Disagrees

[thegruf]

Hopefully not going to get a bunch of disagrees for this, so just raising as a discussion point

What do folks think about "Disagrees"?

The particular point being those members who rarely if ever post, or who havent posted their view in a thread, yet litter disagrees all over the place.

Should the "disagreer" be required to post in the thread before they can disagree with other posts?
At least this way they are encouraged to express their counter opinion.

Should there be other factors too, or should be left as is?

 

[lunitiks]

If you post something like this in one of my threads:

"Idiot."

Then you shall receive a Disagree. Period.

 

[malcolm]

There could be an argument that says in order to award a "Disagree" you are required to post an explanatory or follow-up comment.

But tbh, if that was the case, it probably won't encourage thoughtful debate, just:

Disagree
(why?)
Because.

But at least it might dissuade the serial Disagree-clicker.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Hopefully not going to get a bunch of disagrees for this, so just raising as a discussion point

What do folks think about "Disagrees"?

The particular point being those members who rarely if ever post, or who havent posted their view in a thread, yet litter disagrees all over the place.

Should the "disagreer" be required to post in the thread before they can disagree with other posts?
At least this way they are encouraged to express their counter opinion.

Should there be other factors too, or should be left as is?

So this wouldn't work. In order to tag a post "disagree", someone would just have to post *anything* in a thread to then be activated to disagree. So we'd end up with posts like "making this stupid required post in this thread just so I can disagree". Or even more subtle, just adding an inocuous post that doesn't really say anything, just so they can disagree ( like "Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.").

So then it would be up to the (unpaid) mods to start policing these required posts -- do they actually offer an opposing point of view? Do the mods then delete the post or just undo the resulting 'disagrees'?

My advice (which I follow myself), is to just ignore the 'disagrees'. They're meaningless. If someone just wants to do that without posting anything, so be it. If you're really curious, call them out and ask. I've done that once where someone 'disagreed' with me, and I was really curious why.. turns out what I posted was not accurate, and the 'disagreer' just tagged the post.. until I asked what was up and he told me where I went wrong.

So 'disagree' could mean any one of a dozen different thoughts/opinions. I've said it before, the thumbs up/down should really be opposites -- so either LIKE/DISLIKE or AGREE/DISAGREE, but to have LIKE/DISAGREE doesn't make sense to me, because it causes exactly this kind of confusion.

Life's to short to worry about "disagree".

 

[lunitiks]

Ha!

 

[deonb]

See:

Remove the 'Dislike' Button?

 

[lunitiks]

Ha!

Just realized I proved your point... [Undoes, rates Funny]

 

[thegruf]

Life's to short to worry about "disagree".

Yeah this.

Just wondered what others views were, and didnt realise there had been a whole thread where it had been done to death already.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

The particular point being those members who rarely if ever post, or who havent posted their view in a thread, yet litter disagrees all over the place.

Should the "disagreer" be required to post in the thread before they can disagree with other posts?
At least this way they are encouraged to express their counter opinion.

Should there be other factors too, or should be left as is?

In the old TMC forum, there were limits on feedback. For example, one couldn't give positive feedback to the same person too many times in a row. Some kind of limits to prevent feedback spamming might be helpful.

 

[macpacheco]

Its not like a bunny dies every time some one presses disagree !!!!
Only your ego gets bruised if you let it happen.
For me getting a disagree from some people is a badge of honour (I'm pro nuclear power and I'm bound to get a lot of disagrees when I post anything pro nuclear here).
Have your convictions, buddy !

 

[KarenRei]

I'd just be happy if we could edit posts after 10m... I hate it when I discover that I left out some simple word that makes a sentence illegible or leaves it meaning something else.

 

[HankLloydRight]

I'd just be happy if we could edit posts after 10m... I hate it when I discover that I left out some simple word that makes a sentence illegible or leaves it meaning something else.

If you subscribe to TMC, the edit time is extended: https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/account/upgrades

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Hopefully not going to get a bunch of disagrees for this, so just raising as a discussion point

What do folks think about "Disagrees"?

The particular point being those members who rarely if ever post, or who havent posted their view in a thread, yet litter disagrees all over the place.

Should the "disagreer" be required to post in the thread before they can disagree with other posts?
At least this way they are encouraged to express their counter opinion.

Should there be other factors too, or should be left as is?

Leave it as is.

 

[BerTX]

Most of my posts are either short and funny or long and multifaceted. I get disagrees sometimes, but if people just hit disagree I assume they didn't feel very strongly about it or they would specify what they disagree with.