I found this distasteful. Justifying your opinions? In response to a resolution that has no impact on you? That such presumption is encouraged is a discouraging sign.
You don’t see anything wrong with posting two mutually-contradictory resolutions, one of which is an obvious reaction to downvoting? I downvoted Clippy on the metric of ‘I would prefer to see less of this’. I don’t actually care whether he justifies his opinions, but I do care whether people in the future are likely to reverse their opinion for the sole purpose of gaining forum approval.
Just to state the obvious: to the extent that your conditioning paradigm has an effect, it will cause someone primarily motivated by gaining forum approval, if they state an opinion that garners disapproval, will reverse their stated opinion and claim some other motive.
Of course, if you don’t actually care whether they are likely to reverse their opinion solely to gain approval, merely whether they are likely to say that that’s what they’re doing, then that should be OK.
I think people are more responsive to this kind of conditioning when they know they are signaling an agreement than when they actually have a disagreement, especially because downvoting makes the signaling appear useless to the signaler.
if you don’t actually care whether they are likely to reverse their opinion solely to gain approval, merely whether they are likely to say that that’s what they’re doing, then that should be OK
I can live with that. Most justifications are post-hoc rationalisation anyway, and at least more interesting motives are more interesting to read and may even be somewhat insightful or useful to the original poster as a form of self-signalling.
Let’s not pretend the second comment was anything but a question. An attempt to elicit just what the sentiment means. See the punctuation if you have any doubt.
I downvoted Clippy on the metric of ‘I would prefer to see less of this’.
If that was all you had done I would not have been disgusted that your comment was not subzero.
I found this distasteful. Justifying your opinions? In response to a resolution that has no impact on you? That such presumption is encouraged is a discouraging sign.
You don’t see anything wrong with posting two mutually-contradictory resolutions, one of which is an obvious reaction to downvoting? I downvoted Clippy on the metric of ‘I would prefer to see less of this’. I don’t actually care whether he justifies his opinions, but I do care whether people in the future are likely to reverse their opinion for the sole purpose of gaining forum approval.
Just to state the obvious: to the extent that your conditioning paradigm has an effect, it will cause someone primarily motivated by gaining forum approval, if they state an opinion that garners disapproval, will reverse their stated opinion and claim some other motive.
Of course, if you don’t actually care whether they are likely to reverse their opinion solely to gain approval, merely whether they are likely to say that that’s what they’re doing, then that should be OK.
I think people are more responsive to this kind of conditioning when they know they are signaling an agreement than when they actually have a disagreement, especially because downvoting makes the signaling appear useless to the signaler.
I can live with that. Most justifications are post-hoc rationalisation anyway, and at least more interesting motives are more interesting to read and may even be somewhat insightful or useful to the original poster as a form of self-signalling.
Let’s not pretend the second comment was anything but a question. An attempt to elicit just what the sentiment means. See the punctuation if you have any doubt.
If that was all you had done I would not have been disgusted that your comment was not subzero.