Rules on Emote reactions?

[lackblogger]

So, as predicted, the 'expansion' of post-reactions beyond a simple 'nice-one' type agreement/like to now include a whole array of troll-food has indeed resulted in, shock and surprise, people using them to troll other users.

While this might work on the codex, it's never been RPGWatch's intent to encourage trolling. If anything, the whole appeal of the site is that the only way to troll someone is to actually post stuff, thereby bringing those that 'don't get' the site quickly to the fore.

The other day I logged on to find user @arthureloi has rated 20+ random posts of mine with an 'eyeroll' emote.

It communicates nothing apart from to insinuate that another poster is 'at war' with you. Information which is useful to no-one except the excited and juvenile troll.

And this is the primary reason why the site doesn't use these kinds of 'reactions', because no-one needs to read an agreement post or a +1 post, but you do need to read a reason why someone is in disagreement. Agreement doesn't require clarification, disagreement does.

I think we can all do without trolls targeting us every time we post and having posters afraid to post because people with 'medical conditions' decide to make us their food for thought of the day.

If that's how it's going to be now, then why don't we all just migrate to the codex? What's RPGWatch's USP if it just goes down this road? Just somewhere to read aggregated news and nothing else?

And, no, apps and tools to 'hide' or 'ignore' troll frenzies are not the answer, so please don't miss the point by that particular country mile.

 

[Deleted member 18181]

Never use them, they are useless to me and also ignore them.

 

[lackblogger]

Excellent, good to know you wouldn't mind at all if there were rules on their use.

 

[pibbuR]

#deleted

 

[Pladio]

I don't have the rights, but I would suggest trolls are trolls no matter what/how they do it. So if this is a thing, we can give this person a warning and then ban if they continue.

@Taluntain - what do you think ?

PS: I don't have the ability to do so as far as I know.

 

[Taluntain]

to now include a whole array of troll-food

Exaggerate much? I've seen far more "trolling" in regular text here than via reactions. There are a grand total of 2 (two) very mildly negative ones. And it's been what, more than half a year since they were introduced? All hell hasn't broken loose, sorry.

I understand that you're extremely upset that a user has reacted with rolleyes to a bunch of your posts and that you have a strong opinion that any kind of non-positive reactions shouldn't be allowed at all. I don't agree with that, but for the record, I don't see any benefit in mass rating posts with rolleyes either. So I might need to come up with a rule about that if I can't limit it on the software level.

For now, the "no trolling" rule from the current TOS applies to reactions just fine as well: "Sowing discord in a discussion by starting arguments or upsetting people by using inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or disrupting normal on-topic discussion is forbidden."

I don't see a problem with mildly negative reactions used here and there, but anyone throwing them around like confetti is obviously trolling for a reaction to the reactions and not using the system in good faith.

XenForo by default doesn't allow me to just get rid of specific reactions a user has given, but it does allow me to mass delete all of them given by a user going back X days. It also allows me to remove a specific user's ability to use reactions completely if they can't be trusted to use them sensibly.

So I'm tagging @arthureloi here so that he can go over his negative reactions over the last couple of weeks and decide which posts actually merit using them and delete them on the rest. He's actually dished out a number of likes as well, so I'd prefer not having to delete them along with the rolleyes. And obviously stripping someone of the ability to use reactions altogether would be the final step, though we could make it a temporary measure as well if needed.

 

[Corwin]

Sounds like a good plan boss.

 

[Couchpotato]

Bah I get eye-rolling emotes every week.

It's a badge of pride and still adds to the total count.

Also sometimes it's warranted as the opinion posted deserves it.

 

[pibbuR]

#deleted

 

[Carnifex]

I've never understood the whole "like" thing, perhaps I'm simply too old to get it. Or I'm too attached to my opinion actually having value.

 

[bkrueger]

I like the like thing but I dislike the dislike thing.

 

[lackblogger]

Exaggerate much? I've seen far more "trolling" in regular text here than via reactions. There are a grand total of 2 (two) very mildly negative ones. And it's been what, more than half a year since they were introduced? All hell hasn't broken loose, sorry.

I understand that you're extremely upset that a user has reacted with rolleyes to a bunch of your posts and that you have a strong opinion that any kind of non-positive reactions shouldn't be allowed at all. I don't agree with that, but for the record, I don't see any benefit in mass rating posts with rolleyes either. So I might need to come up with a rule about that if I can't limit it on the software level.

For now, the "no trolling" rule from the current TOS applies to reactions just fine as well: "Sowing discord in a discussion by starting arguments or upsetting people by using inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or disrupting normal on-topic discussion is forbidden."

I don't see a problem with mildly negative reactions used here and there, but anyone throwing them around like confetti is obviously trolling for a reaction to the reactions and not using the system in good faith.

XenForo by default doesn't allow me to just get rid of specific reactions a user has given, but it does allow me to mass delete all of them given by a user going back X days. It also allows me to remove a specific user's ability to use reactions completely if they can't be trusted to use them sensibly.

So I'm tagging @arthureloi here so that he can go over his negative reactions over the last couple of weeks and decide which posts actually merit using them and delete them on the rest. He's actually dished out a number of likes as well, so I'd prefer not having to delete them along with the rolleyes. And obviously stripping someone of the ability to use reactions altogether would be the final step, though we could make it a temporary measure as well if needed.

I think permanently would be the only thing it understands...

 

[Taluntain]

I'll probably run a poll on how we want to handle situations such as these going forward in the next few days.

 

[Couchpotato]

Okay but I really don't see the problem especially well I don't want to be an an ass, but certain members with their opinion, and writing style deserve the negative emojis.

Also the one complaining has been banned on this site before.

Still the poll will be nice to see site opinion.

 

[JDR13]

I'm still waiting for us to get buttons like the Codex.

 

[Couchpotato]

I want that doughnut and a few other button emojis as well.

 

[Taluntain]

Okay but I really don't see the problem especially well I don't want to be an an ass, but certain members with their opinion, and writing style deserve the negative emojis.

Also the one complaining has been banned on this site before.

Still the poll will be nice to see site opinion.

The way I see it, we have 3 options:

1) Anyone can use any reaction with no restrictions whatsoever.
2) We set some limits on the number of negative reactions aimed at a certain user per week/month. There would be no easy way to moderate this and the mods would basically only enforce this if/when a certain user complained that they're getting inundated with negative reactions.
3) We remove negative reactions altogether (with the exception of the "sad" one) and only leave the positive ones.

None of the options are really ideal and they all have upsides and downsides. Personally, simply because so far this seems to be an issue mainly with only a single user here, I'm leaning towards option #2, though it is the least practical of the bunch.

 

[Couchpotato]

Tough choice I remember on the old forum a simply was implemented, but of course uproar started because some didn't like the down-vote button.

So was the only option.

Eventually that was fazed out as well.

 

[henriquejr]

I got my fair share of ArthurEloi's eyerolls as well. Initially I tried to understand why I got them but since he never cared to further comment anything about my eyerolled posts, I disregard them nowadays. And this post will probably be another one to be eyerolled

 

[Couchpotato]

Nah not this time. I'll give you a blue icon instead. On another forum I gave a member a down-vote just because I didn't like his opinion. Well..what do you know bad decision.

He barraged me with over a hundred PM's demanding I take it back.