Jun
22nd
2020
Why Do Dislike Exist? · 10:12pm Jun 22nd, 2020
...Maybe I should rephrase that. Why do dislikes exist when it comes to comments. Stories I understand. Everyone is entitled to their option and it to show that the stories are either good, bad, eta(although sometimes they can be abuse but that's an entirety different subject). But why comments?
To me, it just seems some(not all) people use it just to belittle others. Personally, if you dislike/disagree with someone, you should present a point. Not something like a college level argument but at least someway to say why so it doesn't just seem petty. Maybe I'm just hammering on but I just feel chatty today and this came to mind.
What do you guys/girls think? I would love your option on the matter
They're there because of someone say something bad or just plain racist they can give the comment a thumbs down to show their disapproval with our actually commenting
In my opinion the dislike button on comments are just a lazy way out. Though having a arguement in your comments section doesn't appeal to me either.
5290946 Okay, that's a fair point but that's only two examples out of many that can be circumvented. In the event of a person/s under going some kind of controversy, people have been known to throw blind hate at said person even if they make valid points(Just ask several people here). Of course, that's not to say a point is made there.
5290952 Okay, fair point. Arguments are just as bad (If not worse) in some cases... but on the same coin, you could argue that sometimes it can be helpful so people can see what is right/wrong if that makes any sense.
5290954
I see your point. Thank you for pointing it out and giving me a new perspective.
5290959 Of course. And thank you for giving your thoughts on the matter. I love it when people respond to things like this. It gives me a good perspective on their thought process
5290960
It's my pleasure
Most people give a dislike upon some of my comments, even when I haven't said anything bad, and they don't even have the guts to say why. That they think no matter what they say, they know it's all a load of bull. Personally, they have no life at all and know that if they leave this site, there's nothing for them to look forward to. The internet 'is' their only means of existing.
The best we can do is just move forward and prove why there are more superior human beings on this site, such as upstanding artistes like ourselves.
5290965 You are correct about that. However, if I may be... blunt(If that the correct term) for a moment, some people who are susceptible to being easily hurt. I'm aware of the terms, "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen(internet)" but for some people, this is their only escape and even then, I personally don't believe anyone should ever be bullied. Of course, this is nothing more than my option
Personally, I'd say it's better to have the dislikes than not have them. Consider Twitter, which has Likes, Retweets, and Replies. Likes do exactly what you'd think, and Retweeting is more or less indicates that you really like the tweet in question. Both of these are indications of a positive opinion of the tweet. However, the only way to show your negative opinion of the tweet is to Reply and offer your words.
Most of the time, someone's just going to look at the tweet, see how many Likes and Retweets it has, react to it how they feel, and go on their way. The only way to see how negatively people view any particular tweet is to read the Replies, and in some cases there's a bloody lot of them.
I'm not going to say that the current system is perfect. Most people understand that dislikes are a negative opinion and that likes are a positive opinion. However, the vast majority of people will also use this as a measure of the quality of particular work as opposed to a person's binary approval or disapproval. Thusly, lots of dislikes using that measure means that the story or comment itself is flawed. It semi-works for stories, but often times a particular type of story is dislike-bombed not because the story is flawed but because the people who are disliking it on external factors that shouldn't affect the story itself. This could be something as benign as disliking the story's genre, characters, or themes, to disliking the story as a personal attack on the author because of something related to their identity or beliefs. The system is exclusively used that way for comments.
I think the reason it's there is simply as a quick signal to anyone passing by how well the comment went down. The broad theory seems to be that, at least more often than not, an upvote or a downvote is at least a useful quick guide to how good or bad a comment is. Downvotes in and of themselves are probably there as a sort of balance to the upvotes: having one without the other might seem unfair or lopsided.
Personally, I don't like them. Downvotes, I mean, and not just for the obvious reason (getting one is a real kick in the teeth, especially when you don't know why).
The very fact that they can mean anything from "This comment contains bad logic and genuinely hostile or offensive content" to "Duh boo I no like you boo because [insert dumb reason here]" pretty much makes them useless from a constructive criticism point-of-view. No one really benefits from that part of the system.
It's true that writing a comment to explain what you mean (say, why you downvoted somebody's work or comment) takes longer and isn't as obvious to passersby (one block of text looks like any other), but nuts to passersby. That's the appeal: talking to people is a more intelligent way to engage with them, especially if you have their best interests at heart (even blunt criticism can be helpful, if delivered well).
I mean, the same logic broadly applies to upvotes as well, but at least getting and giving an upvote is a nice and encouraging thing to do. It's got that in its favour.
They're a blessing and a curse, because they tell you that someone wants something in the story changed but they don't tell you why someone doesn't like it.