Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments • Hacker News Board

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#151

Post by goldenkey » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:37 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #97

gkoberger wrote: post #88

Earlier 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…

Internally when voting (informally) on things we do +1, +0, -0, and -1. Super helpful to be able to ask for everyone's opinion while they can also express the strength of their opinion. Feel like that would be very useful

+0 and -0 are equal..

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#152

Post by mrredbit » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:41 AM UTC

matthuggins wrote: post #63

Lazare wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seriously, GitHub, this is rule one of designing constructive social platforms: you never ever ever implement a downvote button of any kind. It seems ironic you'd post this on a platform that has a downvote button.

Says the guy commenting on HackerNews, which also offers a downvote button. :)

There is nothing irony, you are saying people living in totalitarianism country can't fight for democracy.

We are not just using the system, we use the system here to improve the system itself that's why people call it constructive community.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#153

Post by Karunamon » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:43 AM UTC

rlidwka wrote: post #131

jakobegger wrote: post #94

Earlier 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…

You know, "+1" usually has only one meaning:

Nonsense.

    - Agreement: "I agree with whatever you're saying" 
    - Contributory : "I don't agree with what you're saying, but you elaborated your point *very* well and contributed to the discussion"
    - Mercy: "I don't agree with what you're saying, but the hivemind punished you for no good reason, have an upvote"
    - Popularity: "I like you and will +1 anything you write"
    - Thanks: "I like what you did even if this post isn't relevant"

The second and third one are very common on sites like HN, certain places on Reddit, and Stack*

Downvotes have:

    - Disagreement: "I disagree with what you're saying"
    - Anger: "Fuck you, have a downvote"
    - Doesn't contribute: "I might agree, but you're not helping the discussion"
    - Incorrect: "This isn't about agreement, your advice is wrong and/or harmful"

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#154

Post by mclifton » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:48 AM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #150

joepie91_ wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Prior to reading these arguments I would have agreed. But I suppose I have to admit that I would prefer that someone said "This feature isn't necessary - feature Y is a perfectly good substitute" or even "this feature is inappropriate according to the goals of this project" and upvote those comments, rather than downvoting the original feature/pull request without giving a reason.

I'm not nearly as adamantly opposed to a downvote button, but I can understand the argument.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#155

Post by lccarrasco » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:48 AM UTC

goldenkey wrote: post #151

rtpg wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internally when voting (informally) on things we do +1, +0, -0, and -1. Super helpful to be able to ask for everyone's opinion while they can also express the strength of their opinion. Feel like that would be very useful

+0 and -0 are equal..

I believe the implied meaning is:

+0 -> support from the sidelines (like for a change that doesn't directly affect you)/something that's not urgent but would be nice

-0 -> disagree from the sidelines/disagree with the solution but can't think of a better one

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#156

Post by yawaramin » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:55 AM UTC

tamana wrote: post #149

spoondan wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Users are also lazy (I know I am). Give them a two-click way to do something, and they'll use it over a click, emoji-hunt-and-type, and click.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#157

Post by bhaumik » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:55 AM UTC

First* Slack, then Facebook, and now GitHub. Looks like reactions are replacing (or expanding on..) the unary like/upvote/heart expression for tech products.

*Or at least the first time I've seen them used as an important feature.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#158

Post by yawaramin » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:57 AM UTC

joeyespo wrote: post #107

gkoberger wrote: post #88

Earlier 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…

Sounds like a pre-optimization. You can get the same level of information with two comments and vote exclusively with +1's, but without the general negative aspects of what's mentioned above.

Right, if you're asking every single issue poster ever to remember to post two comments specifically for voting, versus just posting their issue itself.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#159

Post by qwyxzy » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 2:58 AM UTC

brbcoding wrote: post #114

dpflan wrote: post #9

I like the idea of adding more expressiveness, pictorially capturing sometimes fleeting moments of emotion or accurately representing an emotional state that can occur. These are the following reactions: 1. +1 2. -1 3. smile 4. thinking_face 5. heart 6. tada Do they capture the necessary expressiveness for the context? Facebook's reactions cover more emotions, but FB is trying to support reaction to anything that can…

I actually don't have :thinking_face: but have :confused: instead.

I think GitHub wanted an option to express "I don't understand this," and decided :confused: was a better fit. Which makes sense, because :thinking_face: could mean "I'm considering this" or "Interesting point," which is not, I think, what that option is meant to convey.

Re: Add Reactions to Pull Requests, Issues, and Comments

#160

Post by franciscop » Fri, Mar 11, 2016, 3:04 AM UTC

Awesome! Just a niptick, I think the reaction action should be near where the interface is. So either change the icon to make a reaction to bottom left, or change where it's shown to the right (where milestone, tags, etc are).

This way you get better feedback.