Agreed. We shouldn't just get rid of a system that only a small number of users abuse but barely affect anything. I concede defeat.
More emoji response options for like button?
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Why is 'self-discipline' only a requirement for people who actually post?
Is reaction-spamming by members who make literally zero posts a mark of 'self discipline'?
Also, your counter-objection is besides the actual point.
Do you want a herd environment like reddit/twitter/instagram where thought-silos are driven by reactions?
Passive members exist because of the active members, not the other way around.
Or is this a gladiator arena?
If a person never posted or used emojis, how can we judge? If a person only used emojis infrequently such as like, how can we judge? It is only a few members that use emojis excessively or annoyingly that we can judge.
I never defend spamming by members. I only said that we have many lurkers and passive members that use emojis to engage. We shouldn't take that away from them just because a few members abuse emoji.
Both pro-China and pro-West members got banned here. I just don't see how we should be compared with Reddit, Twitter or Instagram. More often than not, it is that some members want to ban certain topics or don't like the views of some members that result in heated debates. When certain members couldn't control the narrative, they decide to disengage. Just like the Ukraine crisis thread that when they can't silent and ban pro-Russian members' views, they decide to not participate.
The so called herd environment isn't by design. It is just that some members have a temper tantrum and decide to throw a fit and call it quit.
To some extent, that's true. However, how many active members got banned, disengaged, quit, or inactive over the years. How many active members become passive temporary or permanently? How many passive members that were initially passive and eventually become active. As a community, we need to look out for both active and passive members.
Not objecting for fostering a better environment. But a ban on emoji isn't that helpful. Limit or restrict emoji abuse can be discussed.
Fair enough. I've already lost interest in this topic. Moving on.
This is one of the, if not the most silly and baffling debates I've seen on here.
You lot are basically arguing the quality of this board over the emotional state inflected upon you based on what someone does with these little drawn and anatomically incorrect faces the size of a mole, and you have the nerve to talk 'quality' because someone chooses to interact and express themselves in their own way, using features as provided by this board, that frankly isn't trolling nor abusive behaviour in the least if you'd paid attention to their "emoji usage".
So they're online a bunch. And? Does being "actively online" = "spamming" now because they prefer to participate with smiley faces over typed words? You'd rather someone who has "nothing to contribute" to just do nothing, say nothing, not make their existence known, log in, read or not read whatever, log out, like a ghost, because you find their choice of smiley faces to your postings "annoying", as opposed to others who react to you? Do y'all care so much about emoji reactions to your postings over the actual content thereof to the point we now have this stupid thread arguing about it? And you have the nerve to talk 'quality' of this board.
The fact that some of you are singling out a particular member for the way they interact with this board which is by all indications not malicious nor in bad faith i.e. not a troll; and that some of you are apparently so emotionally sensitive to the type of smiley face you may or may not receive from this particular member, or that you're getting a reaction from them at all, on a forum about defence matters no less, which this member ought to be using the 'laugh emoji' on the ridiculous attention it's garnered TBH...
... All that notwithstanding, you have numerous active, speaking (word-typing) members who regularly engage in lively/heated/lengthy debates which do regularly and expectedly turn into a 'battle of the ego' to the point the person who gets out-argued decides to use emojis to display their passive aggression instead. How about those people get their own threads like this here thread so y'all can express your annoyance and displeasure over those emoji use, on a forum about defence matters?
So is responding just to respond so you can get the last word in, which is as silly as complaining about what people do with their emojis on a bloody message board.
You lot are basically arguing the quality of this board over the emotional state inflected upon you based on what someone does with these little drawn and anatomically incorrect faces the size of a mole, and you have the nerve to talk 'quality' because someone chooses to interact and express themselves in their own way, using features as provided by this board, that frankly isn't trolling nor abusive behaviour in the least if you'd paid attention to their "emoji usage".
So they're online a bunch. And? Does being "actively online" = "spamming" now because they prefer to participate with smiley faces over typed words? You'd rather someone who has "nothing to contribute" to just do nothing, say nothing, not make their existence known, log in, read or not read whatever, log out, like a ghost, because you find their choice of smiley faces to your postings "annoying", as opposed to others who react to you? Do y'all care so much about emoji reactions to your postings over the actual content thereof to the point we now have this stupid thread arguing about it? And you have the nerve to talk 'quality' of this board.
The fact that some of you are singling out a particular member for the way they interact with this board which is by all indications not malicious nor in bad faith i.e. not a troll; and that some of you are apparently so emotionally sensitive to the type of smiley face you may or may not receive from this particular member, or that you're getting a reaction from them at all, on a forum about defence matters no less, which this member ought to be using the 'laugh emoji' on the ridiculous attention it's garnered TBH...
... All that notwithstanding, you have numerous active, speaking (word-typing) members who regularly engage in lively/heated/lengthy debates which do regularly and expectedly turn into a 'battle of the ego' to the point the person who gets out-argued decides to use emojis to display their passive aggression instead. How about those people get their own threads like this here thread so y'all can express your annoyance and displeasure over those emoji use, on a forum about defence matters?
Then move on. The informing of your loss in interest over emojis on a defence board is about as useful as the reaction points at the bottom of each posting i.e. nobody cares except you.
So is responding just to respond so you can get the last word in, which is as silly as complaining about what people do with their emojis on a bloody message board.
Yes, I agree with Helius completely on this point. People who get triggered by emoji responses probably shouldn't be on a defense forum in the first place, soldiers regularly wave their swords at opponents to spite them.
What's wrong with Loveleenkr's emoji responses? Maybe she has some obsession with this forum and likes reading it, so what? Ppl whose posts get an emoji response should feel honoured that the reader took the time to read and click the emoji button for a response.
What's wrong with Loveleenkr's emoji responses? Maybe she has some obsession with this forum and likes reading it, so what? Ppl whose posts get an emoji response should feel honoured that the reader took the time to read and click the emoji button for a response.
Agreed here as well, Loveleenkr, while sure you can say it's spammy, isn't done with malice like some other banned users from before. I don't see much reason for calling out or attacking this user or any user like this especially since it seems they tend to be in agreement with what's posted.
I thought she was a bot and was just flabbergasted by how fast she responded. After doing some "research", I conclude that she is just a really really active member.
- Status