Archived Negative Ratings

[Lumbo]

I think negative ratings should be added to the forums because it'll be salutary for those who don't want to type "I disagree" as a reply to something they don't agree with. Whilst it can lead to abuse & harm to some, I personally think it's better than being deceived in thinking that the positive ratings only dispense those who agree with you. Whilst I sway to be a bit pretentious when speaking "I don't mind it when people disagree with me" it's way better than being delusional & think that what you post is going to be agreed with everyone. For example, if I create a post & gets a few positive ratings & no one wanting to replies stating they oppose with me & doesn't want to make the effort to reply saying they disagree for said reason. It's as if it is easier to just agree with someone then to disagree because if you object; then you'll have to type a paragraph of why you disagree which some people don't have the effort into producing.

I know people will just disagree to disagree & if that's such, it shouldn't burden those who agree with the person who presents the thread. These negative ratings don't have to be rude or disdainful, they just have to people pure like "Disagree", "Confused", & "Unclear"

If people solemnly post & anticipate to not get any resentment from what they post, they shouldn't be posting at all; people shouldn't take a "Disagree" rating personally furthermore reflect why said person is opposing

Suppose if MonMarty posts something & gets many of winner ratings (Which usually happens), he'll presumably think everyone agrees with him or at least most of them do.

If I can recall they had negative ratings back a few years past but why remove them? Ratings shouldn't be taken personally at all if you can't manage negativity frankly don't post.

 

[FireFan96]

I'd like to see negative ratings return again. I'm not going to be butthurt if suddenly I get many dislikes, because usually I don't even care about the rating to begin with.

Better to have a way to express quick emotions than hugbox positive ones. Yes Massive is a way to escape the real world, but I don't think one "disagree" rating is that big of a deal. Or maybe it is and I just don't reflect the typical player.

 

[Kibaa]

I'd like them back too, but the thing about them is that they were used for spite en-masse. We don't want one of our forum functions openly leading to toxic behavior like this. They weren't just completely removed one day, they were gradually removed because each time one was removed, players would find another to dub as "the bad rating", and simply spam people with it whenever they even so much as disagreed with the content of the post. It's gotten to the point where now good ratings have to be used in sarcasm to display disagreement. Ever gotten a few "Cuddles!" ratings on a serious post which isn't even remotely cartooney or sweet?

 

[65jes89]

No, we'll just end up with more idiots like jeanlucmontou or whatever that dudes name was who can't defend their points and just go through peoples' post histories and disagree with every post they've ever made. If you disagree, reply so people can respond.

 

[Conflee]

No.

Agreement is enough of a statement on its own to be useful enough. It says "I agree with everything you have said here and think this is good.". If people can just click a "Disagree" button without explaining why or giving any insight their input is useless though, bar for 'voting' which we already having a system for.

 

[Zacatero]

All we need to do is bring back "This is so Goth" and it'll fix all our problems.

 

[Winterless]

Negative ratings inspire cowardice and a lack of discourse, imo. If you disagree with someone or their idea you should be expected to explain why- that's the burden of proof.

 

[Reaganism]

it'll be salutary for those who don't want to type "I disagree" as a reply to something they don't agree with.

Click to shrink...

> imlying negative ratings were used to express disagreement, and not personal dislike

 

[ZiHAMMER]

Add ZiHAMMER rating instead.

 

[MonMarty]

No I don't presumably think I'm in the right for getting ratings. Ratings are pointless and have no bearing on decision taking whatsoever.

I'm of the opinion that if a player expresses disagreement, but does not clarify said agreement, that the disagreement is pointless. A critical opinion is worthless if it has no supporting arguments. Value can be expressed in a reply, not in a rating, and if someone makes a reply, then the rating becomes redundant.

Not even bringing the absolutely rampant rating griefing.

 

[Zacatero]

I mean even the negative ratings we had as long as Ive been here we're actually neutral ratings. Meaning from a technical standpoint on the forums it didn't actually screw up the numbers (not that it really matters). That being said, I don't think it's really necessary for them to return. Half the time they were used just to troll, which drew away from any purpose or content that the thread tried to have

That also being said... Bring back This is so Goth <3

 

[Aespair]

Any rating can be made negative if you try hard enough.

 

[dogbew]

I put negative ratings on things to make people feel bad, I'll admit to it.

 

[Jalapeno690]

No.

Agreement is enough of a statement on its own to be useful enough. It says "I agree with everything you have said here and think this is good.". If people can just click a "Disagree" button without explaining why or giving any insight their input is useless though, bar for 'voting' which we already having a system for.

Click to shrink...

I miss negative rating you