If I'm reading a repair thread and someone took the time to type out a paragraph or two of help, and I am reading that information, and I see that someone else gave it a thumbs down, why on earth would I consider the thumbs down as part of the conversation? I wouldn't. What, someone who cannot be bothered to post their way of fixing the problem actually hopes I will devalue the person who did take the time for me? I have a game to fix. I am not wasting my time with somebody who can't join in to help but still wants me to follow him, that he is the true Repair Jesus, and all he offers is... nothing.

Do you see the disconnect in imputing value into the thumbs down thing? Only the person who does the thumbs down imagines more value in it than the ones who see it. I don't have ESP. I have a game to fix. Step in, or step out.

Interestingly, if those who disagree can't bother to explain, it's a win-win, as they voted themselves off the island and told us who they were.

And we call that communication. Like what I'm about to say.

There's generally only one way to agree with someone while plenty of ways to disagree. A thumbs-up indicates agreement with the thing that was said. For that, an explanation is truly unnecessary, as we already know what they agree with because someone already took the time to type it out. A thumbs-down doesn't impart to the reader which of the plenty of ways disagreement is had. Only the person who gives the thumbs down knows their reason of the many and therefore has both parts of it: the posted info plus the reason they disagree with it. No doubt the person who thumbs down sees great value in it because of this. The person who thumbs down is the only one that has this satisfaction of knowing both parts. Makes sense that they'd defend thumbs-down. It pleases them. The rest of us see a list of thumbs-downers who want to self-identify as self-pleased people who deny us to share in their satisfaction of knowing which of the many ways do they disagree. The pleasure is only theirs. Is what I am saying too subtle to be understood? To prove it, have you not read the posts where people explain why they do the thumbs down? They tell us what it means to... themselves, seemingly not as concerned that we can never memorize all of their intentions by it but, hey, we have been duly notified and are only notified because they see they are losing this thumbs-down capability, so one wonders if they ever cared about our satisfaction as much as they care about their own. So, down go those thumbs! They are proud to tell us that they disagree! That much they want us to know!

Yes, one can communicate in many ways and forms but not all are helpful. Some are self-serving. In your example of a flipped bird, once again you chose to communicate with a symbol that served only yourself. Your pleasure was paramount. You denied the 'why' to your recipient. It's all about you, I contend.

If Robin built a way to show a flipped bird signal and you clicked it, I would not know why you disagreed but I would know that you disagreed and with contempt. Right? I still would not know why you disagreed. No one itty bitty symbol communicates the why.

I am talking about communication that is on-topic and, uh, useful to the recipient.

I am reluctant to single you out for my next question so please do not feel singled out. I'll risk asking it. Feel free to not answer it, as I am really asking not you in particular but am asking any proponent of the thumbs-down thing.

By giving a thumbs down, why is it so important to you to announce to everyone that you disagree, and then you cut out and disappear on everyone? I didn't say you went anonymous, we see your avatar and username, but who out there cares more than you do, that you announce yourself in this unhelpful way? Who more than you?

If the original post is a succinct, non-complex statement with only two polarities, I can grasp that a thumbs-down is saying, "I believe in the inverse of your statement". I get that.

But, when the post is a repair issue of length, or is a complex statement or statements, or covers more ideas than just one, then with a thumbs-down you're essentially saying, "I know something that is better than what is said here, and I'm not bothering to tell you." That's the paralanguage that is received. Who needs to hear someone gloat? Nobody. Think about it. Nobody gains with that except the one who gave the thumbs down. You can suggest all day long that you are altruistic, helping your fellow pinsider, but that's no help. Whatever is gained by it profits the person who gave the thumbs down most of all.

I don't feel picked on, thanks for the concern. In turn, I am worried that I write unnecessarily sharply.

I don't feel it's necessary for everyone to explain themselves. Mostly, I am being Socratic in that I pose questions for thought more than trying to arm wrestle anyone and pin them to the mat. I decided to post in this thread because I felt that the reasons given for giving thumbs down instead of an explanation often seemed to be tinged with some idea of being helpful to other pinsiders by it, and I think that is what some people who thumbs down tell themselves. I'm not buying it. From where I sit, in most cases it's ego at work. I'd have to have quite the ego to go around with my thumb, vanilla disagrees with this, vanilla disagrees with that, while keeping my thoughts about this and that in the shadows like a troll. But, variety is what makes a forum. I can't knock it. I'm just opining like the next guy.

Respectfully, sir, you have not obliged me. You think you have, but you haven't. Obliging me would be to entertain my questions as to your motives. Instead, you have only restated your earlier position that if you disagree with a particular statement and don't want a debate, you show it by giving a thumbs-down. Thank you for your time this last post, but I already knew that from you. No worries, I am not holding you to answer to my Socratic Method.

But wait, there's more of it!

Have you considered that disagreeing with someone and stating your position why, does not have to be a debate unless you make it one? That is, you can state why you disagree with a post in lieu of a thumbs-down and be done with it. It's easy-peasy. If some next pinsider shows his lack of skill and twists it into an unwanted debate, that is when you ghost.

And that includes me. If you feel you have stated your case to me, and if you think I am trying to draw you into a debate, then ghost me. At least we together did more than swap our damn thumbs! That's what I call a forum.

To answer your question, I don't know. From what you wrote, the helpers are not posting only thumbs down as was my beef but they are actively posting advice. Then others accuse (again not something one does with their thumb) these helpers? Perhaps they are continuing a private conflict and holding everyone else in need of repair advice hostage to it? I think you are being kind be calling such people odd, and I bet if we knew more of what was behind it, odd would not be the best word to use for what we'd know! I am grateful for every morsel of repair advice that I get. I admire the quality of sharing to help.

Some websites show ads to all users but provide the option that each user can make the ads vanish by giving money. In this way, those who prefer to contribute money instead of seeing ads can do that, and those who would rather see the ads than contribute money can have their way as well.

He's moved over to RGP...

duplicate

How about either of these ideas?

Idea 1) Bring back the thumbs down, and as long as users are signed in, they can do a thumbs down, but, no one, not even the one who downvotes, sees any thumbs down totals on ANY post while signed-in. Only those who are NOT signed into the site will see the thumbs down tally in each post.

This satisfies the signed-in user who wants to downvote a comment to get his/her need to disagree met, conveniently.
This satisfies the signed-in user who does not want to see the downvotes and get agitated by them.
This allows the newbies who have not yet become registered members, and also the lurkers who chance by the site, and anyone else who is not signed-in, to see the downvotes, as a way to satisfy those downvote advocates who say that their downvotes help those who do not yet know better in what they read here.

Because signed-in users do not see the tallies, this should placate those users who believe that some users give thumbs-down not based on personal integrity but for lesser reasons such as they see a high-count of negative votes and want to join the smack-down, or just want to feel they belong, or like to game the system, or are just jerks, or see that their buddy gave a downvote so they want to as well, making the downvote into a popularity contest, or have a compulsive need to make themselves known, or any of those less-than-noble reasons that are disliked by those who would not have those reasons and would not want to see them quantified.

Advocates of downvoting say they do it because they disagree with the post. They don't say that they do it because they were influenced by the existing downvote count that they saw in the post. Therefore these advocates should not insist that they need to see these tallies prior to casting their downvote. Right? Good. For those downvoters who still want to see who else downvoted, for those downvoters who give social meaning to their downvote, for those downvoters who essentially are human beings with these legitimate desires, they can sign-off and take a look anytime. In exchange for having been given this convenient wordless way to express their opinion, their possibly contentious opinion, they can sign-off and take a look, knowing that a few extra keystrokes on their part to meet their own extra needs serves a greater good than what we had before. They are big enough to do that much. Keep in mind, all registered users would have to be as big, if they were as curious.

For those remaining downvoters and any upvoters who read the above and believe they would have to sign-in, sign-off, sign-in, sign-off, just to get through a thread, well that is elective behavior and if you really follow the downvoting to that degree then now we are talking about something obsessive perhaps, people who are living a side life inside this downvoting thing, a choice outside of giving feedback.

Idea 2) Bring back the thumbs down but forget Idea 1 and just have a toggle button in your profile to globally suppress the downvote count so that each user can decide if he/she wants to see them or not.

You single me out because I am not one of the in-crowd here and we both know it.

I have always posted for good will and I count on people to discern this. I have never singled out anyone here for a put-down.

I think both thumbs up/down as default would be best. To show what features you have. Kinda like when I buy new software sometimes. Some companies turn on all the bells and whistles right out of the box so that the customer can see what it can do, then I'll methodically turn off the ones I won't need/use.