Support : I "Like" that the "Like" Button has been removed

Perfection

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Let me be the first to state that I am appreciative of this particular function being removed. Its existence--not in this forum specifically-- but in general here and other venues has always reminded me of a way to be used in service of personal squabbles and covert agendas, as a divisive weapon against legitimate disagreements, as an indirect suppression of data and information and personal expression, as well as to enforce and maintain the Western-styled doctrine of "we" and "them" from which cliques emerge and thrive.

I believe with that particular function being abolished, as it relates to "who" is doing the "like", it allows for a more genuine and open dialogue on issues and it, the removal---more importantly, enables for more unity than it does division which should be the goal of all of us.
 

skuderjaymes

Contextualizer Synthesizer
MEMBER
Let me be the first to state that I am appreciative of this particular function being removed. Its existence--not in this forum specifically-- but in general here and other venues has always reminded me of a way to be used in service of personal squabbles and covert agendas, as a divisive weapon against legitimate disagreements, as an indirect suppression of data and information and personal expression, as well as to enforce and maintain the Western-styled doctrine of "we" and "them" from which cliques emerge and thrive.

I believe with that particular function being abolished, as it relates to "who" is doing the "like", it allows for a more genuine and open dialogue on issues and it, the removal---more importantly, enables for more unity than it does division which should be the goal of all of us.
Actually.. I think you'll find that having a positive acknowledgement is superior.. with regard to keeping the peace.. than having both positive and negative acknowledgements. The old system only showed you when people agreed with you.. this one will collect and display all of the disagreement as well.. and that'll most likely lead to more drama.. #watch
 

Destee

destee.com
STAFF
uh oh ... the "like" feature has not been removed ... :eeek:

as Brother Skuder says ... it's been expanded ... and we've embarked upon a path we've never been before

Members can now leave "negative" critiques via the "like button area"

we're 17 years old and i've never let us leave "negative" critiques in this regard

i thot long and hard on it ... initially was going to go the way we always have ... no negative critiques

but that's just not realistic ... even with me wanting us all to only think positive ... everything is not positive

additionally ... negative critiques have their place, can play a positive role if it helps someone improve

allows them to see how others feel about their commentary ... in a big picture sort of way

one might adjust if they see that 29 others think their contribution looks like a violation (for example)

it also gives us a way to encourage self-moderation even more ... as we'll look more closely at comments where many in the family are feeling like a violation may have occurred.

the truth of the matter is ... even without these negative "like button" critiques ... folk here will let you know anyway ... if they disagree, don't like what you said, consider it false, inhospitable, disrespectful, etc.

this new system also brings to the forefront a few of our 13 rules ... kinda keeps them on the table if you will

they are very important and a way for the Family to weigh in on when they think a Member is close to the edge

now ... we ... Moderators ... won't act immediately on one person thinking a Member "violated" and marking it accordingly ... but if 29 Members mark a post as a violation ... that will weigh heavier, play a part in the Moderating decision making process, etc.

generally ... when a Member thinks another "violated a rule" ... it's usually not the case ... as managing / moderating in this community requires more than a cursory, surface view ... but sometimes Members get it right ... and there is in fact a violation ... but it doesn't rise all the way to the level of the Moderating TEAM acting on it ... well ... this is a Member's way to speak to these "violations" ... that they feel are occurring.

additionally ... we can build into this where there are consequences for the one receiving the "violation" warning ... i just haven't gotten that far yet ... and don't know if i'll use it because the consequence is not something we'd normally do ... like make their "negatively rated" post invisible

while i've always wanted us to be positive toward each other, encouraged that in every way possible ... being able to maturely accept negative critiques is a necessity of life ... and after 17 years of building a very positive foundation of positive engagement ... i think it's time we add a real life dimension to this ... and see just how mature we really are ... how balanced ... how real ... by being able to accept what the world does actually give and bring ... a balance of positive and negative critiques

we shall see how it goes

let me know if you have any suggestions

we can always cancel it all if need be

but i think we can handle it

at least i hope

Loving Us!

:heart:

Destee
 

Destee

destee.com
STAFF
Perfection ... i understand your concern of having that one, two, or few that hate everything you say and only leave negative critiques ... but likewise ... you'll probably have that same number of folk that love everything you say ... no matter what you say ... 'cause they love you

so i'm thinking it will all even out in the end

we're all subject to it ... me included ... and in case you didn't know ... not everyone likes all i say ... :teach:

in this community folk get to not like what someone says ... and if the person can't handle that ... they're probably in the wrong community ... because we can absolutely guarantee ... folk will tell you that they don't like what you're saying ... 'cause it's been happening for 17 years ... long before we got this new feature ... and there is no violation in sharing such an opinion respectfully

i think it will be all good in da hood ... :love:

Love You!

:heart:

Destee
 

Perfection

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Actually.. I think you'll find that having a positive acknowledgement is superior.. with regard to keeping the peace.. than having both positive and negative acknowledgements. The old system only showed you when people agreed with you.. this one will collect and display all of the disagreement as well.. and that'll most likely lead to more drama.. #watch
A few points here. First, I think that maybe my post was not read carefully by some---except the individual who "liked" it lol. I applaud this new system which does not publicly show who's "liking" posts. I think this makes a difference. I will not address the detailed note Queen Destee posted below because this is her building and I'm a guest in it. I was merely saying that I appreciate that aspect (that I mentioned) of the change.

You mentioned that the former system was the "superior" one citing "positive acknowledgement" as the basis of your conclusion. While I can see your possible reasoning in that, I would (counter) argue that the superior system would seek to avoid any type of "grading" system of "likes" or responses regarding personal expression as it could never gauge the actual worth of the thread in question. It's artifical and skewed out the gate.

Let's offer an example.

Say a newbie comes to a venue and she likes all kittens that are only black. But 80% of the venue (tenure memebers) this newbie has walked in prefers orange kittens. If the newbie constantly underscores the black kittens in her posts, those who like orange kittens will disagree and start to show it through their "like" and or "dislike" buttons. What are they doing? They have weaponized their personal squabbles against the newbie who admires black kittens.

Embracing the idea that a grading/liking system is indicative of a reality is as flawed and illogical as saying that a video which receives 1 million views is more important than one which receives only 500 views.

Therefore, to reduce tensions, or, what you labeled as "drama", the superior system would seem be that which would abolish the "like" system. This way, there's only a single instrument you can utilize to attack who you may disagree: your mind.
 

skuderjaymes

Contextualizer Synthesizer
MEMBER
Say a newbie comes to a venue and she likes all kittens that are only black. But 80% of the venue (tenure memebers) this newbie has walked in prefers orange kittens.
Perhaps she should find a site that prefers Orange kittens instead.. or maybe even start her own site.. orangekittens.com perhaps. That is.. if she cant handle folks not agreeing with her.

in fact.. I would submit that said "newbie" probably secretly desires the conflict that she condemns out of the other side of her mouth.. otherwise.. why would she insist on inserting her unpopular opinion where it is clearly not appreciated?.. why caste her pearls before swine?

Embracing the idea that a grading/liking system is indicative of a reality is as flawed and illogical as saying that a video which receives 1 million views is more important than one which receives only 500 views.
With regard to online discussions, relevance / importance is really in the eye of the beholder.. but insecurity can lead to envy.. and animosity.. and all types of other dysfunction.
 

Enki

The Evolved Amphibian
STAFF
I personally didn't see a problem with it. So what if the person liking you comment is known, At least that person's views was out in the open, vs hiding in the shadows. Nothing has changed, members didn't call out other members eventhough their names were shown. This equates to the same thing, and as I said, one ways was in the open, this way is clandestine.

I guess it will give some that cover of protection when it comes to their opinions. IMO, this falls in line with if you can't handle chat, you shouldn't be in it.

Peace!
 

Enki

The Evolved Amphibian
STAFF
I just noticed, you can click on "list" and still see who agrees, and who doesn't.

I likes that....;)

Peace!
 

Perfection

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
... but insecurity can lead to envy.. and animosity.. and all types of other dysfunction.
1) insecurity

2) envy

3) animosity

4) dysfunction

Your words, not mine.

And so this is why I pointed out how peace is jeopardized, indeed--it's under attack, with artificial and skewed and arbitrary "rating systems." How in the world can a man "dislike" a woman opening up (in a thread) about how she had been abused by her husband for over 20 years?

For the record, I'm not against rating systems in general. My position is that everything cannot have certain kinds of rating systems or even should have a rating system at all. I think that all Black Women are beautiful. A western-based "rating system", however, would say only Black Women whose features resemble those of white women would be considered more beautiful.

Generally speaking, these systems give a false sense of power and, in the case of the web, are, in essence, literary tools of vengeance. "She think she cute because she got 200,000 subscribers and I have only 37...I'mma dislike all her videos."

But I'm glad you're here with us because the reality of the incoherence of the rating system is more obvious and gets even more suspect while its need to be abolished becomes more pronounced in that you mentioned elements of psychiatric disorders. Doing so demomstrates your awareness to this important issue. That is to say, when people have these envious and jealous and insecure and dysfunctional proclivities--because they are incapable of doing what others can do--it creates that (your word) "animosity."

But obviously you and me are not blanketing this scenario on everyone; we're just observing the behaviour of those who fall into this class that you noted.

So that jealousy and that envy (and that animosity it births) have to come out in the open in one form or another because, again, like you brilliantly observed, these indiviuals are in a state of "dysfuction." This dysfunction that you mentioned cannot remain latent for too long, so it has to manifest itself eventually...somewhere else. And how does it manifest itself? Through the artificial rating/liking system.

May I bring your attention then back to something else you noted: the "superior" system. Let's review that again. If a system creates and or fosters "animosity" due to latent trace elements of jealousy and envy in the mind, how can that system be superior, because, we have clearly demonstrated that jealousy and envy are not friends of peace? Are they not?

Logic, it seems, would dictate that in order to remove that "dysfunction" (which is a correlative to the animosity and the envy you mentioned) from either existing or being hosted; then a system which has no rating system is the best option and therefore the superior system.
 
Top