difference between upvote and like vote

[TheVat]

Noob question:

I've seen these used at other forums, where they use either Like or Upvote, and they mean approval/agreement to that posting.  Here, both seem to be options, so I'm just getting clear on what the distinction is.  Does upvote mean more that we approve the posting's opinion, while "like" is more that we like the style or approach even if we disagree? 

[Phi for All]

Like has been available since the last software update, iirc. I don't use it. I think Like is part of a positive-only system of reputation, for those who want to focus on that. I think the Admins have it set where both are active.

[swansont]

I use upvote and downvote as they have no chance of triggering the self-destruct sequence.

[TheVat]

5 hours ago, swansont said:

I use upvote and downvote as they have no chance of triggering the self-destruct sequence.

LoL.   Thanks.   The vagueness of such buttons makes me not want to use them overly much.   But I've been getting upvotes (apparently winning a day,  yesterday -- I've never won a day in my life!  Do I add it to my lifespan?   This is exciting...)  so now I feel somehow guilty and stingy if I don't cast them,  too.   

I'll just let the thumb operate autonomously, see what happens... 

[Peterkin]

Well, I understand "like" - or thought I did, until just now, when

5 hours ago, swansont said:

I use upvote and downvote as they have no chance of triggering the self-destruct sequence.

I read the suggestion that using it could trigger the self-destruct sequence. I'm pretty sure I'm not ready for that.

 I don't understand the others, so I won't use them until I see more of how things work here.

(PS *heart* the emoji selection.)

[Phi for All]

"Like" and "Upvote" give +1 to reputation (pick one or the other), "Downvote" gives -1. 

If you trigger the auto-destruct sequence, the whole site goes on red alert and you will be given a warning point which will never expire. 

[dimreepr]

43 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

"Like" and "Upvote" give +1 to reputation (pick one or the other), "Downvote" gives -1. 

If you trigger the auto-destruct sequence, the whole site goes on red alert and you will be given a warning point which will never expire. 

Indeed, I'm always assumed to be stoned; it's very frustrating... 

[studiot]

27 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, I'm always assumed to be stoned; it's very frustrating... 

"it's very frustrating... "

Is that because stoned is your preferred state, or because you once visited Hetty Pegler's Tump ?

🙂

[dimreepr]

6 minutes ago, studiot said:

Is that because stoned is your preferred state,

No, it's because stoned, is an excuse to your preferred state...

[TheVat]

After a couple months of the reputation system, and watching a couple of people get downvotes apparently just because someone disagreed with them,  I got a bit torqued and wrote this:

The practice of anonymous downvoting here strikes me as mean-spirited and passive-aggressive.   If you disagree,  why not just say so,  and move on without handing out a demerit badge?  If you have nothing useful to say, just refrain from upvoting.   I think having this judgmental tool to brand others with belongs more to totalitarian China than to a free and civil forum.   (I used the downvote once here,  a short time after joining,  then cancelled my downvote a few hours later,  disgusted with meself)   

JMO, the potential for abuse of such a feature is high.   Please don't put a scarlet D on my forehead!   

 

 

[iNow]

 

4 minutes ago, TheVat said:

If you disagree,  why not just say so,  and move on without handing out a demerit badge? 

Why not both? What about when ones explanations repeatedly fall upon deaf ears and blind eyes? What about when the poster shared something truly bigoted, hateful, and foul?

It’s fine if your personal religion encourages you to avoid such things, but why force that choice on to everyone else?

Are we not good enough or mature enough in your opinion to be granted the freedom to use the system ourselves as we each see fit (so long as we’re not abusing the system or breaking the rules to which we all agreed upon joining the community here)?

[zapatos]

18 minutes ago, TheVat said:

After a couple months of the reputation system, and watching a couple of people get downvotes apparently just because someone disagreed with them,  I got a bit torqued and wrote this:

The practice of anonymous downvoting here strikes me as mean-spirited and passive-aggressive.   If you disagree,  why not just say so,  and move on without handing out a demerit badge?  If you have nothing useful to say, just refrain from upvoting.   I think having this judgmental tool to brand others with belongs more to totalitarian China than to a free and civil forum.   (I used the downvote once here,  a short time after joining,  then cancelled my downvote a few hours later,  disgusted with meself)   

JMO, the potential for abuse of such a feature is high.   Please don't put a scarlet D on my forehead!   

 

 

About every six months or so we have a mini-debate triggered by someone who doesn't like the downvote.

As there are others here who like the downvote, the result of the debate is that the option remains and people can use it or not as they see fit.

Occasionally someone will downvote everything someone says because they are pissed at them and the admins will step in so that doesn't happen.

Every once in a while someone doesn't like the upvote either but that is a rare sighting.

[MigL]

26 minutes ago, TheVat said:

The practice of anonymous downvoting here strikes me as mean-spirited and passive-aggressive. 

It annoys me also.
If you disagree with someone's position, tell them why.
I don't like it when a downvote is used instead of a good argument, or when you lack an argument.

 

21 minutes ago, iNow said:

What about when ones explanations repeatedly fall upon deaf ears and blind eyes?

Does the downvote change their mind ?
Or is it just a way for you to take out your frustrations ?

[iNow]

You didn’t answer my questions. Why should I answer yours?

 

 

 

Admit it… for a brief second there you wanted to downvote me. 😂 

19 minutes ago, MigL said:

is it just a way for you to take out your frustrations ?

Perhaps, or perhaps it’s a simple visual way to notify less informed / less familiar future readers that maybe the posts of this person aren’t of the same quality as posts from others such as you. 

[MigL]

Don't try to butter me up after provoking me into almost downvoting you 😄 .

I would think a good argument would accomplish the same while also educating less informed/less familiar future readers.
I don't expect others to do the same as I do; it is a personal choice for me.
And @TheVat seems to think along the same lines

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

If you have nothing useful to say, just refrain from upvoting.

Are you assuming the voting is coming from someone involved in the discussion? Many of the votes are from non-participants who probably don't have much to add, but know they like/dislike something that was posted. 

[zapatos]

Every six months. Like clock work. 😄

[J.C.MacSwell]

6 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Are you assuming the voting is coming from someone involved in the discussion? Many of the votes are from non-participants who probably don't have much to add, but know they like/dislike something that was posted. 

You have no way of knowing why you were down voted anonymously. So what is the value in it if you don't know why. If it's bad enough you should know why, isn't that better left to the mods than some random observer?

[Intoscience]

I don't take it too personal, some do.

I've not used the down vote yet, because I would rather reply with my disagreement, since just voting doesn't really clearly define your feelings.  I would only use the down vote if someone posted something vile, or very offensive etc... It seems each forum I attend, people tend to have differences on the interpretation of each option. It can create a stigma.  

There is one forum that I'm a member of where there are multiple options to express your feelings by vote buttons: like, dislike, agree, winner, funny, optimistic... This seems to work pretty well since people can get an idea of what your feelings are if you have nothing to add, i.e. whether you agree with what is said or whether you just like the post...etc. 

I find the system on here a little ambiguous, because you are relying on the poster's interpretation of the vote much more so. So for me personally I would prefer more options with clearer intent, so avoiding creating stigmas.    

 

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

So what is the value in it if you don't know why.

Some people may take a second or third look at their posting style if it's not obvious to them. It still blows me away how many folks whip out a strawman argument like the whole discussion isn't written down.

Staff only monitors the rep system for abuse, like when someone uses all their votes for a few days on a single member, no matter what's been posted. Most of the rest is usually adjusted by the membership. I'm not sure why there's so much pushback in that regard, since it's usually pretty obvious when someone does/doesn't deserve the vote they got. 

[TheVat]

9 hours ago, zapatos said:

Every six months. Like clock work. 😄

Haha!   My thanks to you and others for replying.   I guess I'll keep not using the feature, and leave it to the quality control crew who will hopefully not bias new users overly much.   And if I see a DV cast that's saying "Argh, I'm frustrated with you," rather than, say,  "misinformation" or "sophistry, " then I might ask about that DV and hope the DVer can address it. 

9 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Are you assuming the voting is coming from someone involved in the discussion? Many of the votes are from non-participants who probably don't have much to add, but know they like/dislike something that was posted. 

I wasn't assuming.   Discussion forums are for discussing,  is my thought.  If you're not invested enough to post,  then it's questionable that you're issuing a quality judgement.  As @iNow alluded to,  the system is predicated on the maturity and restraint of the users -- I'm probably a little too cynical from years on troll-ridden MBs.   Seen too many Al Pacino meltdowns... I'm outta order?   You're ALL outta order!!   

[Phi for All]

12 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Haha!   My thanks to you and others for replying.   I guess I'll keep not using the feature, and leave it to the quality control crew who will hopefully not bias new users overly much.   And if I see a DV cast that's saying "Argh, I'm frustrated with you," rather than, say,  "misinformation" or "sophistry, " then I might ask about that DV and hope the DVer can address it. 

The rep system's worst flaw is a mixed blessing, imo. When we get someone who joins who has a TON of pop-sci misinformation stuffed in their heads and starts their journey to the Wild West Guesswork Factory by posting here, it's often easier for many to downvote, jaded by all the other posters who start their "theory" with cracked science. We've had lots of folks start that way and eventually realize the gaps in their knowledge, but many leave because they get such a bad rep so quickly. I wonder if we might help some of those folks, but then we get so many that have spent "years" on their non-mainstream "theory of everything", so I suppose some folks don't want to learn as much as they want to be right.

25 minutes ago, TheVat said:

If you're not invested enough to post,  then it's questionable that you're issuing a quality judgement.

If there were members who only voted but didn't post, we'd probably consider that abuse of the system. It doesn't happen.

[zapatos]

12 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

When we get someone who joins who has a TON of pop-sci misinformation stuffed in their heads and starts their journey to the Wild West Guesswork Factory

LOL!

Great metaphor/simile/analogy/description (I am often not clear what exactly that type of phrasing is called. 😛)

[MigL]

15 hours ago, Phi for All said:

it's often easier for many to downvote, jaded by all the other posters who start their "theory" with cracked science

That's no way to teach.
( although I enjoyed your description as well )

[Phi for All]

7 hours ago, MigL said:

That's no way to teach.
( although I enjoyed your description as well )

We had a thread once upon a time about the benefits/drawbacks of ridicule in science. Iirc, it can have its desired effect, which is to essentially derail a line of thought known to be unproductive. It's the equivalent of your Italian grandmother giving you a slap to the back of the head with her big ring and telling you to think about what you just said.