It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
avatar
Vestin: ...I have trouble finding a way to explain why it doesn't make sense; it's so counterintuitive...
Now I don't really understand. First you say it's a good thing. Then you say it's silly.
avatar
Vestin: ...I have trouble finding a way to explain why it doesn't make sense; it's so counterintuitive...
avatar
Trilarion: Now I don't really understand. First you say it's a good thing. Then you say it's silly.
Ugh... Claiming that expressing disagreement with people expressing disagreement somehow strips the latter of their freedom to express disagreement, calling it "suppression" - that is what I find silly. It's not intolerant to merely disagree with someone, even a minority.
avatar
DieRuhe: I recently got down-repped for a post talking about the futility of the down-rep button as it is, because the person didn't agree with me. Which exactly illustrates my point, and I'm glad that others here have pointed that out.
avatar
TStael: I got heavily bashed for posting an opinion about The Withcer 2 that it was not really enjoyable due to anti-gay bias - in balance of things - in portrayal of Dethmold character that in my view incorporated about any conceivable negative cliché.
That thread depressed the hell out of me. I guess it's a little late to say that I support your position, but I do.
avatar
yyahoo: Yeah, I think the problem is repetition. Constructive criticism is fine. But after the 50th, 100th, 500th time, particularly when it comes from the same people, it's gets a little old. I think that is the problem people are having with these things more than anything recently... heck, the people complaining about the people complaining is even getting old. I usually like to stay out of this stuff, but that's what I think people are down-voting for, because it's becoming a bit tiresome and trite. Me? I just try to stay out of it...
This. I'm far from a GOG loyalist (I use Steam all the time! :D), and downrating of legitimate criticism is stupid, but I get really sick of people complaining about the same things over and over. When people mention in almost every new game release that they're disappointed that it's not an old game, people are going to get tired of it. Same thing with those who have their pet games they constantly talk about GOG needing to get. Put it on the wishlist, make a thread about it if you must, but bringing it up constantly isn't going to make GOG get it faster, just like rapidly pushing an elevator button doesn't make the elevator move faster.
avatar
Vestin: It's helpful to think of low-rated posts as multiple people frowning and high-rated posts as multiple people smiling at you. To suggest that we shouldn't even express our disdain through such silent forms is so silly to me, I have trouble finding a way to explain why it doesn't make sense; it's so counterintuitive...
Except frowning in real life doesn't make other people's opinions go away. On this forum, posting an unpopular opinion in a civilised manner, no matter how justified it may be, is liable to get your post hidden.

As it stands, the abuse of the downrepping button has kept itself within limits, unlike sites like Eurogamer.
avatar
Gazoinks: This. I'm far from a GOG loyalist (I use Steam all the time! :D), and downrating of legitimate criticism is stupid, but I get really sick of people complaining about the same things over and over. When people mention in almost every new game release that they're disappointed that it's not an old game, people are going to get tired of it. Same thing with those who have their pet games they constantly talk about GOG needing to get. Put it on the wishlist, make a thread about it if you must, but bringing it up constantly isn't going to make GOG get it faster, just like rapidly pushing an elevator button doesn't make the elevator move faster.
I know what you mean. I'm sick of complaining about the complainers, and now I have people complaining about my complaining about the complaining.
Post edited November 22, 2012 by jamyskis
avatar
jamyskis: I know what you mean. I'm sick of complaining about the complainers, and now I have people complaining about my complaining about the complaining.
It's a vicious cycle. x]
avatar
Trilarion: Now I don't really understand. First you say it's a good thing. Then you say it's silly.
avatar
Vestin: Ugh... Claiming that expressing disagreement with people expressing disagreement somehow strips the latter of their freedom to express disagreement, calling it "suppression" - that is what I find silly. It's not intolerant to merely disagree with someone, even a minority.
It's refreshing to see others accept disagreement between people. We should sue Facebook for not being open with their only 'like' button and no 'dislike'. :P

avatar
jamyskis: I know what you mean. I'm sick of complaining about the complainers, and now I have people complaining about my complaining about the complaining.
There are three kinds of people in the world: Complainers, complaining about complainers and people who don't care about either of the first two. :-)

avatar
jamyskis: As it stands, the abuse of the downrepping button has kept itself within limits, unlike sites like Eurogamer.
I know GOG forum doesn't seem to have many rules and I like the freedom here as many others but to avoid this they could do a minor restriction on the reputation system (if it's that important) to avoid newcomers or old members with multiple account to abuse it. Aside from that I think any down- or uprepping is justifiable because it's based on opinions, we are not supreme scientific judges. We should be allowed to downrep someone because they have "a bad opinion" according to the one who downreps, it's his freedom to do so.
avatar
jamyskis: Except frowning in real life doesn't make other people's opinions go away.
You'd be surprised ;P...

avatar
jamyskis: On this forum, posting an unpopular opinion in a civilised manner, no matter how justified it may be, is liable to get your post hidden.
That's blatantly not true and you should know better than to tell this to ME, of all people.
Even if it were, I wouldn't consider it much of an issue, though. That's the things about having unpopular opinions - you need to be ready to take flak for them, otherwise they wouldn't be "unpopular" in the first place.

avatar
Nirth: It's refreshing to see others accept disagreement between people. We should sue Facebook for not being open with their only 'like' button and no 'dislike'. :P
There's a joke that sheds some light on the issue: a castaway was found after living on a deserted island for many years. During his time there, he had erected three buildings: a house, where he lived, a club to which he went and a club to which he DID NOT go.
avatar
tfishell: You've completely missed my point. The whole idea here is that "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" is probably the best play ever made.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are dead by a mile. :P
If I was European I'm sure I'd actually appreciate the theatre as much as you do. ;)
avatar
tfishell: If I was European I'm sure I'd actually appreciate the theatre as much as you do. ;)
I'm as American as you are. :P
avatar
tfishell: If I was European I'm sure I'd actually appreciate the theatre as much as you do. ;)
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: I'm as American as you are. :P
http://fandommenacepodcast.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/billtedwhoa.gif
avatar
Vestin: So, in summary:
PEOPLE CAN criticize GOG.
PEOPLE MUSTN'T criticize criticizing GOG.
PEOPLE CAN criticize criticizing of criticizing of GOG ?
avatar
tfishell: You've completely missed my point. The whole idea here is that "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" is probably the best play ever made.
BECAUSE Elizabeth Taylor had such great cleavage in the film? :-P

"Edit": wanted to post this a bit back, as playful early AM-ish anaphora of sorts, but as a reply - came across as edit which I suppressed. Hence post it now with leitmotiv "äly tuli iltajunas!" (from Karelian translation of Donald Duck, meaning with a delay, and a little more, lol)
avatar
Vestin: That's not the point I was trying to make. Basically: up- and down-voting posts is an incredibly efficient and meaningful way of interacting with what other people write. They carve a mark into a given one only if plenty of people feel the same way about its contents, serving as instant insight into vox populi. THAT'S A GOOD THING.

It's helpful to think of low-rated posts as multiple people frowning and high-rated posts as multiple people smiling at you. To suggest that we shouldn't even express our disdain through such silent forms is so silly to me, I have trouble finding a way to explain why it doesn't make sense; it's so counterintuitive...
Well, when it comes to this vox populi vox dei approach - Hitler was highly popular indeed at outset, and voices of difference got most vigorously frowned upon; very severely indeed.

If any popular moral compass and standard of conduct is as good as the next one, a frown may indeed be more honorable than a smile.

Yes, it is a gaming site, but it is still surprising at times what constitutes a "frown at" or "smile upon" opinion, in my view.
avatar
TStael: Well, when it comes to this vox populi vox dei approach (...)
...it is something I have never mentioned. There's a difference between applauding people expressing themselves and applauding the things they are expressing.

Otherwise - I agree with the gist of your reasoning. It is simply unrelated to what has been said.

avatar
TStael: If any popular moral compass and standard of conduct is as good as the next one
That, coincidentally, is ALSO something I have never said. Hell - it's one of the things people here probably would be able to predict me disagreeing with.
Of course - your critique is quite valid... though, again - unrelated.
avatar
TStael: Well, when it comes to this vox populi vox dei approach (...)
avatar
Vestin: ...it is something I have never mentioned. There's a difference between applauding people expressing themselves and applauding the things they are expressing.

Otherwise - I agree with the gist of your reasoning. It is simply unrelated to what has been said.

avatar
TStael: If any popular moral compass and standard of conduct is as good as the next one
avatar
Vestin: That, coincidentally, is ALSO something I have never said. Hell - it's one of the things people here probably would be able to predict me disagreeing with.
Of course - your critique is quite valid... though, again - unrelated.
.
.
I admit the comparison to NSDP regime is bit of a hyperbole but relevant in terms of historic evidence - but besides, I quoted fully your response to a posting that pointed out that OP was merely requesting goodwill, yet that he might not be able to expect none, not dictating the rules of the fora.

My impression is that the up post / down post is more often about having similar opinion, than appreciating fellow fora members engaging nicely and arguing their point of view maybe firmly but politely. I cannot say I have always been perfect, unfortunately.

The smile at - frown upon approach is arguably more populistic, based on how a posting is liked or disliked. Let us just simply state vox populi, as original quote. But this surely implies validation of popular opinion?

This I think this is the difference between "goodwill" your counter posting as such supported, and "rules" implied in the posting you reacted to - or the moral compass, as in assessing popular and unpopular views at equal footing.

Edit: trying to figure out how to properly snippet this. But not succeeding, gääh! :'(
Post edited November 27, 2012 by TStael