How to react to post?

[Barebacked]

Thank you, that was the piece of information I couldn’t find.

As for frustrating, I don’t mind the wait, and I sure as hell won’t be pushing for it to happen sooner. I was just wondering what would change, interface-wise, and you replied perfectly!!! 

[hntnhole]

6 hours ago, Barebacked said:

Is it a code, like ::heart:: or something like that?

No, not a "code".  It's the small (I think it' blue?) circle in the lower rght corner.  When you hover over it other reactions will appear (upvote, piggy, thanks, laughing, sad, confused and downvote). You can choose any single reaction to the post you're going to react to, and other guys can see who gave whatever reaction to the post in that particular thread.  It may take a few weeks - at first I couldn't "react" to anything, but gradually you earn more and more points for writing a response to some question/observation.  The best way (as far as I know) is to actually compose replies (just like this one) to whatever the subject of that particular thread happens to be.  The point is, to encourage participation (avoiding, of course, bitterness or perceived anger in your replies). 

They won't put up with commentary in any foreign languages, either.  I got my knuckles rapped for saying "thanks" in a foreign language that both the poster and myself well understood.  It may pay off to read through the rules and regs occasionally, until you feel secure in what goes and what doesn't.

Now.  After I click 'submit', I'm going to hover over that little white heart inside the blue circle, then clink on it, which is shorthand for saying I liked your post.  Then, next time you're on BZ, you can see who "reacted" and how, to your input.  Hope this helps ..... 

[hntnhole]

So now you have some feedback relative to your question, and a "response" (I tend to call them doo-dads).  One bit of advise:  use the "downvote" choice very sparingly, and it can ignite some hurt feelings.  Silly, I know, but - what is, is.

[Njn0mc]

This subject is soooo frustrating!

I have posted alot, I responded a lot, my level his kinda hight but still can ONLY react a very small amount🤬

Don't understand why I have to wait 24 hours to react to very good post and only be able react just a few of the post.

[hntnhole]

The only other suggestion I would have is to ask one of the moderators.  You'll get a proper answer.  

[BootmanLA]

As an observer of the process, I would at least note the following:

1. "Reacting" to a post does not simply affect you (as the person reacting). It also affects the person who posted the information to which you are reacting. So, for instance, if you make a post, and I react with an "upvote" or a "like" to your post, that (internally to BZ) affects your status in certain respects, boosting your reputational score.

2. If the ability to react were unlimited, once a member gains that ability, he could go on to dramatically change the reputational score of anyone else, for better or worse.

3. And that, in turn, could open the floodgates for spammer-type activity across the site.

Imagine these scenarios:

1. A determined malcontent reaches the ability to react to members. If his ability to react is unlimited, he could target a member (or members) with whom he has a beef, and use that person's profile to pull up every post he's ever made - and then downvote each post. If he creates two or three separate accounts with different handles, and repeats this process, the targeted user could go from a solid (and well-earned) reputational score to a much lower one in a heartbeat. That could, in turn, limit his own ability to interact on the system, and unless he knows to look, he may not even notice; if he does notice, he may have no idea why he suddenly can't do as much as he once did.

2. A determined disrupter creates an account (or two or three or more) and nurses each to the point that they can "react" in unlimited fashion. In turn, each one "likes" or "upvotes" every post by the other accounts involved, and very quickly the disrupter's accounts rise in ability to the point where the limits, if any, are meaningless. And then, when he's ready to cause whatever disruption he's got planned, he has multiple accounts with extensive posting privileges at his disposal.

The essence of the current system is: prove yourself, before you're given much power. That's not an unreasonable approach given the sensitive nature of this site.

[Njn0mc]

35 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

As an observer of the process, I would at least note the following:

1. "Reacting" to a post does not simply affect you (as the person reacting). It also affects the person who posted the information to which you are reacting. So, for instance, if you make a post, and I react with an "upvote" or a "like" to your post, that (internally to BZ) affects your status in certain respects, boosting your reputational score.

2. If the ability to react were unlimited, once a member gains that ability, he could go on to dramatically change the reputational score of anyone else, for better or worse.

3. And that, in turn, could open the floodgates for spammer-type activity across the site.

Imagine these scenarios:

1. A determined malcontent reaches the ability to react to members. If his ability to react is unlimited, he could target a member (or members) with whom he has a beef, and use that person's profile to pull up every post he's ever made - and then downvote each post. If he creates two or three separate accounts with different handles, and repeats this process, the targeted user could go from a solid (and well-earned) reputational score to a much lower one in a heartbeat. That could, in turn, limit his own ability to interact on the system, and unless he knows to look, he may not even notice; if he does notice, he may have no idea why he suddenly can't do as much as he once did.

2. A determined disrupter creates an account (or two or three or more) and nurses each to the point that they can "react" in unlimited fashion. In turn, each one "likes" or "upvotes" every post by the other accounts involved, and very quickly the disrupter's accounts rise in ability to the point where the limits, if any, are meaningless. And then, when he's ready to cause whatever disruption he's got planned, he has multiple accounts with extensive posting privileges at his disposal.

The essence of the current system is: prove yourself, before you're given much power. That's not an unreasonable approach given the sensitive nature of this site.

Thanks. Make sense 

[hntnhole]

13 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

A determined malcontent reaches the ability to react to members

That was as well-reasoned an explanation as anyone could ask for.  I can't say I get why some guy somewhere would want to bother himself messing up some other guy's account; after all, this site is a lot of fun, but - it's not a flesh-n-blood entity.  Nothing out there in the ether is - only the discourse is.  When some genius invents a computer that we can actually get our Cocks into and fuck guys, that might be a pig of a different color, as the old saying goes. 

 

[viking8x6]

14 hours ago, hntnhole said:

When some genius invents a computer that we can actually get our Cocks into and fuck guys...

Well, they are making great strides in robotics these days. <cue Duran Duran>

[Guest]

Replying to this thread to hopefully earn some points. I wish I knew how much points I needed to “level up.”

[Pozguyinchi]

I really don’t pay much attention to how this all works. I know that I have on several occasions entered topics in the wrong spot or commented where I shouldn’t have. This has caused me to lose ranking? Or something. I very seldom react. I really don’t get that and  would hate to do something wrong and cause an issue. All I know is you should keep commenting on things that interest you. I sometimes go weeks without commenting. If you are consistent it all works out.

[RandomStranger]

2 hours ago, Pozguyinchi said:

I know that I have on several occasions entered topics in the wrong spot or commented where I shouldn’t have. This has caused me to lose ranking? Or something. I very seldom react. I really don’t get that and  would hate to do something wrong and cause an issue.

This site would have more new thread postings and more active commentary if the result of a mistake wasn't punitive. 

[viking8x6]

7 hours ago, Pozguyinchi said:

... I know that I have on several occasions entered topics in the wrong spot or commented where I shouldn’t have. This has caused me to lose ranking? Or something. I very seldom react. I really don’t get that and  would hate to do something wrong and cause an issue...

Posting in the wrong place is going to happen now and then, and the warnings are intended to encourage paying enough attention that it doesn't happen all the time. Please don't take them as a reason not to post! The topics where you need to be concerned about it are pretty obvious - bug chasing, substance use, and straight/bi sex. ALSO, infractions (and the points associated with them) DO NOT change your ranking. They may give you a suspension of posting privileges, or even a suspension of access to the site (both temporary), but it's a completely separate system from the advancement to higher user rank.

5 hours ago, RandomStranger said:

This site would have more new thread postings and more active commentary if the result of a mistake wasn't punitive. 

The result of a mistake is seldom seriously punitive. A three-day suspension of posting privileges is the standard for moderate infractions (usually posting bug chasing content outside the Backroom). The penalties only become really serious if the infractions are egregious or habitual. Don't let that be you.

[RandomStranger]

Still, it's an unnecessary annoyance.  And an unintended deterrent.

[BootmanLA]

On 12/18/2022 at 5:20 PM, RandomStranger said:

Still, it's an unnecessary annoyance.  And an unintended deterrent.

I think it's the prerogative of the site's owner, not random relatively new members, to decide what is "necessary" and what is "unnecessary". And I suspect the site's owner has also determined what sorts of deterrents are intended or not.