The Origin and Meaning of "Woo"
Replies
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too 
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
6 -
Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
14 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
It's because you don't like cats, isn't it?
2 -
RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.4 -
RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
98!!
3 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
7 -
RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You obviously haven't angered the wrong people! :laugh:3 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I just hugged you, and as you can see by my avatar, I am actually two cats.2 -
RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.5 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
You need to work on developing your online alter ego. See, IRL I'm quite the touch-me-not, but around here I'm hugging the *kitten* out of everyone (especially people who claim to hate it
) 6 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
Oh, it's not the hugging that makes you creepy.....8 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
I am not sassy at all, I just play nice. Somehow I attracted a woo stalker and have jumped by 40 in the last month
4 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
You need to work on developing your online alter ego. See, IRL I'm quite the touch-me-not, but around here I'm hugging the *kitten* out of everyone (especially people who claim to hate it )
Stop being my twin. I'm touch-avoidant irl too. I only let my parents hug me and they always ask first.
I want to be the pun-master but I'm so bad at thinking of them. I need to practice.
I'm actually very quiet and sensitive irl, lol. Don't tell anyone.5 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
Got enough yet?? Can't quite believe how much I'm invested in seeing your screenshot!!1 -
.Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
Oh, it's not the hugging that makes you creepy.....2 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
You need to work on developing your online alter ego. See, IRL I'm quite the touch-me-not, but around here I'm hugging the *kitten* out of everyone (especially people who claim to hate it )
Not sure whether to hug or woo?
But then woo'ing you could be taken totally wrong by my wife and your husband....2 -
I use it as "wow", which can be a good wow or a bad wow.
UserA: I've lost 50 pounds!
Me: Woo emoji (wow! good job!)
UserB: I hate animals.
Me: Woo emoji (wow...)
@Kiyomoo
Then you are insulting people by marking their posts as bro science, BS or WTF.
Please don't be rude when you intend to congratulate!
How about actually saying something nice instead?
I think calling it rude is going a little far, considering the sheer amount of people who use it in a positive way. I am not the only one.
If you struck up a conversation with a stranger and said "You're talking BS" do you think they would think you were being rude? Because that's exactly what you are doing whatever your intentions are.
"I'm are not the only one doing it wrong" is a poor defense when many people have told you what the button really means.
You could call my pet a dog despite her having whiskers, chasing mice and going meowww - that other people can't tell the difference between a cat and a dog doesn't mean you should continue to do it wrong.
This poster went on to say she stopped using it in a congratulatory way since reading this thread.
But don't your first 2 sentences make the point that it's rude to use woo for it's stated purpose?
I use the woo button in the way it's supposed to be used - is that rude or just direct?
The point I was making is that don't say "BS/too good to be true/WTF" when you mean "well done".
Personally I don't mind having a discussion with someone I disagree with but there are people on here that it's impossible to have a sensible dialogue with and/or it avoids the ganging up aspect that people disliked before the woo button was instigated - hopefully if people see multiple woos against a post it raises a bit of a warning flag for people to consider, including the person who posted (hopefully!).
Do wish MFP would spend 5 minutes changing the label on the HTML tag to something unambiguous.
2 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
Got enough yet?? Can't quite believe how much I'm invested in seeing your screenshot!!
Bless all your hearts. :flowerforyou:7 -
:flowerforyou: is the ultimate in MFP passive aggressiveness.RelCanonical wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »texasredreb wrote: »Whelp, I've been using the woo button as praise. Sorry to all the folks I've unintentionally ticked off. No more buttons for me!
You can use Like, Insightful, Inspiring, and Hug.
I wish they would change Woo to "Disagree" -- something clearer and not so insulting.
That would be my preference, but if they don't want to do that, than just get rid of it. As was demonstrated on this thread, there is a lot of confusion about the meaning of "Woo".
If they got rid of Woo I'd figure out how to passive-aggressively use "hug" as the new woo. "Bless your heart" like how the little old ladies in the southern US use it.
I've also been know to use "inspiring" when a post in particularly funny and I don't feel like "like" is enough. Or "insightful" for a wonderfully sarcastic post or one that's giving major side-eye. Good stuff.
Hey, don't ruin :flowerforyou: entirely! It can be nice, too. Context is everything.
And I like woo, even ambiguous woo, having been around when there was no negative reaction available at all.
Trust me, you do not want to be hearing in actual words from the people who woo innocuous posts, or follow others around just to woo to see their posts. These are not smart, funny, or insightful people. More stupid fight threads frightening new people, then getting censored or closed, is a worse problem that a few ambiguous or unwelcome woos.
Let the passive aggressives woo to their hearts' content. We're all better off that way.
I think there would be lot a people who would be surprised and disappointed to see the usernames attached to the woos of innocuous posts or who follow others around to woo their posts.
The purpose of the woo button was to reduce the ensuing trainwreck of 50 people coming to attack and mock some ridiculous claim, like "drinking a tbsp of ACV at precisely 10:43 pm while covered in dryer lint will cause weight loss and cure cancer."
A lot of users come here having heard ridiculous diet myths on social media, and it was meant as a non-aggressive response to someone promoting those myths so that others who were able to respond civilly and politely could provide helpful information. That way the information wouldn't get lost in bunch of "hurr durr derp woo" responses from people who are unable to respond in a non-snarky way to people who are trying to learn.
It's unfortunate that the response has been abused to the point that it is effectively meaningless.
In Disqus and various other forums you can see who left positive and negative reactions. I think that would be a better way and stop the woo stalking and passive aggressive nonsense.
I think it's less a replacement for snark (which I frankly think you are exaggerating) as a lot of "me too" type posts where people said the same thing. I do think it's valuable for that. Back in the old days you'd get 20 responses largely saying the same thing in slightly different ways, and although none of them were really mean or rude at all, and only a few might be a little snarky, the newbie might feel piled on and stupid due to volume (although I'd say thicker skin if one is on the internet isn't actually a bad thing).
Now the woos replace it, at least if the newbie isn't told she should feel butthurt about getting a woo or two.
As one of the people who spent their time closing or cleaning out the topics, and then dishing out warnings for the comments, I don't think I'm exaggerating the snark. The fact that so many people were getting warnings for derailing topics was part of the reason why the woo button was potentially a benefit. Some people chimed in with an "I agree" posts, and those were not an issue, but there was a healthy number of people who were letting their own frustrations cloud their perspective about the kinds of posts that exist in health and fitness forums, and the appropriate way to respond to them.2 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »
.Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
Oh, it's not the hugging that makes you creepy.....
Well, I got it down to the building, maybe not the actual floor.......3 -
Also sometimes I don't have the time, energy, desire, or patience to explain just why I think whatever someone said was wrong, distasteful, a really bad idea, etc. Other times I realize that doing so would end up repeating what a number of other people have said or I'd rather not pile on to a thread where there are already a bunch of replies disagreeing with a poster for various reasons.I use it as "wow", which can be a good wow or a bad wow.
UserA: I've lost 50 pounds!
Me: Woo emoji (wow! good job!)
UserB: I hate animals.
Me: Woo emoji (wow...)
@Kiyomoo
Then you are insulting people by marking their posts as bro science, BS or WTF.
Please don't be rude when you intend to congratulate!
How about actually saying something nice instead?
I think calling it rude is going a little far, considering the sheer amount of people who use it in a positive way. I am not the only one.
If you struck up a conversation with a stranger and said "You're talking BS" do you think they would think you were being rude? Because that's exactly what you are doing whatever your intentions are.
"I'm are not the only one doing it wrong" is a poor defense when many people have told you what the button really means.
You could call my pet a dog despite her having whiskers, chasing mice and going meowww - that other people can't tell the difference between a cat and a dog doesn't mean you should continue to do it wrong.
This poster went on to say she stopped using it in a congratulatory way since reading this thread.
But don't your first 2 sentences make the point that it's rude to use woo for it's stated purpose?
I use the woo button in the way it's supposed to be used - is that rude or just direct?
The point I was making is that don't say "BS/too good to be true/WTF" when you mean "well done".
Personally I don't mind having a discussion with someone I disagree with but there are people on here that it's impossible to have a sensible dialogue with and/or it avoids the ganging up aspect that people disliked before the woo button was instigated - hopefully if people see multiple woos against a post it raises a bit of a warning flag for people to consider, including the person who posted (hopefully!).
Do wish MFP would spend 5 minutes changing the label on the HTML tag to something unambiguous.
4 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
Got enough yet?? Can't quite believe how much I'm invested in seeing your screenshot!!
Bless all your hearts. :flowerforyou:
Way to go! Though I've personally never seen a woo-worthy post of yours.1 -
hopefully if people see multiple woos against a post it raises a bit of a warning flag for people to consider, including the person who posted (hopefully!).
I know I don't pay much attention to the buttons. Has to be something pretty out there before I look to see if it got reactions, but I don't think it has the intended effect.
1 -
RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »Guys I'm almost at 100. Help a woman out here. This is the perfect thread for it.
You are lucky I like you. With a woo score that low I should really put you on ignore.
Despite my sass level, I'm remarkably conflict avoidant, and thusly the woos remain low. I need more to increase my street cred.
Got enough yet?? Can't quite believe how much I'm invested in seeing your screenshot!!
Bless all your hearts. :flowerforyou:
Way to go! Though I've personally never seen a woo-worthy post of yours.
I get a lot of one woo posts where it could possibly mean "woo-hoo". Definitely get a few in the NSV thread since I post there I a lot. I think the only one I got more than a couple on was a thread I made about making a cotton candy burrito in Food and Nutrition. I think people didn't like me posting about such a highly palatable food in that forum. xD4 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »
.Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
Oh, it's not the hugging that makes you creepy.....
Well, I got it down to the building, maybe not the actual floor.......
:laugh: Yes you did.
I think I saw you there one day on my lunch break, but wasn't about to say hello.
3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »
.Tacklewasher wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Is perfectly acceptable :flowerforyou:Tacklewasher wrote: »Someday it's going to be revealed that the person going around "wooing" all the posts in the woo threads is @kimny72 , @lemurcat2 , @AnnPT77 , or somebody else like that
Or someone who accused them to avoid being under suspicion themselves.
I think people might be surprised how many of us DON'T regularly use the woo button, much less woo-stalk users we might not care for, simply because we appreciate just how meaningless the reaction is and prefer to either respond or simply ignore, depending on the situation.
Hug stalking, however......
Agreed. Anonymous hugging is uber creepy.
I don't use the woo for anything. When I was first here, like some people, I thought it mean woot or something similar but after I learned I stopped completely. I told my wife about the woo thing and we had a good derisive laugh over it.
With @tacklewasher it's never anonymous He know I hugged him. Hugged you too
Stop violating my personal internet posting space!
I have hugged you a time or two as well, mainly to poke the bear. @Tacklewasher I will readily admit I hug stalked him and gave him over 100 hugs one day, because he said it was hug a dumbass day. If that makes me creepy, well...
Oh, it's not the hugging that makes you creepy.....
Well, I got it down to the building, maybe not the actual floor.......
:laugh: Yes you did.
I think I saw you there one day on my lunch break, but wasn't about to say hello.
That's @pinuplove6 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »
:flowerforyou: is the ultimate in MFP passive aggressiveness.RelCanonical wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »texasredreb wrote: »Whelp, I've been using the woo button as praise. Sorry to all the folks I've unintentionally ticked off. No more buttons for me!
You can use Like, Insightful, Inspiring, and Hug.
I wish they would change Woo to "Disagree" -- something clearer and not so insulting.
That would be my preference, but if they don't want to do that, than just get rid of it. As was demonstrated on this thread, there is a lot of confusion about the meaning of "Woo".
If they got rid of Woo I'd figure out how to passive-aggressively use "hug" as the new woo. "Bless your heart" like how the little old ladies in the southern US use it.
I've also been know to use "inspiring" when a post in particularly funny and I don't feel like "like" is enough. Or "insightful" for a wonderfully sarcastic post or one that's giving major side-eye. Good stuff.
Hey, don't ruin :flowerforyou: entirely! It can be nice, too. Context is everything.
And I like woo, even ambiguous woo, having been around when there was no negative reaction available at all.
Trust me, you do not want to be hearing in actual words from the people who woo innocuous posts, or follow others around just to woo to see their posts. These are not smart, funny, or insightful people. More stupid fight threads frightening new people, then getting censored or closed, is a worse problem that a few ambiguous or unwelcome woos.
Let the passive aggressives woo to their hearts' content. We're all better off that way.
Oh gosh. The days of a relatively innocuous first post followed by a page of "that's stupid" and then 19 pages of cat gifs and "in b4 the roll."
Man, I (sort of) miss that! Although after reading @kimny72 thoughtful reply, this is probably better.
Any context really is everything. If you get a :flowerforyou: from, say, a snarky ill-tempered looking cat, it probably means something different from the :flowerforyou: you get from everyone's favorite granny (although she's way cooler than anyone's granny!)
Don't make too many assumptions. Context really is everything. Context. Context.
(And thanks for the nice comment, which I'm taking the liberty of taking personally. ).
3 -
I've only been here two months, and they all came from you guys.
8 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »
:flowerforyou: is the ultimate in MFP passive aggressiveness.RelCanonical wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »texasredreb wrote: »Whelp, I've been using the woo button as praise. Sorry to all the folks I've unintentionally ticked off. No more buttons for me!
You can use Like, Insightful, Inspiring, and Hug.
I wish they would change Woo to "Disagree" -- something clearer and not so insulting.
That would be my preference, but if they don't want to do that, than just get rid of it. As was demonstrated on this thread, there is a lot of confusion about the meaning of "Woo".
If they got rid of Woo I'd figure out how to passive-aggressively use "hug" as the new woo. "Bless your heart" like how the little old ladies in the southern US use it.
I've also been know to use "inspiring" when a post in particularly funny and I don't feel like "like" is enough. Or "insightful" for a wonderfully sarcastic post or one that's giving major side-eye. Good stuff.
Hey, don't ruin :flowerforyou: entirely! It can be nice, too. Context is everything.
And I like woo, even ambiguous woo, having been around when there was no negative reaction available at all.
Trust me, you do not want to be hearing in actual words from the people who woo innocuous posts, or follow others around just to woo to see their posts. These are not smart, funny, or insightful people. More stupid fight threads frightening new people, then getting censored or closed, is a worse problem that a few ambiguous or unwelcome woos.
Let the passive aggressives woo to their hearts' content. We're all better off that way.
Oh gosh. The days of a relatively innocuous first post followed by a page of "that's stupid" and then 19 pages of cat gifs and "in b4 the roll."
Man, I (sort of) miss that! Although after reading @kimny72 thoughtful reply, this is probably better.
Any context really is everything. If you get a :flowerforyou: from, say, a snarky ill-tempered looking cat, it probably means something different from the :flowerforyou: you get from everyone's favorite granny (although she's way cooler than anyone's granny!)
Don't make too many assumptions. Context really is everything. Context. Context.
(And thanks for the nice comment, which I'm taking the liberty of taking personally. ).
See, I thought she meant the "other" granny on here.
And my mind is pulling a complete blank as to her username for some reason.6 -
:flowerforyou: is the ultimate in MFP passive aggressiveness.RelCanonical wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »texasredreb wrote: »Whelp, I've been using the woo button as praise. Sorry to all the folks I've unintentionally ticked off. No more buttons for me!
You can use Like, Insightful, Inspiring, and Hug.
I wish they would change Woo to "Disagree" -- something clearer and not so insulting.
That would be my preference, but if they don't want to do that, than just get rid of it. As was demonstrated on this thread, there is a lot of confusion about the meaning of "Woo".
If they got rid of Woo I'd figure out how to passive-aggressively use "hug" as the new woo. "Bless your heart" like how the little old ladies in the southern US use it.
I've also been know to use "inspiring" when a post in particularly funny and I don't feel like "like" is enough. Or "insightful" for a wonderfully sarcastic post or one that's giving major side-eye. Good stuff.
Hey, don't ruin :flowerforyou: entirely! It can be nice, too. Context is everything.
And I like woo, even ambiguous woo, having been around when there was no negative reaction available at all.
Trust me, you do not want to be hearing in actual words from the people who woo innocuous posts, or follow others around just to woo to see their posts. These are not smart, funny, or insightful people. More stupid fight threads frightening new people, then getting censored or closed, is a worse problem that a few ambiguous or unwelcome woos.
Let the passive aggressives woo to their hearts' content. We're all better off that way.
I think there would be lot a people who would be surprised and disappointed to see the usernames attached to the woos of innocuous posts or who follow others around to woo their posts.
The purpose of the woo button was to reduce the ensuing trainwreck of 50 people coming to attack and mock some ridiculous claim, like "drinking a tbsp of ACV at precisely 10:43 pm while covered in dryer lint will cause weight loss and cure cancer."
A lot of users come here having heard ridiculous diet myths on social media, and it was meant as a non-aggressive response to someone promoting those myths so that others who were able to respond civilly and politely could provide helpful information. That way the information wouldn't get lost in bunch of "hurr durr derp woo" responses from people who are unable to respond in a non-snarky way to people who are trying to learn.
It's unfortunate that the response has been abused to the point that it is effectively meaningless.
I have to guess that putting up with a bunch of woo-whining is easier for the very patient and helpful moderator crew than putting out dumpster fires constantly . . . much as I love a good dumpster fire.
And since (Ann ducks) I know I'm not supposed to comment about moderation, I'll add that I do woo posts from time to time, when that seems like a rational reaction, and especially when others have already made the substantive argument. I appreciate having that option. A post having a boatload of woos and a couple of sound counter-argument replies is a picture that tells a story (once people grasp what woo means). I don't think it's meaningless.
I don't woo-stalk, though, or woo just because a particular person (with a particular reputation IMO only) said something I disagree with. I probably judge some people's posts more harshly because of past interactions, but truly try not to do that.
I do think it's funny (funny ha-ha) that the MFP culture likes to woo posts that mention woo. I might sometimes have done that . . . !
edited: typo7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.7K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions