I have never paid attention to scores on this site. I have always thought the LOL button had two purposes based on context. 1) to ridicule ignorant comments without having replying, and 2) to laugh at genuinely funny comments.
At least those are the two contexts i always use LOL with.
If LOL is meant to be a form of agreement then there should be a thumbs down button. It doesn't make much sense to have 3 buttons that do the same thing.
+1 , Insightful , agree and awesome ...and then lol is all the same but with a twist
Negative responses therefore require someone to make a post, and people are lazy, so that naturally reduces the vitriol.
That and moderation...
And to be fair all in all the MMORpg mod team is fairly lenient. As long as you attack the topic and not the person making it... You can get away with a fair amount of venom.
IIRC, the laws of "Good Social Media Practice" dictate that only positive reinforcement should be allowed for one-click user responses.
Hence no quick buttons for "Disagree" or "Awful" or "Idiot" !
Negative responses therefore require someone to make a post, and people are lazy, so that naturally reduces the vitriol.
Fuck this!
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
For me LOL stands for "Ludicrous Online Lies" (thanks to AboveTopSecret.com for that) meaning any absurd comment meant to be taken seriously. If I find something actually funny I will give you an "Awesome" for it.
The More You Know!
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
I have never paid attention to scores on this site. I have always thought the LOL button had two purposes based on context. 1) to ridicule ignorant comments without having replying, and 2) to laugh at genuinely funny comments.
At least those are the two contexts i always use LOL with.
If LOL is meant to be a form of agreement then there should be a thumbs down button. It doesn't make much sense to have 3 buttons that do the same thing.
Same two contexts I use and assume others use it for and in most cases I can tell whether people are laughing with me or at me. As someone mentioned, all counts towards positive forum points.
When they first rolled this new system out people were clamouring for a disagree or down vote button and Bill explained the reasoning why they would never do so.
When it was pointed out LOL could be used in a negative manner he acknowledged this was true, and if it became a problem at some point they would consider removing it as well.
Judging how some folks take strong offense to having LOLs dropped on their posts I can see their point.
A true "negative" button would only be worse and we sure have no problem expressing our negativity around here.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Sometimes it's a way of just looking at the post as sarcasm (hence the LoL). Much like listening to leftist sjw libtards. All you can really do is laugh as they can't provide any argument.
The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin. Both think they know everything, but in reality are just full of shit.
The difference I am seeing is one is able to present evidence and facts with an argument, the other is not.
I have to disagree. The far right doesn't do well with facts. Neither does the far left. That's obvious by the far right denying proven science like climate change and the far left denying proven science like Vaccines and GMOs.
Sometimes it's a way of just looking at the post as sarcasm (hence the LoL). Much like listening to leftist sjw libtards. All you can really do is laugh as they can't provide any argument.
The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin. Both think they know everything, but in reality are just full of shit.
The difference I am seeing is one is able to present evidence and facts with an argument, the other is not.
Since this post is both absurd as well as funny, you get a second LOL... The far right uses facts lmao...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sometimes it's a way of just looking at the post as sarcasm (hence the LoL). Much like listening to leftist sjw libtards. All you can really do is laugh as they can't provide any argument.
The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin. Both think they know everything, but in reality are just full of shit.
The difference I am seeing is one is able to present evidence and facts with an argument, the other is not.
Since this post is both absurd as well as funny, you get a second LOL... The far right uses facts lmao...
In the words of Sponge Bob, I'm not laughing at you. I'm laughing next to you.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Not sure why it matters. Who cares about "post score"?
Only people with low scores of course.
My score must be extremely low, I don't even know where you check it.........or care to learn.
“It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better.”
LOL is my favorite one, it means you made someone laugh or/and the post is/was funny. I always like comedy and cheering people up Sometimes people can be too negative and/or serious lol
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
The best ones are the ones who go "How DARE you give me LOL's?!" and post a rant thread about it.
I don't think that's quite the case here... but I've seen a few do it.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Sometimes it's a way of just looking at the post as sarcasm (hence the LoL). Much like listening to leftist sjw libtards. All you can really do is laugh as they can't provide any argument.
The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin. Both think they know everything, but in reality are just full of shit.
The difference I am seeing is one is able to present evidence and facts with an argument, the other is not.
I have to disagree. The far right doesn't do well with facts. Neither does the far left. That's obvious by the far right denying proven science like climate change and the far left denying proven science like Vaccines and GMOs.
Skeptic: Why did most of the warming that you're claiming is caused by greenhouse gases occur between 1920 and 1940, when atmospheric greenhouse gas amounts were a fraction of what they are now?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why was there no significant warming between 1945 and 1980, when atmospheric greenhouse gas amounts were increasing exponentially?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why has the warming since 1995 been essentially negligible despite atmospheric carbon dioxide amounts continuing to increase exponentially?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why were the Romans able to grow grapes in England and the Vikings able to grow barley in Greenland, which is impossible today due to the climate, despite not having any significant amounts of anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at that time?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: So, what proof do you have of anthropogenic climate change?
Climatologist: A 97% consensus among scientists!
Skeptic: The same scientists who are being showered with billions in funding from the UN and various governments because they claim that a climate apocalypse is coming?
Climatologist: ...
I'm not saying that the far right doesn't do that on certain issues, but they do it a lot less than the far left, and climate change in particular is just a hoax. If you wanted to use a 'proven science' example, you should've just gone with evolution.
It's not even 97%. , Of the 2500 scientists that were asked the question only a small fraction responded. 97% of those that responded said yes to this question. Do you think humans have had impact on climate?
I agree. I think we have had an impact. And that's all I'll say.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Comments
Meaning, I'm both lazy and unable to support my position.
Also, there's option 2: which is finding the post genuinely amusing.
Hence no quick buttons for "Disagree" or "Awful" or "Idiot" !
Negative responses therefore require someone to make a post, and people are lazy, so that naturally reduces the vitriol.
That and moderation...
And to be fair all in all the MMORpg mod team is fairly lenient. As long as you attack the topic and not the person making it... You can get away with a fair amount of venom.
This have been a good conversation
The More You Know!
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
When they first rolled this new system out people were clamouring for a disagree or down vote button and Bill explained the reasoning why they would never do so.
When it was pointed out LOL could be used in a negative manner he acknowledged this was true, and if it became a problem at some point they would consider removing it as well.
Judging how some folks take strong offense to having LOLs dropped on their posts I can see their point.
A true "negative" button would only be worse and we sure have no problem expressing our negativity around here.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
--John Ruskin
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
What you say is almost correct, but even though I agree with the post I still find it funny, thus you get a LOL from me.
I don't think that's quite the case here... but I've seen a few do it.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
1. Good. Thanks for posting that!
2. I disagree.
3. You are an asshole.
4. I disagree and by the way you are an asshole.
No LOL at all.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why was there no significant warming between 1945 and 1980, when atmospheric greenhouse gas amounts were increasing exponentially?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why has the warming since 1995 been essentially negligible despite atmospheric carbon dioxide amounts continuing to increase exponentially?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: Why were the Romans able to grow grapes in England and the Vikings able to grow barley in Greenland, which is impossible today due to the climate, despite not having any significant amounts of anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at that time?
Climatologist: ...
Skeptic: So, what proof do you have of anthropogenic climate change?
Climatologist: A 97% consensus among scientists!
Skeptic: The same scientists who are being showered with billions in funding from the UN and various governments because they claim that a climate apocalypse is coming?
Climatologist: ...
I'm not saying that the far right doesn't do that on certain issues, but they do it a lot less than the far left, and climate change in particular is just a hoax. If you wanted to use a 'proven science' example, you should've just gone with evolution.
I agree. I think we have had an impact. And that's all I'll say.