How about adding a "Get Serious" button to our feedback options?

[monkrules]

Okay, I know there has to be a thread about this, somewhere. But here goes.

The buttons we can click to give quick feedback are handy: funny, funny and agree, informative, winner, thank you. But, to give more honest feedback we really need another button or two, to be added.

I’m not suggesting a ST*U button. But something along the lines of a “ you must be freaking kidding”, or a “get serious” button.

As it stands, we can give only positive feedback. But there are a few members who don’t always agree with every message posted. And having a “get serious” button would save them the trouble of writing a long, heated, response to a thread just to say, in essence, “Get Serious”. And it might save many other members the trouble of having to sort through so many heated, often nonsensical, negative replies.

 

[MarathonMike]

The 'funny' rating is often used for that purpose. It either means "oh that's funny!" or "get real". I agree with you, maybe get rid of the funny rating and replace with two new ratings such as "HaHa" and "GetReal" or whatever.

 

[monkrules]

The 'funny' rating is often used for that purpose. It either means "oh that's funny!" or "get real". I agree with you, maybe get rid of the funny rating and replace with two new ratings such as "HaHa" and "GetReal" or whatever.

Yeah, I've used the "funny" button for that purpose too. But it's ambiguous.

A "Get Serious" button would clarify things immediately.

An "Up Yours" button would probably be going a bit too far. Lol...

 

[Mousterian]

No, never! Give us a STFU! rating, there's so much scope for it here...

 

[Circe]

The 'funny' rating is often used for that purpose. It either means "oh that's funny!" or "get real". I agree with you, maybe get rid of the funny rating and replace with two new ratings such as "HaHa" and "GetReal" or whatever.

Yes, I quickly figured out that the "funny" rating is double purpose and a lot of people use it for snark, to replace the missing "I hate this post and this poster" button. Actually, you could have both those buttons: I hate this post and separately, I hate this poster. But negative rating buttons are not as much done: too discouraging, perhaps. I have seen a forum that does that, and one leftwing poster has nothing but red blobs for the rating about how much others like him over time --- not at all, for hundreds of ratings, in his case.

Amazon does something interesting: you can click "not helpful," but the count for the reviewer comes up as, say, "11 of 14 people found this helpful."

Amazon was quickly blindsided by the reviews of Hillary's new book. People immediately started reviewing her and the election generally, and hundreds of reviews piled up very fast, impossibly for a commercial site. They stopped the reviews. But Amazon removed the programing that prevented people from hitting the "not helpful" or "helpful" button more than once, maybe as a safety valve, an outlet for emotion, and reviews instantly got literally tens of thousands of positive or negative votes.

People really want a negative rating button. I'd rather reorganize the whole forum than have a "we hate you" button.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I want a "take the fucking medication before you post again" button.

 

[Circe]

I'd love to see areas of the forum segregated separately for pro-Trump conservatives and anti-Trump RINOs and leftists. As it is, we aren't recognizing the elephant in the room: we're in a cold civil war right now and actual discussion is not possible, because people are fighting verbally instead.

The forum is a cacophony of obscenity insults, and that is useless for discussion. How can it be otherwise? In a war nobody tries to persuade the enemy in the trench opposite that he should believe otherwise: they just try to kill him. That's what is going on here, only digitally.

If we had it divided into the three sides the country is divided into people could discuss, analyze, make allies within their own belief group. Alliances is what it's actually all about, human relationships: not persuading others of the "truth." There is no truth, only what your own identity group believes, and there is no possibility of persuasion, and besides, persuasion is darned impertinent.

The immediate problem with areas for each army would be trolls. As when men sneak into women's groups and try to sabotage and vandalize them: all the great old women's forums like the MS forum fell to that. I think that could be dealt with by Slashdot-style rating buttons --- people could EITHER (not both) reply to a post or hit the "this guy does NOT belong here" button. After, say, ten or twenty or a hundred or whatever "no, no, no" ratings, out he goes as a misfit for the group.

People can't and don't discuss things and fight a war with each other at the same time. I think that ought to be admitted -- that we are in a similar period to the 1850s before the hot war broke out -- and dealt with openly.

 

[JoeMoma]

Lets simply give up typing responses and have a button for everything.

 

[monkrules]

...Yes, I quickly figured out that the "funny" rating is double purpose and a lot of people use it for snark, to replace the missing "I hate this post and this poster" button. Actually, you could have both those buttons: I hate this post and separately, I hate this poster. But negative rating buttons are not as much done: too discouraging, perhaps. I have seen a forum that does that, and one leftwing poster has nothing but red blobs for the rating about how much others like him over time --- not at all, for hundreds of ratings, in his case...

People really want a negative rating button. I'd rather reorganize the whole forum than have a "we hate you" button.

When I posted this idea, I hadn’t considered the possibility of a group of members on one side simply piling on someone they dislike. That would be nasty. And, over time, it could cause a lot of hard feelings.

Long ago, I visited a forum that did have negative ratings. There was a big argument taking place because some members were using the negative ratings to try and damage the reputation of other members they disliked. I suppose that’s the reason USMB has avoided adding any kind of a negative rating button for the main boards.

A while back I read a post in which a member, here, was calling on all his ‘friends’ to attack members sharing an opposite political view. This kind of attitude serves only to weaken the forum as a whole, imo. After all, it would take no brains to simply attack those you don’t like with the click of a button. No discussion needed. That would add nothing positive to the forum.

So, maybe a “Get Serious” button isn’t such a good idea, after all.

 

[JoeMoma]

...Yes, I quickly figured out that the "funny" rating is double purpose and a lot of people use it for snark, to replace the missing "I hate this post and this poster" button. Actually, you could have both those buttons: I hate this post and separately, I hate this poster. But negative rating buttons are not as much done: too discouraging, perhaps. I have seen a forum that does that, and one leftwing poster has nothing but red blobs for the rating about how much others like him over time --- not at all, for hundreds of ratings, in his case...

People really want a negative rating button. I'd rather reorganize the whole forum than have a "we hate you" button.

When I posted this idea, I hadn’t considered the possibility of a group of members on one side simply piling on someone they dislike. That would be nasty. And, over time, it could cause a lot of hard feelings.

Long ago, I visited a forum that did have negative ratings. There was a big argument taking place because some members were using the negative ratings to try and damage the reputation of other members they disliked. I suppose that’s the reason USMB has avoided adding any kind of a negative rating button for the main boards.

A while back I read a post in which a member, here, was calling on all his ‘friends’ to attack members sharing an opposite political view. This kind of attitude serves only to weaken the forum as a whole, imo. After all, it would take no brains to simply attack those you don’t like with the click of a button. No discussion needed. That would add nothing positive to the forum.

So, maybe a “Get Serious” button isn’t such a good idea, after all.

Get Serious

 

[Hossfly]

How about this button?

 

[Vastator]

The 'funny' rating is often used for that purpose. It either means "oh that's funny!" or "get real". I agree with you, maybe get rid of the funny rating and replace with two new ratings such as "HaHa" and "GetReal" or whatever.

Often the funny button is also used when a post invoked that involuntary swallow that has the offended poster, prompting them to bite their knuckle, feigning a laugh to clear their throat, while straining to crack a grin, in hope of making the fact that they have no way of refuting what you just said, anything bit painfully obvious. The liberals here use it for just this purpose quite often.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I want a "Nothing But A Good Time" button...

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Damaged Eagle]

How about this button?

I kinda' like calling it the "End Of The World Spell"... Now just press control, alt, delete...

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I think that being allowed to post Images's and Gif's serves the purpose nicely. As long as not overused..it adds a dimension to this forum that I like. I g to other places for serious talk..for the most part, this is not the spot..at least, not in the Politics forum. sometimes it gets good..but some butt-head can and will blow it all up.

 

[ChrisL]

How about a "get bent" button? Sounds like a plan.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

For those times when I might have to agree with someone who I don't want agree with.

I also want a...

*****CHUCKLE*****





...button/rating.

 

[ChrisL]

Maybe we should be able to give out stars. You could rate a post from 1 to 5 stars.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Maybe we should be able to give out stars. You could rate a post from 1 to 5 stars.

It just wouldn't have the right ambiance.....

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[flacaltenn]

I'd love to see areas of the forum segregated separately for pro-Trump conservatives and anti-Trump RINOs and leftists. As it is, we aren't recognizing the elephant in the room: we're in a cold civil war right now and actual discussion is not possible, because people are fighting verbally instead.

The forum is a cacophony of obscenity insults, and that is useless for discussion. How can it be otherwise? In a war nobody tries to persuade the enemy in the trench opposite that he should believe otherwise: they just try to kill him. That's what is going on here, only digitally.

If we had it divided into the three sides the country is divided into people could discuss, analyze, make allies within their own belief group. Alliances is what it's actually all about, human relationships: not persuading others of the "truth." There is no truth, only what your own identity group believes, and there is no possibility of persuasion, and besides, persuasion is darned impertinent.

The immediate problem with areas for each army would be trolls. As when men sneak into women's groups and try to sabotage and vandalize them: all the great old women's forums like the MS forum fell to that. I think that could be dealt with by Slashdot-style rating buttons --- people could EITHER (not both) reply to a post or hit the "this guy does NOT belong here" button. After, say, ten or twenty or a hundred or whatever "no, no, no" ratings, out he goes as a misfit for the group.

People can't and don't discuss things and fight a war with each other at the same time. I think that ought to be admitted -- that we are in a similar period to the 1850s before the hot war broke out -- and dealt with openly.

Under the older forum S/W we used to have "rep points". You could essentially +1 someone or -1 someone. You can imagine what that did to NEW members.. It was like baby sea turtles being picked off by the big birds.

IF you survived the march into getting your feet wet, it was a then a matter of Moderation having to impose rules on HOW OFTEN you could "neg rep" a poster. Because the survivors used the system like blackmail. LITERALLY.. Some deviants would sit there looking at the clock, wait for the hour to click over and PM the target telling them to "expect another beating" in 13 minutes"...

So any system that leads to lynchings isn't a good thing. BUT -- I'm a big fan PERSONALLY of having some way to disapprove of trolling and people who are not really adding anything to the discussions. So this idea in the OP is interesting. PERSONALLY - I believe that having a button to hit reduces the urge to violate the rules and go after folks personally. But TALLYING all that up and making it a "rating" -- probably will never happen again on USMB because of the abuse that we saw...