The Race to be Relegated with Wolves, 24/25 Thread

[Tony Towner]

How dare I use a feature of the site?!

I appreciate you are neurodiverse Mark, so it might not originally have appeared this way to you... However you have been told on numerous occasions that just laughing at people's posts, without replyling or engaging further just makes you look a cunt, yet you consciously choose to do so. Therefore the only conclusion to draw from that is you are deliberately acting like a cunt, all whilst responding in the disingenuous way you have above. Just interests me as to why it continues to be tolerated.

 

[AndyWolves]

Just add a nelson muntz for the sarcastic laugh reactions

 

[Wilf Wolf]

I appreciate you are neurodiverse Mark, so it might not originally have appeared this way to you... However you have been told on numerous occasions that just laughing at people's posts, without replyling or engaging further just makes you look a cunt, yet you consciously choose to do so. Therefore the only conclusion to draw from that is you are deliberately acting like a cunt, all whilst responding in the disingenuous way you have above. Just interests me as to why it continues to be tolerated.

I guess it doesn’t do any harm and acts as a reminder that if someone continuously acts like a shirt front they probably are.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I appreciate you are neurodiverse Mark, so it might not originally have appeared this way to you... However you have been told on numerous occasions that just laughing at people's posts, without replyling or engaging further just makes you look a cunt, yet you consciously choose to do so. Therefore the only conclusion to draw from that is you are deliberately acting like a cunt, all whilst responding in the disingenuous way you have above. Just interests me as to why it continues to be tolerated.

Is the first comment meant to be some sort of low key insult?

I use the reactions a lot because I don't always have time to reply with text or if I'm reading back through a long thread it seems pointless dragging up a post from hours/days ago. Sometimes posts just don't warrant a more detailed response.

I do find it interesting how it's only one particular reaction that ever seems to draw any attention from people though. No-one ever questions any of the others do they? No-one has ever questioned a like that I've seen - they're just happy to take that faceless bit of positive reinforcement and skip along on their merry way. The tune changes very quickly when something can be perceived in any way negatively though - suddenly egos become very fragile.

It's also interesting that some individuals who consider themselves to be put upon by these reactions have at times chosen to respond in kind, which I think cheapens their argument that they are potentially offensive or that other posters are using them to be intentionally offensive.

To my mind if people are willing to shout their views out in public then they have to be prepared for those views to be perceived in countless different ways by the audience that finds them. If people are overly concerned about the way their opinions are received by others then perhaps they'd be better served sharing those views in a more selective manner.

 

[Tony Towner]

No it's not an insult it's a factually accurate statement which helps to explain the way you see the world. I'd suggest the rest of your post reinforces that.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Didn't realise you were a qualified medical professional.

 

[Banjo]

Is the first comment meant to be some sort of low key insult?

I use the reactions a lot because I don't always have time to reply with text or if I'm reading back through a long thread it seems pointless dragging up a post from hours/days ago. Sometimes posts just don't warrant a more detailed response.

I do find it interesting how it's only one particular reaction that ever seems to draw any attention from people though. No-one ever questions any of the others do they? No-one has ever questioned a like that I've seen - they're just happy to take that faceless bit of positive reinforcement and skip along on their merry way. The tune changes very quickly when something can be perceived in any way negatively though - suddenly egos become very fragile.

It's also interesting that some individuals who consider themselves to be put upon by these reactions have at times chosen to respond in kind, which I think cheapens their argument that they are potentially offensive or that other posters are using them to be intentionally offensive.

To my mind if people are willing to shout their views out in public then they have to be prepared for those views to be perceived in countless different ways by the audience that finds them. If people are overly concerned about the way their opinions are received by others then perhaps they'd be better served sharing those views in a more selective manner.

You regularly use the laughing emoji to belittle people's posts. You did it to a post of mine on Monday, you do it to people all the time: a cowardly, drive-by "point and laugh", and nothing else. It's rude and it's immature. You wouldn't do it to someone in real life: actively laugh in someone's face when you disagree with what they're saying or find what they're saying to be ridiculous. It's your calling card, you do it all the fucking time, and it's tedious.

Your excuse that you do it because you don't have time to give people the benefit of a reply or explanation as to why you disagree with them (such as what Kenny said to Jinky about Moyes/Everton) is lame. If you don't have time to engage in a conversation, maybe lay off laughing in people's faces.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

You regularly use the laughing emoji to belittle people's posts. You did it to a post of mine on Monday, you do it to people all the time: a cowardly, drive-by "point and laugh", and nothing else. It's rude and it's immature. You wouldn't do it to someone in real life: actively laugh in someone's face when you disagree with what they're saying or find what they're saying to be ridiculous. It's your calling card, you do it all the fucking time, and it's tedious.

Your excuse that you do it because you don't have time to give people the benefit of a reply or explanation as to why you disagree with them (such as what Kenny said to Jinky about Moyes/Everton) is lame. If you don't have time to engage in a conversation, maybe lay off laughing in people's faces.

If something makes me laugh then I use the laughing reaction - surely that's what it's there for?

People taking this high and mighty stance like they only ever laugh with people but never at people is frankly, laughable. As said earlier, no-one craves explanation of a like or other positive reaction do they? So why do they become so needy when they perceive the reaction to be negative? If a lack of time isn't sufficient reasoning for using reactions over text responses then why have them on the forum at all? Make people type out their agreement every time and if they simply don't have time to engage in conversation then their agreement will never be known.

Are posters really so vain?

 

[Banjo]

It's been pointed out to you on countless occasions that people find it rude and condescending. Yet you persist with it because you don't care how it affects other people's experience of using this site.

I assume the emoji exists for people in good faith to show their appreciation when they find something that someone else has said to be amusing - not to belittle someone's post with a childish laugh in their face.

I'd have had more respect for you if you put your hands up and admitted you did it because you're on a wind-up (it cannot have taken you by surprise that people dislike it). Instead, you've tried to come up with a justification ("I'm too busy") and then said that those of us who take offence at being mocked by you all the time are "vain".

Grow up.

 

[Alan]

People taking this high and mighty stance like they only ever laugh with people but never at people is frankly, laughable.

This is such a crock.

The fact that we all have the capacity to be shitty does not, and will never give anybody a free pass to be shitty just for fucking funsies.

Your reactions reap what they sow.

 

[Haggstone]

No idea why these bloody emojis were brought back in the first place tbh. What I would say is if you score a laughing emoji off Mark it means he’s laughing at you rather than with you. Sarcasm and passive aggressiveness all rolled into one little emoji.

He’s not the only one that does it though, in fact a poster who some people were scrambling to have a ban overturned for not so long ago was even more prolific with it.

 

[AndyWolves]

Can only assume MaJ is feeding

 

[Haggstone]

If something makes me laugh then I use the laughing reaction - surely that's what it's there for?

People taking this high and mighty stance like they only ever laugh with people but never at people is frankly, laughable. As said earlier, no-one craves explanation of a like or other positive reaction do they? So why do they become so needy when they perceive the reaction to be negative? If a lack of time isn't sufficient reasoning for using reactions over text responses then why have them on the forum at all? Make people type out their agreement every time and if they simply don't have time to engage in conversation then their agreement will never be known.

Are posters really so vain?

A simple thumbs up, means 'I agree ' so in the context of a discussion forum requires little additional input.

Laughing at someone via emoji without providing further context is, both ill mannered but also ambiguous, because its not clear what it is the person is dissagreing with, and therefore has no place on a discussion board, IMO.

Nothing to do with vanity.

Edit. Correction, vanity does play a part, most people don't particularly like being ridiculed, but then you clearly know that already, but do it anyway. Says a lot.

 

[Kenny]

The has its place for me and I wouldn't want it binned.

Giving that reaction to a post I find funny is a million times better than it was before where people would just quote the comment and respond with a or whatever and if a particular good laugh followed that could be a page and a bit of it being quoted

 

[Trips]

The has its place for me and I wouldn't want it binned.

Giving that reaction to a post I find funny is a million times better than it was before where people would just quote the comment and respond with a or whatever and if a particular good laugh followed that could be a page and a bit of it being quoted

You never had a post get quoted that much, admit it

 

[MARKakaJIM]

A simple thumbs up, means 'I agree ' so in the context of a discussion forum requires little additional input.

Laughing at someone via emoji without providing further context is, both ill mannered but also ambiguous, because its not clear what it is the person is dissagreing with, and therefore has no place on a discussion board, IMO.

Nothing to do with vanity.

Edit. Correction, vanity does play a part, most people don't particularly like being ridiculed, but then you clearly know that already, but do it anyway. Says a lot.

They're all ambiguous - they're the same form of expression. It's just that when it's positive people don't feel the need to question which part of the post someone else liked.

If the reactions are that much of an issue for people then lobby the mods to get rid of them, if it's just the ones they perceive to be negative that they don't like them campaign against those. I don't really care either way. As long as they're a feature of the site and I have the freedom to use this site then I'll use them, and all other features of the site, as I see fit. Just the same as anyone else should.

 

[Kenny]

You never had a post get quoted that much, admit it

I was talking about how I react of course not how people react to me.

Off to start a spreadsheet now though and if you fuckers don't laugh at everything (with or at me is fine)...

 

[jd1981]

Couple of things whilst the emoji is there it’s free to use without breaking any rules.
Nevertheless I don’t like it and using that as an excuse is just hiding behind a technicality.
There’s only one intention involved in the use of it, simply to demean a post but do it with no way of anyone responding to it.
Trying to describe it in any other way ie like it’s a quick response when busy.
Sorry if you’re that busy why are you on a forum? Are you seriously suggesting you have enough time to read a post but then not enough time to respond?
Frankly there’s other emojis you can use or a thumbs down. Simply states you don’t agree with a post in a none insulting way.

 

[BillyDee]

a thumbs down

This might be a better option if possible?

 

[thisisgil]

we had a deano but people got sensitive.

Thanks Kamala.