The agree system was really abused in the OT section, getting banned members to become the most agreed with users etc.
- 9
- 2
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Currently most positively rated member says hi!
On a serious note: could the system be tweaked so that only 5-10 ratings can be given out per hour per member? Could it be tweaked so banned users can't give or receive ratings? It's a great feature, disappointing the fix for OT was to just take it away rather than restrict the worst offenders.
- 6
- 2
I agree with getting rid of disagree. 
My rational is that this is a discussion forum, if someone disagrees with a point I've made, they should have to state it publically, along with their rational, so that people can, ya know, discuss the point. Having disagree effectually reduces every thread to a poll.
My rational is that this is a discussion forum, if someone disagrees with a point I've made, they should have to state it publically, along with their rational, so that people can, ya know, discuss the point. Having disagree effectually reduces every thread to a poll.
- 8
- 2
You don't seem to understand the point of the disagree option. Sometimes there is no need to discuss something so a disagree rating helps in these situations. Also just because I used the disagree rating on your post to show that I disagree with what you wrote doesn't mean I won't reply. I think it's useful to see how many people agree/disagree with a certain post/topic.I agree with getting rid of disagree.
My rational is that this is a discussion forum, if someone disagrees with a point I've made, they should have to state it publically, along with their rational, so that people can, ya know, discuss the point. Having disagree effectually reduces every thread to a poll.
- 6
If you disagree with what someone has said, there's a need to discuss it. This isn't reddit, if someone has said something you disagree with, yet you can't actually come up with a coherent counterargument the flaw is probably with your objection not the original argument. An opinion without reason isn't a useful opinion.
- 6
- 3
Couldn't you just make votes made in the OT section not count towards a user's global total score? Rather like making particular forums not count towards a user's total post count.
- 5
I very strongly disagree with the whole punish the group because of a few bad apples strategy.
- 9
- 1
I love this feature, because I found the "+1" silly (most of the time), but didn't have the time to write my agreement/disagreement on many posts. I agree that the "disagree" part is a little bit trickier, especially when there is just a post and a disagreement, without any other post hinting for a reason to disagree, but I must admit I use it.
To me, it can give an indication of wheter an idea is liked or not, especially the comparison between agree and disagree. When the two are ex aqueo, it would mean (from a developper point of view), that an idea could be very divisive. On the contrary, when there is a lone disagree without explanation and 10 agree, maybe the idea is good enough.
Of course, those are just for quick review. Reading the post and the following posts must be done and give a far better idea of what is discussed, but I think it can be useful.
To me, it can give an indication of wheter an idea is liked or not, especially the comparison between agree and disagree. When the two are ex aqueo, it would mean (from a developper point of view), that an idea could be very divisive. On the contrary, when there is a lone disagree without explanation and 10 agree, maybe the idea is good enough.
Of course, those are just for quick review. Reading the post and the following posts must be done and give a far better idea of what is discussed, but I think it can be useful.
- 7
- 1
Person 1: "I do not like this idea"
Person 2: "I do not like this idea"
Person 3: "I do not like this idea"
Person 4: "I do not like this idea"
Person 5: "I do not like this idea"
Person 6: "I do not like this idea"
Person 7: "I do not like this idea"
Person 8: "I do not like this idea"
Person 9: "I do not like this idea"
Person 10: "I do not like this idea"
...
Person 225: "I do not like this idea"
OR
just 225 disagrees on the post
Agree/Disagree option does NOT stop others from discussing it. People will always say what they have to say, the button just frees others from having to repeat the same thing over and over again, spaming the thread with useless posts only to show that they are numerous.
The Agree/Disagree button also better represents who is a majority and who is a vocal minority (better, not perfectly) as people who wouldn't have anything new to say can simply show what their general opinion on the topic is.
- 10
I'd strongly disagree with this (but, on principle, I don't use the disagree button
). For me, agrees are a great replacement for +1 posts - I can show I agree it's a great idea (Helpful is a great as well - I may not agree, but I can acknowledge it as a useful contribution to a discussion). Limiting it to 5-10 ratings per hour just means that if you're having a big forum binge, you'll be putting +1 posts back in after the first 5-10 posts you've been able to avoid them using the agree/helpful buttons.Totally agree with removing agree totals from profiles though, am not surprised people have started having competitions about them. That's just humans being humans
. Also agree with removing the disagree button. It's far better to agree to a well-articulated post disputing the issue in question than just disagree without any further elaboration. Also more positive and friendly too .- 4
- 3
I'd strongly disagree with this (but, on principle, I don't use the disagree button
Totally agree with removing agree totals from profiles though, am not surprised people have started having competitions about them. That's just humans being humans
The limit wouldn't have to be 5-10, it could be 50; just so long as it's high enough that most people won't notice it and low enough you can't have people going on agree-sprees like Teurlinx and Morkazar did.
As Nyrael above you said, agrees and disagrees don't stop people from articulating their ideas.
Why's it better to agree without elaboration than disagree without elaboration? Last sentence of yours sounds like an echo chamber to me..
- 3
To agree is to maintain the status quo, the null hypothesis to borrow a stats term. It's pretty unexciting. To disagree is to reject the status quo, to posit something different - but what, and why?
- 4
- 1
Isn't there an actual poll function? Like, if you're going to ask a question that warrants a simple yes/no like 'Should China be a DLC', couldn't you use that?
- 3
I think it's reserved for use by those with higher forum access and privileges, mods and such.
- 3
What Captain Kiwi said - to elaborate, if someone clicks 'agree' or 'helpful', then that content of that post is marked as 'agreed with' or 'helpful', and there's no need for someon to post '+1, great post'. There's no need to add content to the post, or post it yourself, because the content of the agreed post contains the information necessary.
However, a 'disagree' provides no information beyond the fact that whoever is disagreeing does not agree with what's in the post. You can agree with a well-articulated post that argues against the original, because that provides far more information than a simple disagree (ie, the information in the well-articulated post) that a simple disagree does not.
And you're right on the polls - I'm pretty sure it's only mods and up.
- 2
- 2
Well said. A simple agreement doesn't need repeating what has been said in the post you agree with. Disagreement needs qualifying, because you obviously want to state something different from what that post said. In this case, saving posts would occur if you agree with a post that states why you disagree with the first post. So, in both cases, only the "agree" option carries useful information beyond bellyfeels.
That's the reason why the "agree" and "disagree" options are not equivalent.
Reddit is an additional perversion on top of that, as It furthers uncritical catering to the hivemind. But that's obviously not a danger here.
- 2
- 1
How is it being abused?
If I like with someone's posts and Agree with many of them, is it abuse or cheating?
Since there is no real benefit from having large amount of agrees, there is also no harm done if someone gets a lot of agrees.
Heck, it even decreases spam of +1 posts or -1 posts; forums will be less crowded with posts that could be replaced by the simple agree button. The removal of agrees from OT has just brought back the +1 and "I agree" posts. Since you cannot censor people from saying they agree with what someone else posted, ask yourself, do you want them to write a message that says "I agree with your idea" or let them just use the agree button?
Also how does one exactly cheat with ratings? I cannot agree with myself, so how do I cheat to get more agrees? Oh wait, I am not an admin and cannot thus change my score, instead I just have to hope someone agrees with my posts, one agree per one person per one post. Anyone can agree with anyone, and as you know, a lot of people agree with Petrarchs ideas though he is long gone, so he gets to the top. You may ban the poster but you cannot ban people from finding his thoughts agreeable.
Just bring back OT agree buttons so we can have less "I agree" posts and more actual debates.
- 10
I just wanted to note I've been seriously debating since I posted this if I want to purposefully post something to gain the 1 infraction point I need to be banned from OT.
I am very strongly morally opposed with this kind of punishment.