Lols are gone?
Answers
-
@Jesya said:
if whoever removed the LOL would focus their time on the Asian forum posts late at night selling degrees and figuring out how to prevent them from spamming the forums with it.
Fixing that is actually relatively simple.
All that is needed is to restrict the number of accounts per game key, and obviously to make the forum so it technically supports it and has an automated process for approving accounts.1 -
@Incarnate said:
Fixing that is actually relatively simple.
All that is needed is to restrict the number of accounts per game key, and obviously to make the forum so it technically supports it and has an automated process for approving accounts.Easier still: hold all posts containing Chinese characters for moderation. The bots seem to be the only Chinese visitors we get anyway.
2 -
Lol1
-
@Incarnate said:
@Jesya said:
if whoever removed the LOL would focus their time on the Asian forum posts late at night selling degrees and figuring out how to prevent them from spamming the forums with it.
Fixing that is actually relatively simple.
All that is needed is to restrict the number of accounts per game key, and obviously to make the forum so it technically supports it and has an automated process for approving accounts.well apparently lol is more important. 🙃
0 -
Where’s the “mourn”1
-
Just....lol0
-
@Orion said:
Who had the highest LOL count? Inquiring minds want to know!
Take it with a grain of salt but I wouldn't be surprise if Lowbei still had the most lols despite being ban eons ago (atleast if you don't take in account the lol bot spam)
0 -
@ItsYourBoyGuzma said:
One upset fox is all it takes.... SighNope, it's something we've been discussing for a couple months now. It's not just because someone complained about it.
3 -
@Doc_W__HOLLIDAY said:
JanTheMan said:Nooooo!!!
Guess the devs hoped that by removing the "LOL's" that survivor mains would quit spamming all killer buff posts with it whilst contributing nothing to the discussion.
I'm going to give you a very big LOL in size 5000 font if i could get it to fit for that nonsense since it wasn't just survivor mains but killer mains doing it as well.
If you honestly think only one side was doing it then there's nothing that could be said to help you, you're like the emperor with no clothes being told you're not wearing any clothes.
I never had an issue with people doing it to me and I'm pretty sure I know who my haters were so to speak that followed me around. I actually got a laugh out of them doing it as if they actually believed it affected me any which by the way it didn't.
I took lols as badges of honor and found amusement in them and so they never bothered me and it gave me great amusement that they'd think it did. Now as others have said the trolls will have to actually post something. While BHVR always knew who was doing it they could hide themselves from the forum, now that's not an option anymore.
1 -
If you read my next comment, I also spoke about how killers would do it to survivors too. I'm not oblivious to the fact that both sides "LOL"d each other without giving any responses.powerbats said:@Doc_W__HOLLIDAY said:
JanTheMan said:Nooooo!!!
Guess the devs hoped that by removing the "LOL's" that survivor mains would quit spamming all killer buff posts with it whilst contributing nothing to the discussion.
I'm going to give you a very big LOL in size 5000 font if i could get it to fit for that nonsense since it wasn't just survivor mains but killer mains doing it as well.
If you honestly think only one side was doing it then there's nothing that could be said to help you, you're like the emperor with no clothes being told you're not wearing any clothes.
I never had an issue with people doing it to me and I'm pretty sure I know who my haters were so to speak that followed me around. I actually got a laugh out of them doing it as if they actually believed it affected me any which by the way it didn't.
I took lols as badges of honor and found amusement in them and so they never bothered me and it gave me great amusement that they'd think it did. Now as others have said the trolls will have to actually post something. While BHVR always knew who was doing it they could hide themselves from the forum, now that's not an option anymore.
However, there are alot of survivor main forum trolls like the OchiDO fanboy and a few others I won't name. They never had anything valuable to say and just LOL'd every post that asked for killer buffs.1 -
@Doc_W__HOLLIDAY said:
If you read my next comment, I also spoke about how killers would do it to survivors too. I'm not oblivious to the fact that both sides "LOL"d each other without giving any responses.
However, there are alot of survivor main forum trolls like the OchiDO fanboy and a few others I won't name. They never had anything valuable to say and just LOL'd every post that asked for killer buffs.
Apologies I missed that next part and yes the he who shall not be named fan club is beyond belief and I'm sure the mods took out a lot of them and they finally got the hint. The others yes there's about 5 or so on each side I won't name and shame but they literally follow around to troll.
0 -
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.
Cheers.0 -
I want my 5 LOL's back
0 -
Alright everyone so Awesome is now the new "lol".........spread the word.0
-
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
2 -
I don't really understand some people's relationship with things like "likes, lols, awesomes" etc in a forum. Who cares? Are they giving out cookies? Are they making decisions by counting upvotes? What really counts in my opinion is the insight or thought put into the actual posts.
1 -
This is such a terrible change.
1 -
this is so sad can we get a lol in chat
0 -
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
1 -
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
1 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
2 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
1 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
1 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.2 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
1 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
I'm sure at least a handful of people disagree with me. That doesn't explain why my "LOL" count increased by the hundreds every few minutes during certain times of the day.
Anyway, I can see you're just going to keep dismissing anyone else's experience in favor of your conclusion, so I'm gonna stop wasting my time.0 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
I'm sure at least a handful of people disagree with me. That doesn't explain why my "LOL" count increased by the hundreds every few minutes during certain times of the day.
Anyway, I can see you're just going to keep dismissing anyone else's experience in favor of your conclusion, so I'm gonna stop wasting my time.I'm not dismissing "experience", I'm dismissing your recollection of your reality which I would definitely not consider "experience" but simply anecdotal. This isn't saying it didn't happen, it's simply that your conclusion drawn from it is not rational nor actual reality. Experience disagrees with you.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.
2 -
Ok
0 -
@Peanits said:
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.To appease everyone else you could consider ratings being disabled for accounts below 50 post. It would be a small deterrent for rating spam.
Personally though I'd be fine with the rating system going away aside from "Vote Up" as it doesn't really feel like the feature was really thought out.
1 -
@Dustin said:
@Peanits said:
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.To appease everyone else you could consider ratings being disabled for accounts below 50 post. It would be a small deterrent for rating spam.
Personally though I'd be fine with the rating system going away aside from "Vote Up" as it doesn't really feel like the feature was really thought out.
Something like that would be nice, but it would take some time to get it implemented. Hopefully one day it'll return.
1 -
@Peanits said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.
So with 5 million copies of the game sold and about 12 people who created extra accounts to do this activity we are going to remove the entire feature for all instead of simply taking action against those 12? To be clear, we're going to take action against and affect the entire DBD community for a .00024% of the population? I fail to see how this is the logical action is any shape or form whatsoever.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.
So with 5 million copies of the game sold and about 12 people who created extra accounts to do this activity we are going to remove the entire feature for all instead of simply taking action against those 12? To be clear, we're going to take action against and affect the entire DBD community for a .0000024% of the population? I fail to see how this is the logical action is any shape or form whatsoever.
I don't know why you throw 5 million copies being sold in there, that's totally irrelevant. All five million people that have bought the game aren't on the forums. There's closer to 35,000 people on the forums (not all active, just registered). That includes all the spam accounts created, of which we have banned a lot.
It's also not just 12, as mentioned, this was a recurring thing.
1 -
@Peanits said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
No, that's not it. Sure, some are just people disagreeing, but the thing I'm talking about were about a dozen or so accounts all created from the same IP around the same time that would follow certain people around and mass LOL their posts. We see all that. I've had several people contact me privately to report that sort of thing. So while it may not have been talked about a lot publicly, it was a recurring issue and something that needed to be dealt with.
So with 5 million copies of the game sold and about 12 people who created extra accounts to do this activity we are going to remove the entire feature for all instead of simply taking action against those 12? To be clear, we're going to take action against and affect the entire DBD community for a .0000024% of the population? I fail to see how this is the logical action is any shape or form whatsoever.
I don't know why you throw 5 million copies being sold in there, that's totally irrelevant. All five million people that have bought the game aren't on the forums. There's closer to 35,000 people on the forums (not all active, just registered). That includes all the spam accounts created, of which we have banned a lot.
It's also not just 12, as mentioned, this was a recurring thing.
Well heck lets even take half that 17,500, that's a .069% population that is being allowed to affect the entire community with this change.
More than 12? Well then we could even make that 12 a 200. That's 1.14% of the forum population.
My point is that even if that 12 was way, way, way larger and we assumed an even way, way, way smaller active population on the forums of that 35k registered that is still an extremely small portion of people you are using as justification for changing an entire system that affects the entire community. That just doesn't make sense.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Yes the devs and mods obviously don't have all this information which allowed them to ban said offenders and bot accounts.They also obviously can't be trusted because gasp some people don't like what they say because you have a different opinion than them.
Do you see the hypocrisy of that statement where you say on the one hand people can disagree with @Orion and then in the exact same post say the devs can't be trusted because your disagrees with them.
1 -
Now that hit me hard. I always thought my LOLs came from providing funny content. I would never have expected that people were just making fun of me. I wish I was kidding but I'm not... Oh man, and this on a Monday, got me fully depressed again.
1 -
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.2 -
@OrionsFury4789 said: I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.tbh I see that specifically as a good thing. Because if someone is a ######### enough poster that they need ratings to survive on a forum then it's better that they're forced to post and either improve their online habits or get banned.
That being said that sentiment is useless if moderation doesn't actually enforce rules. We don't need hand holding but if someone is blatantly trying to derail because they're upset about a topic they shouldn't be posting. Although everyone I've seen post like that has been banned so far so I can't say it's a massive issue although I understand where you're coming from with the DBD community and all.
2 -
@OrionsFury4789 said:
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.Then those people will get banned and the forum will be all the better for it. That's what we call a win-win.
1 -
Hopefully you’re rightOrion said:@OrionsFury4789 said:
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.Then those people will get banned and the forum will be all the better for it. That's what we call a win-win.
0 -
@Orion said:
@OrionsFury4789 said:
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.Then those people will get banned and the forum will be all the better for it. That's what we call a win-win.
I highly doubt that.
0 -
@Wolf74 said:
@Orion said:
@OrionsFury4789 said:
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.Then those people will get banned and the forum will be all the better for it. That's what we call a win-win.
I highly doubt that.
Well considering all the accounts that most likely got banned and now they have no troll tool to use.
0
