Community Notification Discussion!
By
Aura_Familia,
Posted on: 2007-10-05 16:59 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
I think a lesson has just been learned.
We need actual people deciding what is or isn't in line.. not a robotic system calling all the shots.
[ QUOTE ]
My above post is made on the assumption the poster of the original idea made sure to say WHY they think their idea is so grand. If someone says, "lol nerf stalkers they is overpowared!" then a bunch of people simply say, "/yes" then there is indeed a problem. Why do they think this? The line isn't so clear when an agreement is concerned.
Idea: Enable polls in suggestions.. or make is so every thread is created with a yes/no poll by default. That way everyone gets their short responses and anyone that ACTUALLY feels like contributing something of worth can have a say without the clutter.
[/ QUOTE ]
I wrote my previous post before I saw this, but yeah, this is the key. There are two basic types of "idea threads": A poll thread in which people simply voice their taste for an idea, and a debate thread in which people discuss the merits of an idea.
My example was a poll thread, and had there been a poll feature, could have been handled that way instead. But if the mods don't want poll threads, then they can't stop at just requiring that people not post one word responses. They must also require that every idea be backed up with reasoning beyond "I like it".
[ QUOTE ]
What people need to understand is that it doesn't matter how I told you my opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
But it does. It always matters. Humans are not machines. We don't filter out the essence of a message and ignore the manner in which it was delivered.
On an anonymous internet forum, you can avoid most of the consequences of being rude, but not all of them. Maybe some people will put you on /ignore, and then they won't be able to help you out when you have a question later. Maybe you'll be banned from the forums for a while. No big deal, really.
The less anonymity you have, the more consequences you'll suffer for being rude. Waiters will spit in your food; strangers won't hold elevator doors for you; acquaintances won't become friends; police officers won't let you off with a warning; employer's won't hire you; bosses won't promote you.
Whether you are rude or polite matters only to the extent that other people matter. As it happens, other people matter a lot.
Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie
[ QUOTE ]
Whether you are rude or polite matters only to the extent that other people matter. As it happens, other people matter a lot.
[/ QUOTE ]
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
People only matter when they bother putting forth the effort to be polite and generate valid arguments for their point of view in the first place.
Among these efforts to be polite is making sure your idea hasn't been suggested and shot down 30+ times before. There is no reason for me to repeat arguments made for several years before if the poster has not done this.
In that case, I'm giving the same respect I was given with a hearty [ QUOTE ]
/jranger
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a lesson has just been learned.
We need actual people deciding what is or isn't in line.. not a robotic system calling all the shots.
[/ QUOTE ]
I, for one, welcome our shot-calling robotic system overlords.
[ QUOTE ]
If you agree completely.. what more is there to say? You could certainly inflate the post with what is simply a regurgitation of the post you agree with, but that is just silly to require that. All the explanation and points are in the post you are agreeing with. What is the point in repeating them over and over?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because you don't always agree with the entirety of a post and every point it raised. Because sometimes you want to agree with certain parts and disagree with others. Because the idea is good but the reasons given for it are false. Because sometimes you want to add to the idea with suggestions on how it could be improved or other possibilities the original posted does not seem to have thought of.
/yes Means you agree with the idea as presented, nothing more. That's not entirely very constructive on its own.
[ QUOTE ]
When disagreeing.. your reasons are not readily present. How is anyone supposed to know what you find wrong with it unless you explain? /no is utterly useless on its own.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do I need a reason to disagree? If someone tells me they like pie and I say I don't, do I need a reason for it? Sometimes there are things I don't like for no reason other than because I don't like them. What is the point of inventing an entire point when the bottom line is I simply do not like the idea because I do not like the idea? What purpose does that serve? If I have anything to add, any explanations to include and any reasons to give. If I don't, I'll state my disagreement and move on.
/no Means I disagree with the idea as presented. Nothing more. That's no more or less constructive than a /yes on its own.
This whole thing is an incredibly one-sided way of looking at the issue. People are allowed to agree completely for absolutely no reason reason whatsoever, but they are not allowed to disagree for no reason. They HAVE to have a reason to disagree or they're unconstructive. Which is biassed any way you slice it. If you want to be constructive in a thread, then simple agreement or disagreement will quite simply never do. A suggestion followed by 20 /yes posts is no more constructive than a suggestion without a single post, or a suggestion with 20 /no posts. There's a simple reason for this - agreement without input is just as useless as disagreement without input. They're both a representation of opinion, and there's no reason why one has to be justified while the other has not.
Let me put this in a single sentence: One can disagree with an idea because one does not like the idea just the same as one can agree with an idea because one likes the idea. Neither requires justification, not intrinsically.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
[ QUOTE ]
This whole thing is an incredibly one-sided way of looking at the issue. People are allowed to agree completely for absolutely no reason reason whatsoever, but they are not allowed to disagree for no reason. They HAVE to have a reason to disagree or they're unconstructive.
[/ QUOTE ]
True, but how many "/yes" responses have single-handedly generated pages upon pages of reportable posts?
This whole thing caters to the thin-skinned.
I'm not saying I agree with the new ruleset (mostly because I think it'll solve nothing and create more drama), but that is partially how I interpret the reasoning for its existence.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Same here. I dont give crap if I m rude or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then if you are rude you will not be surprised if you are banned.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, yes, I would.
You will note that I said that I would respond 'within the confines of the forum rules'. If I, or anyone else for that matter, are banned without breaking the rules, then there will be hell to pay.
A lot of people on this board seem to think that being polite is a requirement. THAT is the exact reason that we are having this 'Notification Discussion' in the first place.
There's just one problem with that: some people are oversensitive and some people are undersensitive. That means that the things I find 'rude' and 'offensive' are not even close to the things that you find 'rude' and 'offensive'.
You can't enforce 'polite' on a message board unless you want to alienate a majority of your population. As Ex mentioned somewhere back, in that other thread I think, it is not in NCSoft's best interest to do that.
Handing out bans for stupid things like being 'impolite' doesn't keep subscriptions up.
easiest thing to do is just stay out of the thread if it bothers you... if you are incapable of doing that, then you're being just as moronic as the thread you're wasting your 'valuable' word/words on...
if i were at a table discussing something and someone at the table had nothing to say besides no (especially if it's repeatedly)... at some point I would (or some else would) most assuredly either call him out on it or tell him to shut the blank up. If he got all huffy about it, we'd ask him to leave... if he didn't... he suffers the consequences of his spite/ignorance/stupidity (your call)
If I'm at this same table and I'm having a one-on-one at this table; someone decides to butt in... he'd be asked to mind his own blankentyblank business (attitude dependant on the conversation at hand and the 'butt-in' comment); if he got huffy about it... he'd be asked to leave, if he didn't; he'd more than likely catch a right to the face.
Rudeness begins as soon as you've determined that you're going to post in a thread that you knowingly have a problem with. Period.
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
Since rudeness is subjective I suggest that the punishment for it also be an individual judgment call.
You are only allowed to report a person for rudeness when that person has replied to one of your own posts and only allowed to report them for the reply in question.
Any report of rudeness will result in perma-ban.
This way those with thin skins will never be responded too, thereby protecting their sensitive natures from the evils of disagreement and economy of text in replies. Those who have a reputation for tolerance of others can feel free to engage in discussions spanning the gamut from curt to verbose and others can reply to them without fear of retribution knowing that the OP has sufficiently thick skin and is unlikely to force a fellow forumite's removal due to not favoring their replies.
Everybody wins!
-R
- (to the PTB) The above post was made (mostly) in jest and should be considered fluff as it adds almost no value to the conversation at hand, due what you will with it.
[ QUOTE ]
I tend to agree with those reasons.
If you agree completely.. what more is there to say? You could certainly inflate the post with what is simply a regurgitation of the post you agree with, but that is just silly to require that. All the explanation and points are in the post you are agreeing with. What is the point in repeating them over and over? When disagreeing.. your reasons are not readily present. How is anyone supposed to know what you find wrong with it unless you explain? /no is utterly useless on its own.
By that same token, everything past that first line of my post is useless because it is simply regurgitation of the same points already covered in this very thread. I've wasted your time and my time by doing it. I could have simply stated my agreement and we could all go about our business. A yes requires little explanation. A no.. not so much.
Now, if someone else already covered why you think something is a bad idea you are free to post a short agreement for their reasons for disagreeing. At least I think so. "/no for the reasons already stated" is acceptable to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with everything you stated here, up to a point.
The stated purpose of these forums is to provide players with answers to questions, to provide feedback to the developers with what the players perceive as flaws and bugs in the game design, and to suggest changes, improvements and expansions to the developers.
Nowhere in this is any mention of it being a popularity contest.
Saying only Yes or No, does not provide any more information compared to what already was present in the original post, and thus is merely a vote. It does not answer a question a player may have (well, it may be if the poster asked if something was a good idea). It does not give the developers any insight regarding a possible problem within the game. And it does not give them (nor the other posters in the thread) any information regarding the good or bad points of a suggestion.
If all you can say to a suggestion or bug report is 'Yes' then obviously everything has been said already, and adding to it really serves no purpose (other than burying the suggestion or report under layers of meaningless posts). Or you are merely stating your consent and thus are voting, not contributing to a discussion.
If all you can say to a post is 'No' then apparently everything has been said already in the original post and there really is no point to your post either. (We could have some faith in the developers for recognising bad ideas and suppress the urge for stating that out loud). Or you are stating your dissent and then you are voting, not contributing to a discussion.
Neither help the developers find problems, or suggestions for improvement or expansion.
If you want to contribute your post should either be in the form of "Yes, but I would like to add/change/elaborate ..." or "No because it will cause this problem ...". Or you could say "this idea has been brought up, you can find it discussed in other threads if you use the search function".
These are examples of constructive contributions that help the original poster, other players and (should they ever bother to visit this particular suggestions forum ever again now it is essentially unmoderated) developers finding information rather than a good imitation of a seagull colony (*) ...
Nadira
(* flying in circles, screaming at each other at the top of our lungs and crapping all over the place)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What people need to understand is that it doesn't matter how I told you my opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
But it does. It always matters. Humans are not machines. We don't filter out the essence of a message and ignore the manner in which it was delivered.
On an anonymous internet forum, you can avoid most of the consequences of being rude, but not all of them. Maybe some people will put you on /ignore, and then they won't be able to help you out when you have a question later. Maybe you'll be banned from the forums for a while. No big deal, really.
Whether you are rude or polite matters only to the extent that other people matter. As it happens, other people matter a lot.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm rude IRL too, and I don't suffer too many consequences from it, save the frustrated, vein-popping faces of morons who can't refute my argument on a logical basis, and are forced to adopt the "You're so mean, your point is invalid!"
[ QUOTE ]
The less anonymity you have, the more consequences you'll suffer for being rude. Waiters will spit in your food; strangers won't hold elevator doors for you; acquaintances won't become friends; police officers won't let you off with a warning; employer's won't hire you; bosses won't promote you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Waiters already spit in the food of people who aren't mean. Why should I care about that, when the chances of actually getting a disease from that are slim?
If a stranger won't hold an elevator door for me, I guess I'll just have to wait for the next one.
I don't care about actually making friends, because the majority of "acquaintances" are just maintaining a facade of friendliness, and aren't interested in making "friends" anyway. Besides, the friends I have now are the ones who can appreciate my disposition, without me having to modify it. If I have to pretend to be nice to make friends, are those people really my friends anyway? I should think not.
Police officers shouldn't be letting me off with a warning anyway.
I'm not going to respect an employer who won't hire me because he thinks my realistic worldview somehow overshadows my outstanding skills in my profession. Same goes for promotions. Contrary to what they teach impressionable idiots in management school, most employers care much more about your skills than they do about your personality. Any employer who succumbs to some moron who skated through college with a 2.0, but is nothing but a suck-up in a nice suit doesn't deserve to have me as his employee.
Being nice doesn't matter in real life unless you make it matter. It's nothing but a crutch, and you're not very intelligent if you expect everyone else to return your niceness.
What matters is fact. What matters (in this case) is that "/no" and even "/jranger" are perfectly valid answers, because somebody only posted his or her stupid idea because they ignored the stickies in the suggestion forum. They really don't deserve any elaboration, save for "/no, read the stickies"
And when this moron goes and reports my "/no" to the mods, I shouldn't be getting warned for being such a Negative Nancy. If anyone needs to be warned, it should be the person who posted the suggestion in the first place, and the Mods should warn them to lurk moar before they post something stupid.
But nay, we must coddle the new players. We can't alienate the new crowd! They're clearly more important than the people who have been playing for years.
It's a good thing CoX is such a good MMO, because this new attitude towards the boards is making me sick.
as far a a /yes goes... if the poster has detailed his idea enough to a responders topic and the responder agrees... what does he need to add besides the statment of agreement to support that he agrees with the topic - that would be an act of redundancy
If the responder only agrees with part; then he is inherently at a disagreement with something in the OP and if he responds as such... should detail the part he disagrees with
Example:
Topic: I like cats
Body: Cats are cool because they are furry.
Responder (Agrees):/signed
End of discourse... no followup neeeded
Responder (Partly Agrees): I like cats too but not because they're furry... I just like the way they purr
End of discourse. No followup needed
Responder (Disagrees):/no
Open ended. OP wants to know why the responder said no (Does he not like cats, does he not like furry... what?)
Responder(Disagrees): /no, this thread is stoopid
guess what you go on a watch list
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
[ QUOTE ]
as far a a /yes goes... if the poster has detailed his idea enough to a responders topic and the responder agrees... what does he need to add besides the statment of agreement to support that he agrees with the topic - that would be an act of redundancy
If the responder only agrees with part; then he is inherently at a disagreement with something in the OP and if he responds as such... should detail the part he disagrees with
Example:
Topic: I like cats
Body: Cats are cool because they are furry.
Responder (Agrees):/signed
End of discourse... no followup neeeded
Responder (Partly Agrees): I like cats too but not because they're furry... I just like the way they purr
End of discourse. No followup needed
Responder (Disagrees):/no
Open ended. OP wants to know why the responder said no (Does he not like cats, does he not like furry... what?)
Responder(Disagrees): /no, this thread is stoopid
guess what you go on a watch list
[/ QUOTE ]
of course, the OP should go on a watch list too ((Off topic)) and if the 1st response goes on there too if he/she quoted him.
The final response you say goes on a watch list meets all the rules. It says
'no' and then provides the reason 'the topic is stupid'.
Note he did not say the poster was stupid or cast any personal insult. The opinion that that topic is entirely idiotic is perfectly valid. What is he getting reported for?
[ QUOTE ]
as far a a /yes goes... if the poster has detailed his idea enough to a responders topic and the responder agrees... what does he need to add besides the statment of agreement to support that he agrees with the topic - that would be an act of redundancy
If the responder only agrees with part; then he is inherently at a disagreement with something in the OP and if he responds as such... should detail the part he disagrees with
Example:
Topic: I like cats
Body: Cats are cool because they are furry.
Responder (Agrees):/signed
End of discourse... no followup neeeded
Responder (Partly Agrees): I like cats too but not because they're furry... I just like the way they purr
End of discourse. No followup needed
Responder (Disagrees):/no
Open ended. OP wants to know why the responder said no (Does he not like cats, does he not like furry... what?)
[/ QUOTE ]
This is assuming that the OP wants to know why the responder said no in the first place. What if they don't? If I make a thread suggesting "Baby Melee" powersets to be added and ten people reply with "no" and nothing else, I'll reconsider my suggestion. It isn't rude, it's brief. To say that posts like /unsigned, /jranger, /no and such do not contribute is flawed. It might not hold as much merit as a long written explanation of why one disagrees, but the merit is still there.
If one takes something as simple as "no" as being rude, then there isn't much that could satisfy their tender feelings short of outright ignorance to dissenting opinions. That would be FAR worse, in my humble opinion.
"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict
<qr>
Ummm ... The suggestions forum, which is where the vast majority of the much-discussed "/no" type posts are made, is not in the section they will be looking closest at.
Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one 
Storm
Serenity is not freedom from the storm, but peace amid the storm ...
Interesting example.
So the OP states that they like cats because they are furry.
The implied statement in this (by the nature of posting on a public forum) Do you agree with me, and why or why not. That implied statement is part and parcel to every single post on a forum.
Respondent #1 (hereafter referred to as R1) states:
/signed.
What has the OP or the community gained from this exchange? Well, we now know that 2 people like cats, one because they are fury, and the other one for reasons we can only assume are similar to the OP's. Or perhaps R1 likes cats for some other reason, but was responding to the topic of "cats are cool". There are any number of reasons why this poster did not elaborate, all of which we can only answer with conjecture.
Regardless to the reasons for R1's support, we know that there are 2 people who like cats. Thats the value we take away from this discourse.
R2 says:
I like cats because they purr, but not because they are fury.
Excellent, not only do we now have a tally of 3 people who like cats, but we are getting a better view of the different reason why people like cats. That is the value we take from this discourse
R3 says:
/No.
Okay, we and the OP now know that not everyone likes cats, though the reason the R3 does not like cats is open to conjecture, nonetheless R3 has answered at least part of the OPs original question. There are any number of reasons why this poster did not elaborate, all of which we can only answer with conjecture.
We now have a tally of 3 I like cats and 1 I dont like cats (or at least not for the reasons specified). Thats the value we take away from this discourse.
R4 says:
/no. this topic is stoopid.
We now know that there are 3 people who like cats, 1 who doesnt and one who probably doesnt like cats but who dislikes the fact that this topic exists and 1 who needs a spell check. Thats the value we take away from this discourse.
I would like to add an R5 of
/No. Cats have too many pointy ends, dash out the door all the time and wake me up by stealing my breath.
Now, R4 is rather inflammatory, but has not attacked the OP in any way, merely what the OP has chosen to post about. In answering /no we can assume that they are answering the implied question of Do you agree with me. Short of the slightly inflammatory nature of R4 though all of these responses have added value to the discussion by answering the OPs implied question. Of all of these, Rs 1 and 3 give the least amount of information to the community, but also leave the most room for further discussion (not saying that is a good or a bad thing, just what is) in attempts to get these respondents to elaborate on their positions. Rs 2 and 5 contribute the most to the discussion by elaborating on their positions.
R4 is the only one who, by the tone of their post, actually discourages further analysis of the topic.
So, tell me again why R1 is okay and R3 is not. They both answer only part of the implied question of the OP, and the reasons for their positions can only be reached by conjecture. Yet according to the new rule the onus is on only those with a negative stance to justify their positions.
[ QUOTE ]
Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one
Storm
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, just recentlly got moved there, presumably for infractions of the nature being discussed here.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one
Storm
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, just recentlly got moved there, presumably for infractions of the nature being discussed here.
[/ QUOTE ]
I change which I think is particularly demeaning. Now, even the good suggestions are "just for fun."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Same here. I dont give crap if I m rude or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then if you are rude you will not be surprised if you are banned.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, yes, I would.
You will note that I said that I would respond 'within the confines of the forum rules'. If I, or anyone else for that matter, are banned without breaking the rules, then there will be hell to pay.
A lot of people on this board seem to think that being polite is a requirement. THAT is the exact reason that we are having this 'Notification Discussion' in the first place.
There's just one problem with that: some people are oversensitive and some people are undersensitive. That means that the things I find 'rude' and 'offensive' are not even close to the things that you find 'rude' and 'offensive'.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can go you one better. And Ex Libris, with her background iin anthropology, should take this fully to heart.
In my very first course on the subject, the professor related a lesson she had learned while conducting a field study in a rural region of India (anthropology is not all monkeys-and-primitive-tribes stuff, you can do work in the field right in New York City, even). Youy see, like any good Westerner raised in our American/European blend culture, whenever people did nice things for her, she owuld of course say "thank you", most sincerely.
Turns out, where she was? That was seen as the height of rudeness. Yep, that's right ... "thank you" was a slap to the face.
You see, the idea there was (and this wasn't something necessarily expressed in words, or even necessarily consciously realised): neighbors, friends, and family simply did nice things for each other. You showed your gratitude by reciprocating, and thus, joinig in a sort of "web of exchange". Not so much tallying favors, but rather, "engaging in a relationship of trust and mutual kindness".
Saying "thank you" was seen as a cheap way to repay the favor done, without ACTUALLY repaying it. So when she'd sincerely thank those who were generous and kind to her during her stay ... they would react with hurt and even hostility in their eyes. It was as if she were trying to say "your gift is worth no more than a few words, now begone with you."
...
So. What one person, or group of people, consider to be the height of polite behavior, absolutely de rigeur for proper behavior ... another personor group can consider to be the very blackest depths of rudeness.
I think everyone should try and keep that in the back of their mind, whenever they try to decide "is /no rude?"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one
Storm
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, just recentlly got moved there, presumably for infractions of the nature being discussed here.
[/ QUOTE ]
So ... doesn't that make the majority of the discussion regarding the /no /unsigned vs /yes /signed answers (and fluff) rather moot? While these types of answers occasionally show up in places besides Player Suggestions, as I said before, the vast majority of those answers, as well as quite a bit of "fluff", will be found in the Player Suggestions forum... which has now been placed at a considerably lower moderation priority by the Community Leadership - or their superiors - at least with regard to the application of the new interpretation of the rules...
Storm
Serenity is not freedom from the storm, but peace amid the storm ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All the Mods are saying,
is give self-moderation a try.
They'll have to split themselves with moderating the Closed Beta Forums and the regular Forums. And to make sure things are ok here in the regular Forums, all they are asking is for us, the community, to keep it civil and to not just go spamming to pad the thread count.
Personally, I'd like to see that the Mods being able help the Devs with getting feedback from the Closed Beta testers, and therefore getting speedier delivery from Closed to Open testing, than to see them being distracted.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly. The announcement is 100% about what CaptainIntrepid posts above.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL
LH made a /QFT ....you know which /QFT I mean. But no one listened.
Just Look at this stupid thread. So much for self moderation.
[ QUOTE ]
OP: I want the devs to add brightly-colored unicorns to CoH.
Responder 1: /signed
Responder 2: Yes
Responder 3: No
Does Responder 3 really need to go into a detailed explanation of why he or she feels adding brightly-colored unicorns to the game would negatively impact his or her experience? I suppose Responder 3 could have said, "No, because I wouldn't like brightly-colored unicorns in CoH." But isn't that implied by the simple "no"?
[/ QUOTE ]
Or they could of said "No. They wouldn't add anything specific to the city, and if we get unicorns, we should have the classics. White, and the rarer black. The developers like to add things with a strong classical base, and colors other than white and black don't have such."
Ever other person who would of gone /no can then quote that guy and /agree 
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP: I want the devs to add brightly-colored unicorns to CoH.
Responder 1: /signed
Responder 2: Yes
Responder 3: No
Does Responder 3 really need to go into a detailed explanation of why he or she feels adding brightly-colored unicorns to the game would negatively impact his or her experience? I suppose Responder 3 could have said, "No, because I wouldn't like brightly-colored unicorns in CoH." But isn't that implied by the simple "no"?
[/ QUOTE ]
Or they could of said "No. They wouldn't add anything specific to the city, and if we get unicorns, we should have the classics. White, and the rarer black. The developers like to add things with a strong classical base, and colors other than white and black don't have such."
Ever other person who would of gone /no can then quote that guy and /agree
[/ QUOTE ]
I suppose "How does it feel to want?" would be considered both a useless AND a rude response?
Storm
Serenity is not freedom from the storm, but peace amid the storm ...
[ QUOTE ]
ADDITIONAL IDEAS ABOUT TO SPILL.
I have several things whirling in my head so bare with me. I'll try not to mix them up.
My above post is made on the assumption the poster of the original idea made sure to say WHY they think their idea is so grand. If someone says, "lol nerf stalkers they is overpowared!" then a bunch of people simply say, "/yes" then there is indeed a problem. Why do they think this? The line isn't so clear when an agreement is concerned.
Idea: Enable polls in suggestions.. or make is so every thread is created with a yes/no poll by default. That way everyone gets their short responses and anyone that ACTUALLY feels like contributing something of worth can have a say without the clutter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately (based on personal experience with another forum using the same software), most of the options in this particular forum software are enabled for all forums or disabled for all forums... no options for individual forums (unless they've added that very recently).
Also, the point made above about /signed or /yes sometimes not being enough is precisely the reason why we cannot automatically treat /unsigned or /no in a different way - sometimes, no simply IS enough. When asking a question like "tell me if you think this idea is a good one" one shouldn't expect anything more than a yes or no response. And, if you want people to participate, but don't want insults, then /no or /unsigned with no further explanation is often the best response from some people.
Storm
Serenity is not freedom from the storm, but peace amid the storm ...