Remove "Agree (neutral)" in favor of "Agree"

[User]

As you may know, several sections of the forum include the "agree (neutral)" reaction alongside or in place of the normal agree reaction. This causes an inaccurate reaction count, and honestly doesn't make much sense, as all the sections where agree is neutral actually hold more value in reactions. For example, an important suggestion or bug report would hold more value than a funny post, therefore so should the reactions.

 

[Justis]

They were made neutral because it’s incredibly easy to farm reactions in those sections.
Prior to agree being made neutral, users would constantly flood the suggestion threads section for no other purpose other than to farm agree ratings and up their reaction to post ratio.
These sections use the reactions as utilities of the section, rather than as proper reactions like the others.
In other words, neutral agree serves the same purpose as the poll system, and that’s why it doesn’t count towards reactions.

If you want a picture of what I mean, just go to my profile and view how many neutral agrees I have compared to all of my other reactions.

 

[User]

If you want a picture of what I mean, just go to my profile and view how many neutral agrees I have compared to all of my other reactions.

I'd imagine that's because the vast majority of your public posts are in the suggestions section.
Also, people still farm reactions in the other sections. Posts in this section only get more reactions because A. it's one of the most important sections, and B. the posts here generally are of higher quality and detail than in other sections.

 

[Ajdin]

I'd imagine that's because the vast majority of your public posts are in the suggestions section.
Also, people still farm reactions in the other sections. Posts in this section only get more reactions because A. it's one of the most important sections, and B. the posts here generally are of higher quality and detail than in other sections.

If I remember correctly, I was the person that implemented the "Agree" rating in certain sections back in the day.

This was done after people were obviously farming reactions in the suggestion section. I didn't really care about the farming itself because reactions are pointless numbers anyways but what I did care about was people purposely creating low quality content (threads and thread replies) in the suggestion section. At that time, we were heavily focusing on improving the quality of userposts, especially in those sections. By making agree ratings neutral people are discouraged to post low quality content in that section (Memes, roasts, personal banter, etc).

 

[User]

If I remember correctly, I was the person that implemented the "Agree" rating in certain sections back in the day.

This was done after people were obviously farming reactions in the suggestion section. I didn't really care about the farming itself because reactions are pointless numbers anyways but what I did care about was people purposely creating low quality content (threads and thread replies) in the suggestion section. At that time, we were heavily focusing on improving the quality of userposts, especially in those sections. By making agree ratings neutral people are discouraged to post low quality content in that section (Memes, roasts, personal banter, etc).

If the community likes it, then likes should count. There's plenty of low quality content in the other sections getting reactions, I still don't understand why suggestions should be any different. The crappy suggestions are already taken care of by the community (spammed with disagrees, then removed) and the crappy replies are generally removed by staff.

 

[Ajdin]

I still don't understand why suggestions should be any different.

Because the suggestion section is a serious section that decides the future of the website. Low quality content should be heavily discouraged. That's the key difference.

You're still missing the point. People would create suggestions which are unrealistically postivie, they would get agrees and then, the thread would get declined or they would trash it themselves. That's for threads alone. I don't even want to start about the banter that happened in the replies.

I see your point though. You have many reactions through the suggestion section and you want them to be counted. It sucks that legitimate posters have to experience some of these downsides. But the cons simply outweigh the pros.

That's my 2 cents.

I also have 1.6k agrees in this section but trust me, it simply isn't worth it.

 

[User]

Because the suggestion section is a serious section that decides the future of the website. Low quality content should be heavily discouraged. That's the key difference.

You're still missing the point. People would create suggestions which are unrealistically postivie, they would get agrees and then, the thread would get declined or they would trash it themselves. That's for threads alone. I don't even want to start about the banter that happened in the replies.

I see your point though. You have many reactions through the suggestion section and you want them to be counted. It sucks that legitimate posters have to experience some of these downsides. But the cons simply outweigh the pros.

That's my 2 cents.

I also have 1.6k agrees in this section but trust me, it simply isn't worth it.

If everyone but me got their suggestion agrees added, I really wouldn't care.
If there really is such a large issue with the suggestions, I don't see why they can't go through approval like the scam reports; would save the section from some of the more recent "unban me from SB" or "middlemen to middlewomen"-type suggestions, while also allowing those who have formulated a decent suggestion to receive meaningful reactions.

 

[Ajdin]

If everyone but me got their suggestion agrees added, I really wouldn't care.
If there really is such a large issue with the suggestions, I don't see why they can't go through approval like the scam reports; would save the section from some of the more recent "unban me from SB" or "middlemen to middlewomen"-type suggestions, while also allowing those who have formulated a decent suggestion to receive meaningful reactions.

Because that adds workload for the staff team and they've had plenty of issues being consistent with doing their work.

 

[User]

Because that adds workload for the staff team and they've had plenty of issues being consistent with doing their work.

:shrug: Wishful thinking, I suppose.

 

[Mick]

As Justis and Bosny have explained, neutral reactions do have a valid place on the site and we're not gonna change it back to how it used to be any time soon.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.