Abuse of the "Funny" Rating

[ADigitalArtist]

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?

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.

The consensus among staff seems to be that we do not want to create a system for 'downvotes' 'dislikes' and negative ratings like some other sites because it creates--or at least adds to--a toxic or negative environment. Nothing is permanent and we may review that decision in the future, but for now we encourage people who disagree to say so and why instead of just a 'disagree' or 'dislike' button.

 

[columbus]

I wonder if we can request @ADigitalArtist to do the tanning?

All she did on post #9 was rate it funny.
Am I being abused?

Then again @Sunstone does have a way with his hands.....

Whoa!
Lotta information dude.
Tom

 

[ADigitalArtist]

All she did on post #9 was rate it funny.
Am I being abused?

Not yet. Refer to post 20.

 

[VioletVortex]

I disagree with that policy, but I understand it. I just dont understand how such violations would be 'prosecuted' without any real evidence.

 

[columbus]

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

I just rated this post with a .
Wanna know what I was thinking? Or would you prefer not to know what "bad to the bone" means to me?
Tom

 

[columbus]

I disagree with that policy, but I understand it. I just dont understand how such violations would be 'prosecuted' without any real evidence.

My guess is that Quint trusted that she was dealing with competent adults, with a basic sense of decency.
I also guess that @LuisDantas thought she was being naive.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I disagree with that policy, but I understand it. I just dont understand how such violations would be 'prosecuted' without any real evidence.

It's a problem not searching for a solution.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

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.

The only thing I'd add is to talk with the person before giving them a warning. One person's funny is another person's insult. For example, if person X said something sarcastic and I iconed it funny, to one person that could be sarcastic but without asking me you would not know that I agreed to that person's sarcasm and even more so, because of it, agreed with him.

On that note, it frustrates the user when they receive a warning for something they actually felt was not against the rules. The only way you'd know if they disobeyed the rules or interpreted it differently than the owner of the site (given different languages and different cultures-not all speak English), you'd have to ask.

Sense of humor is different in different countries and languages as soon as the culture in which one dialogues compared to another.

So the best way to help with this is pure dialogue.

I don't have any questions but feedback on how it is on both ends: not just from a manager's perspective nad seeing "errors" but from the person making the error not knowing he did and he knows the rules in and out.

Matter of perspective.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

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?

On the other site I go to with the same program, they have a disagree icon. I agree with your whole post. If one can agree, I'm sure we can disagree while being civil about it.

 

[Quetzal]

Then again @Sunstone does have a way with his hands.....

His rates have gone up, I would suggest a coupon.

 

[sun rise]

If I make a post from a liberal perspective and a known conservative rates it funny, it's to me a political comment not a humorous comment.

That said, I'm happy to also eschew making any more snarky political points using the 'funny' ranking. Instead I could change to politely writing that the supremely stupid idea must have come from the evil aliens who have taken over the brains of my political opponents and are using them to degrade, take over and consume humanity.

 

[LuisDantas]

My guess is that Quint trusted that she was dealing with competent adults, with a basic sense of decency.
I also guess that @LuisDantas thought she was being naive.
Tom

Such guessing is not very constructive IMO.

 

[Mindmaster]

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.

So, basically anyone doing this is doing some sort of micro-aggression?

You know the problem with that is that you will have no real idea what the intent of either the author of the post is or that of the person clicking the "funny". Poe's Law, especially, Poe's Corollary applies and certainly demonstrates the dilemma.

In and effort to streamline the system and provide protection for the would be offenders as a lawyer often has to do for a guilty party, I request that the denizens of RF only click "funny" on any of my posts - that way your disdain and true appreciation are unbeknownst to me (my feelings are spared) and we can all live together in big-happy-harmony.

 

[Mister Silver]

When I use the funny emoji, it because I actually think the content is humorous or accurate in stating something via satire. I do, however, understand how someone would misuse it, and I am grateful that the staff here is on top of it.

 

[Quintessence]

I disagree with that policy, but I understand it. I just dont understand how such violations would be 'prosecuted' without any real evidence.

The staff can view activity trends for members, including how they are rating posts. That means we have the ability to pin down a pattern of misuse. A pattern or trend is what we'd be looking for to consider it an infractable issue, not single occurrences.

We've actually been enforcing this here and there for a while now, but we hadn't given an official "heads up, this is a thing" announcement.

 

[Quintessence]

Also... this likely being my most rated post makes me sad...

Those of you who rated that OP as funny... I shake a stick at thee!

 

[Revoltingest]

The staff can view activity trends for members, including how they are rating posts. That means we have the ability to pin down a pattern of misuse. A pattern or trend is what we'd be looking for to consider it an infractable issue, not single occurrences.

We've actually been enforcing this here and there for a while now, but we hadn't given an official "heads up, this is a thing" announcement.

Have posters complained of getting <funny> ratings?
Is this really a good use of your time?

 

[leibowde84]

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.

Great rule. Wholeheartedly support this.

 

[Quintessence]

Have posters complained of getting <funny> ratings?

It's not common, but neither was people reporting abuses of the frubal comments to us back when those were a thing. It's a similar kind of territory.

Is this really a good use of your time?

Well, the staff team are kinda like the site janitors. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it.

Speaking of which, someone thought it'd be cute to stuff toilet paper down the sink again... clean up in aisle six!

 

[oldbadger]

Sometimes a serious post might be construed as a real joke.
Easy....... I'll not be clicking the 'funny' icon.
But I will never report any post or any clicked icon myself.