Why don’t we have an LOL “like” option? (1 Viewer)

[Otis]

We have “Like.” We have “love,” thanks and a bunch of other stuff. But the one that is so obviously missing is the original emoticon — some kind to LOL variant. 80% of the time I read a post around here that makes me care enough to want to hit the like button, and that’s the correct emotion in response, but instead I have to do the stupid handshake “thanks” or some other nonsense that doesn’t really apply.  

How is this option missing from the list?  Can we get Keith on this, pronto? 

 

[Zow]

Does that period beyond your "members." class mean that little you can't just make this happen?

 

[Otis]

Does that period beyond your "members." class mean that little you can't just make this happen?

Members.hip has its privileges. 

 

[PIK95]

I use the handshake for "I agree with you" or "good call" I never use it for it's intended use fwiw.  The new emojis suxors.

 

[ShamrockPride]

We have “Like.” We have “love,” thanks and a bunch of other stuff. But the one that is so obviously missing is the original emoticon — some kind to LOL variant. 80% of the time I read a post around here that makes me care enough to want to hit the like button, and that’s the correct emotion in response, but instead I have to do the stupid handshake “thanks” or some other nonsense that doesn’t really apply.  

How is this option missing from the list?  Can we get Keith on this, pronto? 

Joe himself outlawed it because he's afraid the people in the PF will use it for trolling purposes and to shut down conversation with just laugh emoji reactions. I remember that when we had the first discussion a couple months ago about which emojis should be in the fold.

Joe putting the PF as first priority again for this site. Quite telling why membership has dropped off.

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

We have “Like.” We have “love,” thanks and a bunch of other stuff. But the one that is so obviously missing is the original emoticon — some kind to LOL variant. 80% of the time I read a post around here that makes me care enough to want to hit the like button, and that’s the correct emotion in response, but instead I have to do the stupid handshake “thanks” or some other nonsense that doesn’t really apply.  

How is this option missing from the list?  Can we get Keith on this, pronto? 

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Didn’t make the final cut

 

[Otis]

Joe himself outlawed it because he's afraid the people in the PF will use it for trolling purposes and to shut down conversation with just laugh emoji reactions. I remember that when we had the first discussion a couple months ago about which emojis should be in the fold.

Joe putting the PF as first priority again for this site. Quite telling why membership has dropped off.

Well that’s ridiculous. 

 

[Otis]

Didn’t make the final cut

Who are the ad wizards who came up with this one 

 

[tjnc09]

Laughing isn't allowed here anymore

 

[hagmania]

I thank people for giving me a chuckle.

 

[skol asylum]

 

[rockaction]

Click on emoji smiling face on comment tool bar. 

Select rolling laughter guy from bottom. 

Voila! Problem solved. Takes ten seconds.  

 

[Otis]

Click on emoji smiling face on comment tool bar. 

Select rolling laughter guy from bottom. 

Voila! Problem solved. Takes ten seconds.  

What’s the point thought?  Why make people invest 10 seconds to do this?  Is humor now frowned upon?  Have we really finally reached that point??

 

[Jed]

Click on emoji smiling face on comment tool bar. 

Select rolling laughter guy from bottom. 

Voila! Problem solved. Takes ten seconds.  

If someone wants to troll, they can take 10 seconds to do this, so the reason behind excluding it doesn't fly. But what if we just want to quickly laugh at something funny? It really shuts down the engagement.

 

[Captain Cranks]

I'd happily swap the :Love: option for :LOL: or :Vomiting: options.  I'd even be willing to make the :LOL while vomiting: option work.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe himself outlawed it because he's afraid the people in the PF will use it for trolling purposes and to shut down conversation with just laugh emoji reactions. I remember that when we had the first discussion a couple months ago about which emojis should be in the fold.

Joe putting the PF as first priority again for this site. Quite telling why membership has dropped off.





1

Sorry, but that's not accurate. This was a board thing. Not a Political Forum thing. 

We talked about it a good bit and decided to not have it on the default quick comment emoji options under the smiling face on the right. 

The reason being some people used it more to laugh at or mock people than to laugh with. It's the same reason we didn't include in the default quick comment options.

The underlying reason is simple. I want the boards to be a place where good discussion is encouraged. Laughing at people or rolling eyes at people in my opinion, doesn't encourage good discussion.  and    are good for enocuraging clicks or trolling. But not helpful for promoting good discussion.

I know that's tame for most boards but it's how we're trying to operate here. I don't know if what we're doing is the right way. It's just how we're trying to do it. 

We still have the  emoji available to use in the comment area for typing text. But we ask as a general thing that people not just use it by itself. If you want to use the  please have some more discussion with it.

This post is a good example of the kind that would draw just the   I understand the sentiment. I just don't think it helps do what we're trying to with the board - and that's encourage good discussion. 

 

[mr roboto]

What’s the point thought?  Why make people invest 10 seconds to do this?  Is humor now frowned upon?  Have we really finally reached that point??

 

[belljr]

@Joe Bryant   They are literally part of your message board.   I didn't do anything special.  That was kind of the point.   

 

[Van Dyman]

We have “Like.” We have “love,” thanks and a bunch of other stuff. But the one that is so obviously missing is the original emoticon — some kind to LOL variant. 80% of the time I read a post around here that makes me care enough to want to hit the like button, and that’s the correct emotion in response, but instead I have to do the stupid handshake “thanks” or some other nonsense that doesn’t really apply.  

How is this option missing from the list?  Can we get Keith on this, pronto? 

Just click the "like" button itself. Sure, it looks like a face now and it used to be the actual word "like", but a single click on "like" is exactly the same as it always was. 

The other options are there if you want to provide different feedback (thanks, love, etc.) but you do not have to use them. You can just click the "like" face.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

But the one that is so obviously missing is the original emoticon — some kind to LOL variant. 

I'm still just using Like. A Like is a Like is a Like. I love it, I agree with it, it made me laugh, it made me cry, Like, Like, Like.

Also I want to be sure people are getting Likes. If I go  does the poster still get a "Like" chit? I don't know, so I play it safe with Like.

 

[Otis]

The reason being some people used it more to laugh at or mock people than to laugh with. It's the same reason we didn't include in the default quick comment options.

The underlying reason is simple. I want the boards to be a place where good discussion is encouraged. Laughing at people or rolling eyes at people in my opinion, doesn't encourage good discussion.  and    are good for enocuraging clicks or trolling. But not helpful for promoting good discussion.

I know that's tame for most boards but it's how we're trying to operate here. I don't know if what we're doing is the right way. It's just how we're trying to do it. 

We still have the  emoji available to use in the comment area for typing text. But we ask as a general thing that people not just use it by itself. If you want to use the  please have some more discussion with it.

This post is a good example of the kind that would draw just the   I understand the sentiment. I just don't think it helps do what we're trying to with the board - and that's encourage good discussion. 

Joe, sorry, but this is a bridge too far. First, it’s ridiculous that you’re allowing these “some people” to dictate how the board operates. Talk about letting the terrorists win....  how about the vast majority of us who can appreciate humor, in good fun, for the sake of people feeling good?  A good example of this is in Randall’s thread about his recent ALS diagnosis. It’s a heartbreaking thread, but he’s expressing such a great sense of humor about it and has made some pretty funny jokes—my first instinct was to laugh or give an LOL emoticon to acknowledge his humor and make him feel good. But then I had to work through all the ridiculous other options to find something that otherwise might come close. And we’re forced to work through that all the time because, why, there are a few jerks in the world?

Second, I think the notion that we have to “have more discussion” every time we  is just absurd. How serious and self important have we become?

If there’s anything this world could use, it’s a little more levity and humor. Not everything needs to be a deep serious discussion about whether an image offends someone, or whether we may be treading too close to a line that might make one person in a thousand feel a little uncomfortable. How about we just live our lives?

Rant over. It’s your board. I just find this completely absurd. 

 

[E Street Brat]

What’s the point thought?  Why make people invest 10 seconds to do this?  Is humor now frowned upon?  Have we really finally reached that point??

Same as day one 

 

[TheFanatic]

No laughing allowed, at or with, in the holy forum. 

And isn't being laughed at, the quickest way to correct behavior that is laughable? I think people should be responsible for not doing or typing something that will get them laughed at. They are still getting laughed at, people just have to take more time to show it. 

 

[E Street Brat]

I was also recently informed that using a partial quote to make a joke would drop the ban hammer. 

 

[ShamrockPride]

The reason being some people used it more to laugh at or mock people than to laugh with. It's the same reason we didn't include in the default quick comment options.

So it goes back again Joe, to where exactly are you seeing what, and where? I certainly agree that it would be, and have often seen used for purposes you mention in the PF. From what I've seen in my 7 years here, the large large majority of the time, everybody is among friends in the FFA. With the exception of a couple bad apples specifically, who often get personal in their posts and exchanges in the FFA, I haven't seen anything I wouldn't call a brotherhood here. So again, I have no clue where you're coming up with this idea that the laugh emoji would be used in a trolling/personal manner...UNLESS, you spend a lot of your time in the PF, then I could see where you'd get paranoid about it's use, and make the decision you made.

But hey, forgive me for connecting the easy to see dots here. As Otis said, it's your board. Carry on.

 

[Osaurus]

Poop emoji is lonely 

 

[Otis]

I should note I’m generally a Joe fan and love these boards and what he does with them. And even when it’s something wacky I can usually work to see his side of it. This one just feels plain nutty. 

 

[shuke]

Joe, sorry, but this is a bridge too far. First, it’s ridiculous that you’re allowing these “some people” to dictate how the board operates. Talk about letting the terrorists win....  how about the vast majority of us who can appreciate humor, in good fun, for the sake of people feeling good?  A good example of this is in Randall’s thread about his recent ALS diagnosis. It’s a heartbreaking thread, but he’s expressing such a great sense of humor about it and has made some pretty funny jokes—my first instinct was to laugh or give an LOL emoticon to acknowledge his humor and make him feel good. But then I had to work through all the ridiculous other options to find something that otherwise might come close. And we’re forced to work through that all the time because, why, there are a few jerks in the world?

Second, I think the notion that we have to “have more discussion” every time we  is just absurd. How serious and self important have we become?

If there’s anything this world could use, it’s a little more levity and humor. Not everything needs to be a deep serious discussion about whether an image offends someone, or whether we may be treading too close to a line that might make one person in a thousand feel a little uncomfortable. How about we just live our lives?

Rant over. It’s your board. I just find this completely absurd. 

 

[Otis]

  

fight me 

 

[Osaurus]

  

fight me 

He’s not a potato, Oats.  Oh...and 

 

[Joe Bryant]

So it goes back again Joe, to where exactly are you seeing what, and where? I certainly agree that it would be, and have often seen used for purposes you mention in the PF. From what I've seen in my 7 years here, the large large majority of the time, everybody is among friends in the FFA. With the exception of a couple bad apples specifically, who often get personal in their posts and exchanges in the FFA, I haven't seen anything I wouldn't call a brotherhood here. So again, I have no clue where you're coming up with this idea that the laugh emoji would be used in a trolling/personal manner...UNLESS, you spend a lot of your time in the PF, then I could see where you'd get paranoid about it's use, and make the decision you made.

But hey, forgive me for connecting the easy to see dots here. As Otis said, it's your board. Carry on.

Thanks. I spend way more time here than in the Political Forum. Reading mostly. The FFA topics are way more interesting to me.  No harm at all so no forgiveness necessary. Just letting you know why we did what did. Thanks for being here. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

No laughing allowed, at or with, in the holy forum. 

And isn't being laughed at, the quickest way to correct behavior that is laughable? I think people should be responsible for not doing or typing something that will get them laughed at. They are still getting laughed at, people just have to take more time to show it. 

Thanks Scott. I disagree though. As we talked about in the PM discussion, I disagree not allowing you to make the "Check out the #### on the chick" comments here makes this a "Holy forum". I fully understand though not everyone agrees. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe, sorry, but this is a bridge too far. First, it’s ridiculous that you’re allowing these “some people” to dictate how the board operates. Talk about letting the terrorists win....  how about the vast majority of us who can appreciate humor, in good fun, for the sake of people feeling good?  A good example of this is in Randall’s thread about his recent ALS diagnosis. It’s a heartbreaking thread, but he’s expressing such a great sense of humor about it and has made some pretty funny jokes—my first instinct was to laugh or give an LOL emoticon to acknowledge his humor and make him feel good. But then I had to work through all the ridiculous other options to find something that otherwise might come close. And we’re forced to work through that all the time because, why, there are a few jerks in the world?

Second, I think the notion that we have to “have more discussion” every time we  is just absurd. How serious and self important have we become?

If there’s anything this world could use, it’s a little more levity and humor. Not everything needs to be a deep serious discussion about whether an image offends someone, or whether we may be treading too close to a line that might make one person in a thousand feel a little uncomfortable. How about we just live our lives?

Rant over. It’s your board. I just find this completely absurd. 

Thanks GB.

I fully understand. That's why we still have the emoji. For something like Randall's thread and you want to laugh along with someone, for sure use that. 

The question was just if we have them in the default quick comment area and we chose not to have them there. It's still available for you. It does take 3 seconds but that's not much of a barrier. 

 

[Otis]

Thanks GB.

I fully understand. That's why we still have the emoji. For something like Randall's thread and you want to laugh along with someone, for sure use that. 

The question was just if we have them in the default quick comment area and we chose not to have them there. It's still available for you. It does take 3 seconds but that's not much of a barrier. 

Well, I should add, it’s not just the extra 3 seconds. Every time I do that and quote a post just to add a  , I’m making the thread longer and harder to read. And for that reasons lots of times I won’t give that feedback at all (and I bet a lot of people feel the same way, and people who use this feature won’t otherwise add a new post to the thread). Otherwise we’ll all just be looking at endless streams of smileys before getting to content. That was a cool part of this feature—allowing quick feedback without taking up space—which has now been neutered in a big way. And the worst part is it’s been neutered because of a few bad actors. The fact that trolls guided this decision is just so crazy to me. Again, your board, your rules, as I’ve always said, but this one feels like the totally wrong call, hampers the ability of good posters to communicate, and makes the board less good.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Well, I should add, it’s not just the extra 3 seconds. Every time I do that and quote a post just to add a  , I’m making the thread longer and harder to read. And for that reasons lots of times I won’t give that feedback at all (and I bet a lot of people feel the same way, and people who use this feature won’t otherwise add a new post to the thread). Otherwise we’ll all just be looking at endless streams of smileys before getting to content. That was a cool part of this feature—allowing quick feedback without taking up space—which has now been neutered in a big way. And the worst part is it’s been neutered because of a few bad actors. The fact that trolls guided this decision is just so crazy to me. Again, your board, your rules, as I’ve always said, but this one feels like the totally wrong call, hampers the ability of good posters to communicate, and makes the board less good.  

Thanks. I totally understand where you're coming from there but just disagree. Thanks for explaining how you see it. 

For the posts you mentioned where you might want do a quick    comment so as not to extend the thread, instead please use the like button. Or the heart if you love it. 

 

[NotSmart]

Well, I should add, it’s not just the extra 3 seconds. Every time I do that and quote a post just to add a  , I’m making the thread longer and harder to read. And for that reasons lots of times I won’t give that feedback at all (and I bet a lot of people feel the same way, and people who use this feature won’t otherwise add a new post to the thread). Otherwise we’ll all just be looking at endless streams of smileys before getting to content. That was a cool part of this feature—allowing quick feedback without taking up space—which has now been neutered in a big way. And the worst part is it’s been neutered because of a few bad actors. The fact that trolls guided this decision is just so crazy to me. Again, your board, your rules, as I’ve always said, but this one feels like the totally wrong call, hampers the ability of good posters to communicate, and makes the board less good.  

You make an excellent point I hadn't realized until you pointed it out... but a lot of times I'd like to add a to show someone I appreciate their post and genuinely got a chuckle out of it.  Usually I don't, because as you said, it results in a fully quoted post just to add a smiley.  Having available as a reaction smiley would be PERFECT for such situations.

There's clearly more than just a nuanced difference between a like and a  

If Joe would consider your point a bit further, is it better that a bozo "reacts" with a sarcastic  and has it blended in (and thus diluted) with all the other reactions in the OP, or to is it preferable to have an entire new post that both wastes space AND serves to fully emphasize the sarcastic response?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

You make an excellent point I hadn't realized until you pointed it out... but a lot of times I'd like to add a to show someone I appreciate their post and genuinely got a chuckle out of it.  Usually I don't, because as you said, it results in a fully quoted post just to add a smiley.  Having available as a reaction smiley would be PERFECT for such situations.

There's clearly more than just a nuanced difference between a like and a  

If Joe would consider your point a bit further, is it better that a bozo "reacts" with a sarcastic  and has it blended in (and thus diluted) with all the other reactions in the OP, or to is it preferable to have an entire new post that both wastes space AND serves to fully emphasize the sarcastic response?

For a guy named NotSmart you are pretty smart.

 

[Riddick02]

The sad button is used more to convey judgement on a post or to indicate the post as whiny in the PF, surprised its still around at this point. 

 

[krsone21]

For a guy named NotSmart you are pretty smart.

This would have been the perfect post to use a simple   in the like section.

 

[Phil Elliott]

 

[Joe Bryant]

You make an excellent point I hadn't realized until you pointed it out... but a lot of times I'd like to add a to show someone I appreciate their post and genuinely got a chuckle out of it.  Usually I don't, because as you said, it results in a fully quoted post just to add a smiley.  Having available as a reaction smiley would be PERFECT for such situations.

There's clearly more than just a nuanced difference between a like and a  

If Joe would consider your point a bit further, is it better that a bozo "reacts" with a sarcastic  and has it blended in (and thus diluted) with all the other reactions in the OP, or to is it preferable to have an entire new post that both wastes space AND serves to fully emphasize the sarcastic response?

Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate. 

For us, we'll have to settle for using a or   

 

[Otis]

Sorry to have reopened a sore subject on all this. I just assumed it was an oversight and not a deliberate decision. My bust. 

 

[tonydead]

Joe, sorry, but this is a bridge too far. First, it’s ridiculous that you’re allowing these “some people” to dictate how the board operates. Talk about letting the terrorists win....  how about the vast majority of us who can appreciate humor, in good fun, for the sake of people feeling good?  A good example of this is in Randall’s thread about his recent ALS diagnosis. It’s a heartbreaking thread, but he’s expressing such a great sense of humor about it and has made some pretty funny jokes—my first instinct was to laugh or give an LOL emoticon to acknowledge his humor and make him feel good. But then I had to work through all the ridiculous other options to find something that otherwise might come close. And we’re forced to work through that all the time because, why, there are a few jerks in the world?

Second, I think the notion that we have to “have more discussion” every time we  is just absurd. How serious and self important have we become?

If there’s anything this world could use, it’s a little more levity and humor. Not everything needs to be a deep serious discussion about whether an image offends someone, or whether we may be treading too close to a line that might make one person in a thousand feel a little uncomfortable. How about we just live our lives?

Rant over. It’s your board. I just find this completely absurd. 

TWO terrorist jerks.  Sure the others piled on when they found out the mods were paying attention to it - which is worse trolling than laughing out loud excessively, but, literally two thin skinned people started the campaign.   

 

[Sand]

Sorry, but that's not accurate. This was a board thing. Not a Political Forum thing. 

We talked about it a good bit and decided to not have it on the default quick comment emoji options under the smiling face on the right. 

The reason being some people used it more to laugh at or mock people than to laugh with. It's the same reason we didn't include in the default quick comment options.

The underlying reason is simple. I want the boards to be a place where good discussion is encouraged. Laughing at people or rolling eyes at people in my opinion, doesn't encourage good discussion.  and    are good for enocuraging clicks or trolling. But not helpful for promoting good discussion.

I know that's tame for most boards but it's how we're trying to operate here. I don't know if what we're doing is the right way. It's just how we're trying to do it. 

We still have the  emoji available to use in the comment area for typing text. But we ask as a general thing that people not just use it by itself. If you want to use the  please have some more discussion with it.

This post is a good example of the kind that would draw just the   I understand the sentiment. I just don't think it helps do what we're trying to with the board - and that's encourage good discussion. 

 
This is looking at it backwards.  If that means that Matsuki, Mr. CIA, Tobias, Bruce, and the rest of that crew never have to actually write anything it's a huge win.  Definitely needs implementation.

 

[The General]

Poor political forum...always gets blamed for everything.

 

[Otis]

So the nerds in the politics subforum are what caused this?

ugh. It’s ALWAYS the nerds. 

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

Didn’t make the final cut

 

[tonydead]

 
This is looking at it backwards.  If that means that Matsuki, Mr. CIA, Tobias, Bruce, and the rest of that crew never have to actually write anything it's a huge win.  Definitely needs implementation.

That is very funny. I laughed, out loud.