If I were to react to a post with these reaction icons, how would you interpret it?

[+ Tarte Gogo]

 

As title says.

 

First one, i have no idea, but potentially I could interpret as if someone is saying “blah, blah, blah, .... tldr”.

 

Second one, does it mean “I have mixed feelings about this?” Or “it is all mixed up in my brain, I don’t know what to think any more?” Any other potential meaning?

[+ azdr0710]

Or you could just write what you mean without using a confusing icon!!

[+ Tarte Gogo]

Or you could just write what you mean without using a confusing icon!!

Well if everyone agrees with me that it is not obvious at all, we have a case to ask guy fawkes to remove them. The others are pretty meaningful, these 2 are oddballs.

[bobchitown]

The first one means “you’re stuck in transmit mode”

[+ FreshFluff]

[+ FreshFluff]

If you click on it, it says "ad homenim," but it looks more like "That's confusing." In any case, I say keep it.

[instudiocity]

When I hover over the images, I see their names/descriptions ... and changing directions makes perfect sense for ad hominem cuz someone just went after the person not the thought.

[+ José Soplanucas]

If you click on it, it says "ad homenim," but it looks more like "That's confusing." In any case, I say keep it.

 

Yeah. if you place the cursor over the icon without clicking on it, the meaning pops up.

 

The talking face is "Verbose". I would drop that one, all the clicks on it would go to @stevenkesslar . If Steven likes it, keep it. You deserve a treat, verbose man with beautiful blue eyes.

 

The cross path arrows, for a reason I cannot elucidate, mean "ad hominem". I would keep it. We could use it pretty often (I have deserved it more than once) in the political debates. It is very useful to give quite specific feedback to a post you do not like because of that fallacy. I like it much better than "dislike", which is just a subjective and general statement. If someone dislikes one of my posts, I do not give a fuck. If someone tells me I am going "ad hominem", I have to stop and think.

 

So I would drop the "dislike" icon. I think it is acceptable to give positive non specific feedback ("like") but it is not cool to drop a "dislike". Instead, we have the fore mentioned "ad hominem", plus "insulting". Perhaps we can find other similar icons to replace "dislike" and "angry". For instance "lying" (a little Trump icon would be perfect).

 

I do need a LOL icon. I like the "clapping", but a good joke deserves more than that.

Edited December 11, 2018 by latbear4blk

[Golem]

I agree with dropping the "dislike" icon. Unlike the others, that one isn't constructive, it's just a value judgment. Will lead to bad feelings and I'm not sure what it really adds beyond that.

[rvwnsd]

Well if everyone agrees with me that it is not obvious at all, we have a case to ask guy fawkes to remove them. The others are pretty meaningful, these 2 are oddballs.

They might not be obvious right now, but after we’ve become accustomed to them we might not find them to be as confusing.

[+ José Soplanucas]

What about a "thank you" icon? Sometimes a contribution is so helpful that "thank you" is the best reaction.

[+ E.T.Bass]

Will the anger icon feed the troll when one might be better off ignoring?

The ad hominem icon seems like a good way for the forum to police itself.

[+ José Soplanucas]

Will the anger icon feed the troll when one might be better off ignoring?

The ad hominem icon seems like a good way for the forum to police itself.

 

Yep, I vote for dropping "dislike" and "angry".

[+ bashful]

I use Chrome. When I hover over either, I get nothing. When I click, I get a page entitled ImgBB -UploadImage- to upload and share images, and some bar to presumably click to start uploading.

 

All Greek to me.

[rvwnsd]

What about a "thank you" icon? Sometimes a contribution is so helpful that "thank you" is the best reaction.

Thank you!

[The Phoenix]

I interpret it as “you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

[+ stevenkesslar]

The talking face is "Verbose". I would drop that one, all the clicks on it would go to @stevenkesslar . If Steven likes it, keep it. You deserve a treat. verbose man with beautiful blue eyes.

 

Huh? Moi?

[+ Keith30309]

I’d probably be inclined to err toward having more positive than negative icons because there’s greater risk of misunderstandings with ambiguous symbols. If I want to make a comment that could be interpreted negatively then perhaps it’s best I use words to do so.

 

For example:

Agree - nodding ✅

Insightful - lightbulb ?

Funny - clown ?

[Nvr2Thick]

What about a "thank you" icon? Sometimes a contribution is so helpful that "thank you" is the best reaction.

 

I believe that the "applause" reaction is close enough. There are slight differences in meaning between an applause and a thank you, but if we're concerned about nuances we may as well respond with actual words.

 

_____________________________

 

Generally speaking, I think that many of these reactions are replies without actually replying. Anger, dislike, insulting, ad hominem, and possibly meh are all responses where I believe a member should state his or her thought process rather than just lazily clicking for a response as if comments require a rating.

[rvwnsd]

Huh? Moi?

Never.

[+ Tarte Gogo]

If you click on it, it says "ad homenim," but it looks more like "That's confusing." In any case, I say keep it.

Thanks. I can’t see those descriptions on IOS devices.

[+ stevenkesslar]

 

Generally speaking, I think that many of these reactions are replies without actually replying. Anger, dislike, insulting, ad hominem, and possibly meh are all responses where I believe a member should state his or her thought process rather than just lazily clicking for a response as if comments require a rating.

 

Exactly.

 

This whole website set up inspires childish reaction, not thought. So sad!

 

I'll stick with The Economist. It has no emojis, and thoughtful essays that go on for pages. I guess that makes it verbose. And it has that stupid old garbage called facts, ideas, exposition and argumentation.

 

Worse, in its dry but wicked British humor way, The Economist completely exposes some of our current idiotic leaders for being the morons they are. That kind of humor wouldn't be allowed here, either. All we get is old school marms who substitute rules for reason and subtract points for creative displays of wit.

 

Where are the emojis for boring and useless?

Edited December 11, 2018 by stevenkesslar

[Nvr2Thick]

Exactly.

 

This whole website set up inspires childish reaction, not thought. So sad!

 

I'll stick with The Economist. It has no emojis, and thoughtful essays that go on for pages. I guess that makes it verbose. And it has that stupid old garbage called facts, ideas, exposition and argumentation.

 

Worse, in its dry but wicked British humor way, The Economist completely exposes some of our current idiotic leaders for being the morons they are. That kind of humor wouldn't be allowed here, either. All we get is old school marms who substitute rules for reason and subtract points for creative displays of wit.

 

Where are the emojis for boring and useless?

 

The emoji for boring and useless is "meh."

 

I'm confident that the new feature set will be refined after observation of how it suits the community. Overall, the upgrade is a great benefit, IMO. I know that a platform upgrade requires considerable time and effort, and it's clear that a lot of thought went into refining this platform to suit the forums.

[Populist Fury]

I must be the only one who loves all these new goodies/options. Not sure why anyone would want less choices

 

I say keep them all, & maybe add a ? or a ? for those rare posts you can't get enough of.

[Nvr2Thick]

I must be the only one who loves all these new goodies/options. Not sure why anyone would want less choices

 

I say keep them all, & maybe add a ? or a ? for those rare posts you can't get enough of.

 

? for posts I chose not to read.