction (to make it clearer to the devs what ideas are popular for the games and what ideas aren't) null and void , as many of those reactions are done by childish people or trolls who don't represent what the community think is a good idea or not.

Something should be done in order to prevent this.

 

[Maxxie42]

many of those reactions are done by childish people or trolls who don't represent what the community think is a good idea or not.

How do you know what's representative of "the community" ? A up- and downvoting system may not be perfect, but it's the best thing we got. As for people who disagree and don't comment, they may people who don't feel too comfortable getting into an argument in English, or maybe they can't be bothered to get into the same tired argument that's been played out a million times already over the years in this forum. At any rate, I personally think that despite the small minority of infants who use it for idiotic reasons, the disagree button is doing pretty much what it's supposed to do.

 

[Breton_Lord]

comfortable getting into an argument in English, or maybe they can't be bothered to get into the same tired argument that's been played out a million times already over the years in this forum

If they understand what they're reading then they can write in English well enough , if not then their "disagree" reaction is even more cringe , and if one disagree on something and doesn't reply then yeah maybe he's had this conversation before , or maybe he saw an already existing reply that already expressed his opinion , but my main issue is with people who take it as a form of trolling , or to get back at someone , that is annoying to us and it's not benefecial to the devs.

 

[MatthewP]

my main issue is with people who take it as a form of trolling , or to get back at someone , that is annoying to us and it's not benefecial to the devs.

This is obviously a misuse of the reaction. Maybe it's something to report to moderators. Or just ignore. But anyway it's definitely not a reason to condemn the ability to disagree without writing a comment.

 

[Dunner]

So it's your contention that it's better to write a post saying "I respectfully disagree" than clicking the "Respectfully Disagree" button?

If so, I respectfully disagree

 

[MarkDey]

This topic would be better covered in the Forum Help / Issues / Rules area, not where it was. I have moved the thread.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

Maybe it's something to report to moderators.

It definitely is. Bulk disagreeing is explicitly against the Code of Conduct and ought to be reported.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

If they understand what they're reading then they can write in English well enough

This assumption is false. Example: As a German I can read Dutch without issues. Writing Dutch however? Hell, no! I have no idea about their proper orthography.


And even if they may technically be versed in English sufficiently to write understandable texts they maybe don't feel secure in doing so.

Note: If you are really curious and genuinely have no idea why someone disagreed to your post, please feel free to call them out. If you remain polite while doing so and do not insist, this is no problem. However, if they decide to not reply to your call, please accept it.

 

[InvisibleBison]

Like one post had around 4 replies , but over 11 disagree reactions , so at least 7 people didn't even care to elaborate and express why they disagree

If one of those four replies already states the reason why someone disagrees with the post, what point is there for them to rewrite that post instead of just agreeing with it?

 

[Phibs]

Bulk disagreeing has been covered, should be reported.

On the whole long/laborious post thing: verbosity and/or effort don't entitle one to a equivalent response.
Among other things because there is often no correlation with quality of content.

And imho folks don't consider the likely consequence of removing the odious red x.
An increase in brief written (and potentially less respectful) expressions of disagreement.
Are twelve "X"s really worse than five "what r u on lol"?

 

[honkajoki]

I think the forum could do without the Respectfully disagree reaction. Too often it does not convey information on what is disagreed on, unless the thing disagreed on is the person of the poster, in which case it's hardly respectful. Let the first one to disagree write out his or her reasons for disagreeing, and others of similar opinion click Agree, Like or whatever on that message. Or write out their own message, when they disagree with something else in the original post.

 

[InvisibleBison]

I think the forum could do without the Respectfully disagree reaction. Too often it does not convey information on what is disagreed on, unless the thing disagreed on is the person of the poster, in which case it's hardly respectful. Let the first one to disagree write out his or her reasons for disagreeing, and others of similar opinion click Agree, Like or whatever on that message. Or write out their own message, when they disagree with something else in the original post.

We're not entitled to an explanation of why people disagree with us, however frustrating it can be to not have one.

 

[honkajoki]

We're not entitled to an explanation of why people disagree with us, however frustrating it can be to not have one.

Firstly, thank you, that's much more constructive feedback than a simple red X.

What we, as users of this forum are or are not entitled to, is only something decided by the forum managers. So I'm stating that I respectfully disagree with their policy regarding that reaction. There's a section in the Community Code of Conduct titled Respectfully disagreeing, which I take does not refer only to the reaction. In that section they state

Unconstructive reactions and disagreements will be deleted and subject to sanction.

I fail to see the constructiveness in the red Xs.

 

[MatthewP]

I think the forum could do without the Respectfully disagree reaction. Too often it does not convey information on what is disagreed on, unless the thing disagreed on is the person of the poster, in which case it's hardly respectful. Let the first one to disagree write out his or her reasons for disagreeing, and others of similar opinion click Agree, Like or whatever on that message. Or write out their own message, when they disagree with something else in the original post.

You know, this actually convinced me to some extent. Like would it be that problematic if when someone wrote a bad comment you could let them know by agreeing with a specific written disagreement instead? It’s a more expressive way to disagree.

And honestly even if it’s a really bad comment and all it gets is “that makes no sense” with 20 agrees, that seems no worse than the current system.

 

[InvisibleBison]

Firstly, thank you, that's much more constructive feedback than a simple red X.

What we, as users of this forum are or are not entitled to, is only something decided by the forum managers. So I'm stating that I respectfully disagree with their policy regarding that reaction. There's a section in the Community Code of Conduct titled Respectfully disagreeing, which I take does not refer only to the reaction. In that section they state

I fail to see the constructiveness in the red Xs.

A constructive disagree is one that contributes to the discussion, the same as any other reaction. If you disagree with someone because you think their ideas are wrong you're being constructive; if you disagree with someone because they said something in another thread that annoyed you you're not being constructive.

 

[honkajoki]

A constructive disagree is one that contributes to the discussion, the same as any other reaction. If you disagree with someone because you think their ideas are wrong you're being constructive; if you disagree with someone because they said something in another thread that annoyed you you're not being constructive.

If I am to interpret the "reaction" above as replying or such, I can't disagree with what you're writing here.

If on the other hand reaction means the respectful disagrees, agrees, likes, and others, then I must disagree. None of them are constructive in the sense that they'd contribute new ideas to the discussion. Most of them can be useful in reducing "me too" messages, and perhaps even useful for devs to see if some ideas are especially liked. But that does not really apply to the red X. It does not convey what is being disagreed upon. When a message contains multiple ideas, an agree or like can be interpreted that the person reacting supports them all, or supports some and opposes none. If there's a red X, it's impossible to deduce whether there's opposition for all ideas in a message with multiple ideas or opposition to just one of them. Or whether it's just about, as you say, someone being annoyed with the poster about something else.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

When a message contains multiple ideas, an agree or like can be interpreted that the person reacting supports them all, or supports some and opposes none

That's why it's not great when a single post contains multiple ideas. An idea really ought be able to be conveyed in a sentence or a short paragraph.

 

[InvisibleBison]

If I am to interpret the "reaction" above as replying or such, I can't disagree with what you're writing here.

If on the other hand reaction means the respectful disagrees, agrees, likes, and others, then I must disagree. None of them are constructive in the sense that they'd contribute new ideas to the discussion. Most of them can be useful in reducing "me too" messages, and perhaps even useful for devs to see if some ideas are especially liked. But that does not really apply to the red X. It does not convey what is being disagreed upon. When a message contains multiple ideas, an agree or like can be interpreted that the person reacting supports them all, or supports some and opposes none. If there's a red X, it's impossible to deduce whether there's opposition for all ideas in a message with multiple ideas or opposition to just one of them. Or whether it's just about, as you say, someone being annoyed with the poster about something else.

By reaction, I do mean the six symbols you can leave at the bottom of someone's post.

And I don't find your attempt to differentiate between respectfully disagree and the other reactions particularly convincing. You condemn disagree because it's not clear which point in a message that makes multiple points is being disagreed with, but the same ambiguity is present with the other reactions, as you yourself admit! If it's a problem that I can't tell what part of my post someone disagrees with, why is it not also a problem if I can't tell which part of my post someone agrees with, finds helpful, etc? None of the reactions are any different from each other in how much information they convey.

 

[honkajoki]

That's why it's not great when a single post contains multiple ideas. An idea really ought be able to be conveyed in a sentence or a short paragraph.

Are you suggesting that instead of one longer post containing multiple ideas, each user should divide his ideas into multiple short posts? My first thought would be that it can be considered spamming. The community code seems to agree.

If you think of something else you want to add to the thread, please use the Edit button rather than making multiple posts in a row as this may also be seen as spamming, whether intentional or not.

I think that depending on how active the forum is and how slowly they are written, multiple posts to the same thread could also result in thread bumping, which is also frowned upon by the community code.

Of course it may be that I misunderstood what you meant.

EDIT: The fact that there exists a multi-quote system in the forum, would also suggest that users are meant to combine multiple short messages into longer ones.

By reaction, I do mean the six symbols you can leave at the bottom of someone's post.

And I don't find your attempt to differentiate between respectfully disagree and the other reactions particularly convincing. You condemn disagree because it's not clear which point in a message that makes multiple points is being disagreed with, but the same ambiguity is present with the other reactions, as you yourself admit! If it's a problem that I can't tell what part of my post someone disagrees with, why is it not also a problem if I can't tell which part of my post someone agrees with, finds helpful, etc? None of the reactions are any different from each other in how much information they convey.

I think that for the constructivity of the discussion, it's much less important to know whether the message is being agreed upon wholly or partially, and if partially, then which part, than it is to know that when the message is being disagreed upon.

Also, you yourself noted that the red Xs can be used for personal attacks. Sure, it's also possible to use the other reactions for personal fanboying or something, although I find that less likely. And there's the matter of forum spirit. Few users feel bad when getting positive reactions and not knowing what they are about. Many feel bad when disagreed upon, and more so when they don't know what it is that's being disagreed.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

The community code seems to agree.

So do I. You already said it: The forum has a multi-quote feature. Please use it.

If that means that a post cannot be (dis)agreed upon anymore with a simple reaction so be it. You have a keyboard. Use it.

Also, you yourself noted that the red Xs can be used for personal attacks.

As mentioned, this behaviour is against the CoC. If you encounter such a thing please report it so we can investigate.