[deleted]
Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
141–150 of 238 posts
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#142Why is the thumbs up a white hand, and thumbs down is a yellow hand?!
It's a social commentary
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#143Why is the thumbs up a white hand, and thumbs down is a yellow hand?!
They are both yellow for me on Fedora 22, one is just a flipped version of the other
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#144-1 or the thumbs down reaction, I think is a mistake. They aren't usually that constructive, because most of the time they are used as retaliation against a specific user, instead of constructive criticism. If someone downvotes you, you tend to downvote them. At the least, it should be a privilege to down vote, like SO and HN do. http://stackoverflow.com/help/privileges/vote-down
Combining +1 and -1 is a mistake. It would be useful to see thumbs-up separate from thumbs-down to get a gut feel for contention.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People who don't agree with something should have a way of expressing their views What about a comment? Once someone elaborates why they disagree, others can trivially +1 it to show support of a specific disagreement. On the other hand, you can disagree with both the original comment and someone's disagreement, prompting an additional "disagreement" reply. Note that -1's don't carry as much information as you'd thi…
+1s could mean -Someone agrees with you -Someone likes you -Someone is happy or having a good day -Someone is repaying a favor or maintaining a friendship.
The difference is when you +1, you're publically expressing agreement with what they wrote. If someone you like writes something you don't agree with, you wouldn't +1 them. If you're having a good day, you still wouldn't blindly dish out +1's because if you +1 a controversial comment, it could hurt your reputation.
Negation is different because it's entirely ambiguous. You can dish them out freely and retroactively rationalize your intention. -1's are way more susceptible to knee-jerk emotional reactions than +1's.
A relevant example. Think of the political candidate you like the most. If someone you really like asks you to +1 a persuasive argument about their competitor, would you? On the other hand, if they asked you to -1 someone, you probably would. Even if you knew very little about them.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed 100% for Facebook or even Hacker News, however on GitHub it would be really useful for voting. If you ask "Should we add this feature?", it's hard to understand what favorites mean if you don't have an anchor. Does 10 thumbs-up mean unanimous support, or is it just a small minority? It'd be nice to say "Oh, 10 upvotes... but there's 90 downvotes, so we won't do it." FB and Hacker News are a marketplace of rela…
Commenting should be how people down vote. You should have to explain why it's not a good idea. Then if others agree with you, your comment will get up voted. Just as my comment is a downvote of github's downvote.
The context of this feature is that users were using comments to react without providing substance. The primary motivation is to reduce the visual clutter of non-substantive comments.
While we can agree about what users should do, users not behaving as we think they should is the whole point here. Removing the -1 reaction won't encourage people to articulate their concerns. Nor will it discourage people from writing comments that explain why something is not a good idea. It simply provides a mechanism for people to register disagreement that is less obtrusive than the mechanism they would otherwise use. A cavalcade of -1's as comments obscures and thereby prevents substantive discussion.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#147Well, I think a voting pool is more practical than manually counting upvote/downvote of every comment. I don't know how often the maintainers will come back and see how an issue is going and see which comments are popular. Also, sorting comments is not fun because of duplicated contents.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that the -1 button definitely has a place on Github. I use Github a lot for discussing future feature development, and in that context it is really valuable to see how many people think a feature is useful or not. Github isn't primarily a social network. In a professional context it is essential that you can also express disagreement, or that you think something is a bad idea.
In a professional context it is essential that people can express disagreement provided they write exact reasons why they disagree. You know, "+1" usually has only one meaning: - "I agree with whatever you're saying". "-1" has however two separate meanings: - "I disagree with whatever you're saying because I believe that blah-blah-blah (reasons here)" - "I disagree with whatever you're saying because fuck you that's…
If somebody gives your comment a -1 without a reason, and you are of the opinion that disagreement is only valid given a precise argument - can't you just ignore the -1's?
I'm not sure why this is such an emotional topic. Maybe I just have thick skin, but some random stranger on the internet giving me a down vote is not really even going to give me a moment of pause. Let alone so much that I feel that I have to demand rationalization from every person that cares to disagree with me.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Commenting should be how people down vote. You should have to explain why it's not a good idea. Then if others agree with you, your comment will get up voted. Just as my comment is a downvote of github's downvote.
The context of this feature is that users were using comments to react without providing substance. The primary motivation is to reduce the visual clutter of non-substantive comments. While we can agree about what users should do, users not behaving as we think they should is the whole point here. Removing the -1 reaction won't encourage people to articulate their concerns. Nor will it discourage people from writing…
It's naive to think that users will prefer the discreet way of expressing disapproval. They want to be loud.
Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
>you never ever ever implement a downvote button of any kind. People who don't agree with something should have a way of expressing their views. Why is it acceptable to have a +1 button but not a -1 button? Why can people agree without giving any reason for their agreement but they can't disagree without giving any reason for their agreement? It's crazy that society works in this way and that people have such an irra…
> People who don't agree with something should have a way of expressing their views. Why is it acceptable to have a +1 button but not a -1 button? Why can people agree without giving any reason for their agreement but they can't disagree without giving any reason for their agreement? Because when you agree, that means the argument has already been presented - specifically, it's the argument that you are agreeing with…
That is not the case for disagreement, where a counter-argument must exist, but has not been voiced yet.
Someone shouldn't have to expect to come up with an alternative just to voice the idea that something sucks.
This idea leaves you vulnerable to the "something must be done, this is something, therefore we do it" problem by unfairly biasing positive votes rather than negative ones. Yes, I read your rationale. I don't agree with it.