Hm. Initially, I wasn’t thinking of anti-reactions as being about the reaction. I saw it as symmetrical, like the agree/disagree spectrum. But because anti-reacts can hide the react altogether, they are not symmetric.
Thinking some more about it, I think I don’t want reacts to be hidden by anti-reacts.
I think my clarity argument is weak anyway. In my experience, it is rare that there are many reacts anyway. On our Slack where there are frequent reacts, most people just strengthen the ones already there and I have seen only a couple comments with more than eight different ones (big celebrations or fun ones).
My suggestion for a solution is to drop anti-reacts and offer pairs of reacts instead.
agreement and disagreement
clear and muddled
And always show these next to each other if present.
Hm. Initially, I wasn’t thinking of anti-reactions as being about the reaction. I saw it as symmetrical, like the agree/disagree spectrum. But because anti-reacts can hide the react altogether, they are not symmetric.
Thinking some more about it, I think I don’t want reacts to be hidden by anti-reacts.
I think my clarity argument is weak anyway. In my experience, it is rare that there are many reacts anyway. On our Slack where there are frequent reacts, most people just strengthen the ones already there and I have seen only a couple comments with more than eight different ones (big celebrations or fun ones).
My suggestion for a solution is to drop anti-reacts and offer pairs of reacts instead.
agreement and disagreement
clear and muddled
And always show these next to each other if present.