Facebook Is Testing a Dislike Button (thedailybeast.com)

Ever since the inception of the Like button, Facebook users have been asking for a "dislike" button. Today, Facebook is testing a "downvote" button with certain users in the comment section of posts within Facebook groups and on old Facebook memories content. The Daily Beast reports: The feature appears to give users the ability to downrank certain comments. This is the first time Facebook has tested anything similar to a "dislike" button and it could theoretically allow for content that's offensive or relevant to be pushed to the bottom of a comment feed. In 2016, citing Facebook executives, Bloomberg said a dislike button "had been rejected on the grounds that it would sow too much negativity" to the platform. It's unclear how widely the dislike button is being tested. Facebook regularly tests features with small subsets of users that never end up rolling out to the broader public. Most users currently are only able to either Like or Reply to comments in a thread. The downvote option could have radical implications on what types of discussions and comments flourish on the platform. While it could theoretically be used to de-rank inflammatory or problematic comments, it could also easily be used as a tool for abuse.

Comments

This is incendiary

[postbigbang]

Like a grenade. You thought Facebook was bombastic before? Watch the fury when you can thumbs-down something. The cesspool will get deeper still. This doesn't do anything but start fights.

Re:This is incendiary

[un1nsp1red]

The difference is facebook is (ostensibly) limited to the people with whom you are *friends*. With reddit, anyone can up/downvote you. Facebook doesn't have the anonymity. I doubt the impact would be remotely comparable.

Re:This is incendiary

[Baron_Yam]

I'll see you that '(ostensibly) limited to the people with whom you are *friends*' and raise you a 'friends, but mostly people you want to measure yourself against to boost your weak self esteem in a petty popularity contest'.

Does Facebook allow you to see the likes and dislikes themselves on everything? Because if there isn't an account name tagged to each, it'll quickly turn to a shitshow.

In fact, I think it will even then, because it'll get personal a lot faster.

Re:This is incendiary

[Wycliffe]

The difference is facebook is (ostensibly) limited to the people with whom you are *friends*. With reddit, anyone can up/downvote you. Facebook doesn't have the anonymity. I doubt the impact would be remotely comparable.

Which is exactly why facebook should have anonymous dislikes and anonymous disagree buttons.
Most people already live in an echo chamber but that echo chamber is magnified because very few people
are willing to call their friends out when they post stuff they disagree with. By being allowed to
anonymously disagree with a post you could signal to a friend that you really didn't like their racist
or otherwise inflammatory post. They would know one of their friends disagreed with it which might give
them pause but they wouldn't know which friend. It also might encourage people to prune their
friend lists more often.

Re:This is incendiary

[shanen]

Is there a kernel of insight there? Hard to tell on so few words, but it doesn't matter since I never see a mod point of any sort.

You [postbigbang and the similar authors whose comments I've seen so far] didn't offer anything like a constructive suggestion. My basic suggestion (explained at more length below in my initial reactive comment on the story) is that the negative side should call for more effort. The negative sentiment should be less freely expressed than the positive to tilt the scales in favor of positive interactions. (Ditto earned public reputations.)

To be first?

[TWX]

How would you like to be the schmuck they tried this feature on on first?

"Mr. TWX, having reviewed your social-media footprint, we feel that you're a good fit for our new feature. We expect that dozens, nay HUNDREDS of dislikes will accrue on your posts. Please enjoy beta-testing this new feature!"

Be careful when you wish for symmetry!

[shanen]

I actually think that each of the subjective dimensions should be symmetric (on Facebook and even here on Slashdot), but the playing field should still be tilted in favor of the positive side. You want to make it easier for people to do and be good. In a simple implementation, clicking "Like" can be easy, while clicking "Dislike" can involve an extra step to say why.

However I think that Like-Dislike is basically a weak and almost meaningless dimension. In terms of meaning, I think you can argue that it should increase the general weight of a comment's positive ratings, but on its own there is little meaning to it. Therefore I think the better dimensions of sentiment should have clear meanings. Dimensions such as true-false (or informative-disinformative or valid-invalid) or funny-unfunny (to me). For example, if you say a comment is false, then you would have to indicate which part was false and why. (And if it turned out you are lying, then YOUR own reputation should suffer. More symmetry.)

(Bells and whistles in dimensional thinking for sentiments: I also think the dimensions should be able to evolve over time, and that the dimensions of earned public reputation should age to encourage people to act better and see their reputations gradually improve. People with earned negative reputations should be easier to filter against, thus allowing them to be as negative as they like for the (negative) benefit of people who actually want to spend their time that way. Also, a person who has an earned reputation in a particular dimension should get extra weight, as with a rating from a proven funny person (based on reactions from other people) counting more heavily in rating another comment as funny or unfunny.)

The clumsy, ad hoc, and poorly considered dimensions of Slashdot's moderation are an excellent example of how NOT to do it. Take that "troll" dimension, for example. (I wish someone would.) What is it supposed to mean? I think that the dimension may have a catchy label, but it lacks meaning. Some combination of "negative politeness" and "negative truth" combined with an earned reputation for "negative agreement"? (I think the general meaning on today's Slashdot is that a sock puppet has a mod point to burn, but that might be jealous projection since I never get a mod point.)

Re:Be careful when you wish for symmetry!

[Kjella]

The clumsy, ad hoc, and poorly considered dimensions of Slashdot's moderation are an excellent example of how NOT to do it. Take that "troll" dimension, for example. (I wish someone would.) What is it supposed to mean?

Well, they boil down to +1 or -1 anyway so whether you use troll or flamebait or offtopic or overrated hardly matters. Those who tend to abuse it the most always pick overrated anyway. I think trolling is pretty well defined, but to each his own. Personally I'd probably just disconnect them and have mod points basically be "more people should see this" or "less people should see this" and have the rest be like a popular emotion-vote. It'd probably have to be a mix of descriptive - this post is informative / insightful / important / crazy / trolling / flamebait / crap and reactive - this post makes me feel happy / sad / angry / afraid / disgusted / surprised / excited etc. and actually I'm thinking maybe that is two dimensions.... a post can both be insightful and make me feel happy/angry/sad.