Abuse of the "Funny" Rating

[Quintessence]

Denizens of the forums,

A while back an update to the forum software introduced a "likes" system as an alternative to our once beloved frubals. You may have noticed that negative ratings are not an option, which was an intentional decision by the site owner to support the forum mission:

As a community of diverse cultural and religious backgrounds, our aim is to provide a civil environment, informative, respectful and welcoming where people of diverse beliefs can discuss, compare and debate religion while engaging in fellowship with one another.​

On occasion, we've noticed members abusing the "likes" system by using "funny" in a pejorative, mocking, or trollish fashion. When someone posts a sincerely held belief and a bunch of people start rating it "funny," that isn't exactly respectful and welcoming. We wanted to let you know that we consider behavior like that to be in violation of the rules, specifically Rule 3 or Rule 9 (see the full text of the rules here). If we see a pattern of abusing the "funny" rating, a member may be infracted as per any other piece of rule violating content. It felt prudent to give you all a more direct heads up about this, as it seems to be becoming more of an issue.

Feel free to ask questions for clarification within this thread, but do keep in mind that discussion of specific cases of moderation need to stay in Site Feedback as per Rule 2.

 

[icehorse]

I must confess that I have - on occasion - used the "funny" symbol to express my dissatisfaction. I will stop doing that.

That said, I tend to use it when it seems that a poster is lazily throwing an outrageous, trollish post into an otherwise respectful thread. I realize that that's a subjective call. So any thoughts?

 

[Father Heathen]

It gives them a positive count, so I think it's stupid more than it is abusive.

 

[Deeje]

On occasion, we've noticed members abusing the "likes" system by using "funny" in a pejorative, mocking, or trollish fashion. When someone posts a sincerely held belief and a bunch of people start rating it "funny," that isn't exactly respectful and welcoming

As an offender, I have a suggestion Quintessence FWIW....why not rename the "funny" to "good one" and add an "X" and call it "respectfully disagree"? Are you not allowed to disagree on a debating site? Its nice to keep things positive and civil but not very realistic on emotive topics. Sensitivities can run amok in some people. My personal feeling is, if you can't take criticism for your position in a debating forum, then you shouldn't be there.

Sometimes there just isn't an appropriate rating so "funny" gets hit because you find a response to be somewhat of a joke.

Surely we can disagree agreeably? Can you give us another option?

 

[YmirGF]

What if we come across what are obviously serious writings that genuinely strike us as being funny BECAUSE they are unusually ridiculous but intended to be taken seriously? I assure people that I do in fact laugh out loud when I read such posts. Again, they are funny because they are meant to be taken seriously. That's what makes them funny.

 

[Quetzal]

Anyone else find giving Quint a funny rating a tempting idea?

 

[Quetzal]

As an offender, I have a suggestion Quintessence FWIW....why not rename the "funny" to "good one" and add an "X" and call it "respectfully disagree"? Are you not allowed to disagree on a debating site? Its nice to keep things positive and civil but not very realistic on emotive topics. Sensitivities can run amok in some people. My personal feeling is, if you can't take criticism for your position in a debating forum, then you shouldn't be there.

Sometimes there just isn't an appropriate rating so "funny" gets hit because you find a response to be somewhat of a joke.

Surely we can disagree agreeably? Can you give us another option?

This seems like a reasonable alternative for the future. I agree.

 

[columbus]

Luckily,
my use of the rainbow to mean "Ew! That is so gay!" has flown entirely below the radar.
Don't tell the staff. Except for @ADigitalArtist, her warning posts are the most fun. You can tell her.
Tom

 

[SalixIncendium]

What if we come across what are obviously serious writings that genuinely strike us as being funny BECAUSE they are unusually ridiculous but intended to be taken seriously? I assure people that I do in fact laugh out loud when I read such posts. Again, they are funny because they are meant to be taken seriously. That's what makes them funny.

For such a post, I usually use words like *smiles* or *blinks* in asterisks before my post to express my amusement. Perhaps some sort of icon that reflects this which doesn't award any positive points may be an idea?

 

[YmirGF]

For such a post, I usually use words like *smiles* or *blinks* in asterisks before my post to express my amusement. Perhaps some sort of icon that reflects this which doesn't award any positive points may be an idea?

But the points are absolutely meaningless. What difference does it make?
That said, I often use similar tactics depending on where my humor takes me...

 

[Deidre]

I tend to only use ''funny'' when the poster is clearly being sarcastic, or making a joke. I think to do otherwise would mean YOU are making a joke out of the post, at the poster's expense.

 

[SalixIncendium]

But the points are absolutely meaningless. What difference does it make?
That said, I often use similar tactics depending on where my humor takes me...

Meaningless as they may be, I struggle bring myself to improve someone's rating making it look like someone actually appreciated obliviousness (then again, I guess I have some appreciation given such a post makes me chuckle).

 

[YmirGF]

Meaningless as they may be, I struggle bring myself to improve someone's rating making it look like someone actually appreciated obliviousness (than again, I guess I have some appreciation given such a post makes me chuckle).

I go to the fervent Charles Manson follower example. Are we supposed to take lunacy seriously? Should we attempt to be welcoming? Should we temper our response so as to not upset their delicate mental stability?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Anyone else find giving Quint a funny rating a tempting idea?

I did but I want to continue living here so I undid it.

 

[YmirGF]

I did but I want to continue living here so I undid it.

I guess some of us are just bad to the bone or eagerly looking forward to getting a fanny tanning.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I guess some of us are just bad to the bone or eagerly looking forward to getting a fanny tanning.

I'm expecting the latter.

 

[SomeRandom]

I guess some of us are just bad to the bone or eagerly looking forward to getting a fanny tanning.

Hells yeah we are. Rebel to the end

 

[YmirGF]

Hells yeah we are. Rebel to the end

I wonder if we can request @ADigitalArtist to do the tanning? Then again @Sunstone does have a way with his hands.....

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I wonder if we can request @ADigitalArtist to do the tanning? Then again @Sunstone does have a way with his hands.....

I did just get back from a pirate festival. And it's a pirate festival in Oregon so there was quite a bit of hand crafted leather whips and floggers.

 

[Revoltingest]

Denizens of the forums,

A while back an update to the forum software introduced a "likes" system as an alternative to our once beloved frubals. You may have noticed that negative ratings are not an option, which was an intentional decision by the site owner to support the forum mission:

As a community of diverse cultural and religious backgrounds, our aim is to provide a civil environment, informative, respectful and welcoming where people of diverse beliefs can discuss, compare and debate religion while engaging in fellowship with one another.​

On occasion, we've noticed members abusing the "likes" system by using "funny" in a pejorative, mocking, or trollish fashion. When someone posts a sincerely held belief and a bunch of people start rating it "funny," that isn't exactly respectful and welcoming. We wanted to let you know that we consider behavior like that to be in violation of the rules, specifically Rule 3 or Rule 9 (see the full text of the rules here). If we see a pattern of abusing the "funny" rating, a member may be infracted as per any other piece of rule violating content. It felt prudent to give you all a more direct heads up about this, as it seems to be becoming more of an issue.

Feel free to ask questions for clarification within this thread, but do keep in mind that discussion of specific cases of moderation need to stay in Site Feedback as per Rule 2.

I'll take any frubal I can get.
(Sellf esteem issues.)
I think I even received on of the kind you mention.
No offense taken.