The Origin and Meaning of "Woo"
Replies
-
diannethegeek 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.
Most of my woos seem to come from bumping old guide threads and posting about the middle ground in keto threads. You just have to find your woo niche and you'll rack them up like clockwork!
Well sure, when you stake out the middle ground, you catch flack from both extremes. That'll teach you for being reasonable!
2 -
RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels
Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.7 -
cmriverside wrote: »
Oh I avoided the forms for years. To me, the main function of this website is not the forums. Meanwhile, my main source of social networking, Ravelry...
I'm typically more surprised when people haven't seen those forums despite being members for years and years, but the forums there are far more robust.
That's interesting that a knitting forum has a robust community, but I would imagine it's mostly women and fairly innocuous topics?
Not the same as this mixed-gender forum with an equal mix of young and older people at vastly differing levels of nutrition and fitness education(s). There are so many ways a fitness forum can run into the ditch.
Seems like maybe Ravelry would be much less contentious.
I joined this site in 2007. It was the Wild West up in here for quite a few years before moderation in the forums. Mike, the founder, tried to be the one and only moderator and that just didn't work very well. Or, at all. It was so easy to get in the middle of a dogpile and/or get attacked by some roving trolling poster just spoiling for a little trouble. It really wasn't much fun at all. While I can be snarky with the best of them, it really can get out of hand quickly.
It's much softer and easier here, now.
I did like the gif-as-a-means-to-nuke-a-thread method.
And the, "Is this the real life?" highjacks.3 -
kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Oooh, does this make me a social media influencer???
(Pretty kitty baby! I have two orange kitties of my own at home.)4 -
cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »
Oh I avoided the forms for years. To me, the main function of this website is not the forums. Meanwhile, my main source of social networking, Ravelry...
I'm typically more surprised when people haven't seen those forums despite being members for years and years, but the forums there are far more robust.
That's interesting that a knitting forum has a robust community, but I would imagine it's mostly women and fairly innocuous topics?
Not the same as this mixed-gender forum with an equal mix of young and older people at vastly differing levels of nutrition and fitness education(s). There are so many ways a fitness forum can run into the ditch.
Seems like maybe Ravelry would be much less contentious.
I joined this site in 2007. It was the Wild West up in here for quite a few years before moderation in the forums. Mike, the founder, tried to be the one and only moderator and that just didn't work very well. Or, at all. It was so easy to get in the middle of a dogpile and/or get attacked by some roving trolling poster just spoiling for a little trouble. It really wasn't much fun at all. While I can be snarky with the best of them, it really can get out of hand quickly.
It's much softer and easier here, now.
I did like the gif-as-a-means-to-nuke-a-thread method.
And the, "Is this the real life?" highjacks.
I do recall this being a much nastier forum in the past. Much more clique-y too. Definitely had to take breaks on occasion. Even back then, though, it was nothing like the cesspool that is kpop forums, but that's why I hang out here instead lol.5 -
kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Oooh, does this make me a social media influencer???
(Pretty kitty baby! I have two orange kitties of my own at home.)
I keep telling my OH the cat is orange and he keeps insisting he is brown...3 -
Oi vey with the cat talk. Someone needs to report this as abusive.7
-
kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Oooh, does this make me a social media influencer???
(Pretty kitty baby! I have two orange kitties of my own at home.)
I keep telling my OH the cat is orange and he keeps insisting he is brown...
He is definitely a ginger!
At the risk of derailing further (when has that ever stopped me?) here is one of mine insisting he still fits into the basket on the cat tree:
9 -
: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: typo
I agree that in that instance, it would tell a story. However since the button is misused all over the forums as "I don't like this person" or "I don't like that the person said something positive about their experience using (certain exercise, certain woe) to help them reach their goals," people who are new to the forums aren't getting the meaning that people who have been here awhile are trying to steer them away from something that might be "too good to be true."
You can't share information with someone who might be helped by it if you immediately drive them away. I know some people are perplexed that other users choose groups over the main forums, because groups don't always have a lot of opposing viewpoints to discuss. But when every topic on that subject gets a bunch of woos just because some people don't like it, even completely innocuous posts where the person just mentions the tools they use in weight loss, it's really not all that surprising that people don't want to stick around and engage with people who behave that way.
You seem to be bothered that people are getting a few woos inappropriately (and ignoring that it's hardly just newbies, it's all of us). I don't recall you complaining that
The posts that are truly woo (promoting an idea that's too good to be true) are different in that they get a whole lot of woos.
The idea that someone will be driven away by a few woos really seems overly-dramatic to me. And if someone really gets that upset by the idea that someone, somewhere, doesn't like a post, that person was going to have a freakout just from a nice polite "I don't think the evidence supports that, because..."
I do not see posts that merely mention topics or say that they were personally helpful getting lots and lots of woos. I see them getting a few, in part likely because they were misread. Much like I've had posts that got a few woos that I thought may have been misread, but eh. I don't recall you complaining then.11 -
kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Welcome!5 -
cmriverside wrote: »
Oh I avoided the forms for years. To me, the main function of this website is not the forums. Meanwhile, my main source of social networking, Ravelry...
I'm typically more surprised when people haven't seen those forums despite being members for years and years, but the forums there are far more robust.
Woohoo, another Ravelry member. I haven't gotten into the community much, maybe I should consider it.4 -
kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Welcome!
Can't be a member
9 -
: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: typo
I agree that in that instance, it would tell a story. However since the button is misused all over the forums as "I don't like this person" or "I don't like that the person said something positive about their experience using (certain exercise, certain woe) to help them reach their goals," people who are new to the forums aren't getting the meaning that people who have been here awhile are trying to steer them away from something that might be "too good to be true."
You can't share information with someone who might be helped by it if you immediately drive them away. I know some people are perplexed that other users choose groups over the main forums, because groups don't always have a lot of opposing viewpoints to discuss. But when every topic on that subject gets a bunch of woos just because some people don't like it, even completely innocuous posts where the person just mentions the tools they use in weight loss, it's really not all that surprising that people don't want to stick around and engage with people who behave that way.
You seem to be bothered that people are getting a few woos inappropriately (and ignoring that it's hardly just newbies, it's all of us). I don't recall you complaining that
The posts that are truly woo (promoting an idea that's too good to be true) are different in that they get a whole lot of woos.
The idea that someone will be driven away by a few woos really seems overly-dramatic to me. And if someone really gets that upset by the idea that someone, somewhere, doesn't like a post, that person was going to have a freakout just from a nice polite "I don't think the evidence supports that, because..."
I do not see posts that merely mention topics or say that they were personally helpful getting lots and lots of woos. I see them getting a few, in part likely because they were misread. Much like I've had posts that got a few woos that I thought may have been misread, but eh. I don't recall you complaining then.
To add to this, I checked to see what even sparked this discussion, and the OP did get 8 posts, but in that case it was not merely a question or "this worked for me," but an underlying assumption that we all knew that of course IF had some negative influence on hormones.
I would not have woo'd the post, but I understand better why someone might have, vs. "I read that IF might have a bad affect on hormones, is this true?" It's more akin to posting a thread that says "I want to keto, but I know it has terrible effects on health, is anyone doing it anyway?" That one would get lots of woos. (I'd not woo that either, I'd disagree with the underlying assumption in a post that some would likely consider boring and too long.) ;-)
(I'd also assume that it's IF supporters who might have done it, although of course I don't know.)
I don't see people getting woo'd just for talking about doing a particular kind of diet. I talk about doing various kinds of diets all the time, since I like experimenting with things, and get like 1-2 woos at most (often none).
Therefore, I don't really see why the whole community is getting a finger wagged. If you think someone is misusing the button, maybe just send an email and ask what the deal is.
Of course, all of this would likely not be an issue if the reactors' names could be seen.7 -
kshama2001 wrote: »RelCanonical wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »*twinsies*
@pinuplove is my twin but we can be triplets because more is better.
Our level of twinsieness is approaching uncomfortable levels Just don't hug me if we ever meet on the street and we're all good. I'll admire your shoes and you can say I look nothing at all like a cat.
I've decided it is time for me to join the Orange Cat Avatar Club.
Welcome!
Can't be a member
Nothing a little Clairol can't remedy :laugh:4 -
And here I thought it was just something Ric Flair made famous in the early 1970s, 80s and 90s screaming in the wrestling ring.3
-
cmriverside wrote: »
Oh I avoided the forms for years. To me, the main function of this website is not the forums. Meanwhile, my main source of social networking, Ravelry...
I'm typically more surprised when people haven't seen those forums despite being members for years and years, but the forums there are far more robust.
Woohoo, another Ravelry member. I haven't gotten into the community much, maybe I should consider it.
You totally should! You won't regret it. Outside of the main forums, I suggest LSG and remrants.2 -
: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: typo
I agree that in that instance, it would tell a story. However since the button is misused all over the forums as "I don't like this person" or "I don't like that the person said something positive about their experience using (certain exercise, certain woe) to help them reach their goals," people who are new to the forums aren't getting the meaning that people who have been here awhile are trying to steer them away from something that might be "too good to be true."
You can't share information with someone who might be helped by it if you immediately drive them away. I know some people are perplexed that other users choose groups over the main forums, because groups don't always have a lot of opposing viewpoints to discuss. But when every topic on that subject gets a bunch of woos just because some people don't like it, even completely innocuous posts where the person just mentions the tools they use in weight loss, it's really not all that surprising that people don't want to stick around and engage with people who behave that way.
You seem to be bothered that people are getting a few woos inappropriately (and ignoring that it's hardly just newbies, it's all of us). I don't recall you complaining that
The posts that are truly woo (promoting an idea that's too good to be true) are different in that they get a whole lot of woos.
The idea that someone will be driven away by a few woos really seems overly-dramatic to me. And if someone really gets that upset by the idea that someone, somewhere, doesn't like a post, that person was going to have a freakout just from a nice polite "I don't think the evidence supports that, because..."
I do not see posts that merely mention topics or say that they were personally helpful getting lots and lots of woos. I see them getting a few, in part likely because they were misread. Much like I've had posts that got a few woos that I thought may have been misread, but eh. I don't recall you complaining then.
To add to this, I checked to see what even sparked this discussion, and the OP did get 8 posts, but in that case it was not merely a question or "this worked for me," but an underlying assumption that we all knew that of course IF had some negative influence on hormones.
I would not have woo'd the post, but I understand better why someone might have, vs. "I read that IF might have a bad affect on hormones, is this true?" It's more akin to posting a thread that says "I want to keto, but I know it has terrible effects on health, is anyone doing it anyway?" That one would get lots of woos. (I'd not woo that either, I'd disagree with the underlying assumption in a post that some would likely consider boring and too long.) ;-)
(I'd also assume that it's IF supporters who might have done it, although of course I don't know.)
I don't see people getting woo'd just for talking about doing a particular kind of diet. I talk about doing various kinds of diets all the time, since I like experimenting with things, and get like 1-2 woos at most (often none).
Therefore, I don't really see why the whole community is getting a finger wagged. If you think someone is misusing the button, maybe just send an email and ask what the deal is.
Of course, all of this would likely not be an issue if the reactors' names could be seen.
I agree with you. I believe there's an aspect of POV to each person's opinion on this, and maybe it's mine that's biased. But my experience has been that threads regarding some strategies end up full of "woo"s because their practitioners so often arrive not just saying "this is how I lost weight" but "this is the only way to lose weight or this is the best healthiest way to lose weight and plus it will cure these health conditions".
I suspect there are some individuals who every time they see the name of that one diet trend they're tired of they automatically woo it, but I don't see that as rampant. Honestly I'd argue that newbies will post about a particular "diet" and everything will be fine until someone pops in and accuses everyone who insists on mentioning calories is a hater or tells OP MFPers are against them and then the woo avalanche starts.
I don't know, I think this is one of the mildest, supportive, friendly places I've found on the internet and I've learned more than I ever could have hoped for here. I'll take my "woo"s as payment well spent!11 -
kshama2001 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.
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: typo
I agree that in that instance, it would tell a story. However since the button is misused all over the forums as "I don't like this person" or "I don't like that the person said something positive about their experience using (certain exercise, certain woe) to help them reach their goals," people who are new to the forums aren't getting the meaning that people who have been here awhile are trying to steer them away from something that might be "too good to be true."
You can't share information with someone who might be helped by it if you immediately drive them away. I know some people are perplexed that other users choose groups over the main forums, because groups don't always have a lot of opposing viewpoints to discuss. But when every topic on that subject gets a bunch of woos just because some people don't like it, even completely innocuous posts where the person just mentions the tools they use in weight loss, it's really not all that surprising that people don't want to stick around and engage with people who behave that way.
I agree with everything you've said in this and your last post, but could we at least have it changed to something more clear, like "Disagree"?
In every thread or long discussion about Woo, some people post that they didn't realize they were using it incorrectly, and often feel bad.
i wanted it to be a "nope" button instead of woo.Now I'm wondering if woo-stalkers are ever an actual thing, or just imagination by those of us (sometimes me) who feel like a lot of random innocuous posts have been woo-ed in a short time period.
I almost never try to guess who woo-ed my posts, although sometimes it's tempting to assume. Can't say I care, either.
it is a thing. i've seen it in other threads. in some place, i just need to say hi to be woo'ed on the forum3 -
I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.4
-
snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.4 -
snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.3 -
snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you. 8 -
cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list. 2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list.
I hope you didn't have any plans for the next 6 months or so Oh, and January will be fun! 3 -
snowflake954 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list.
I hope you didn't have any plans for the next 6 months or so Oh, and January will be fun!
I am willing to sacrifice for the tranquility of you all on MFP.
5 -
snowflake954 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list.
You'll have to monitor chit-chat, too.3 -
snowflake954 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list.
You'll have to monitor chit-chat, too.
Well that's just mean.
6 -
snowflake954 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »I, personally, use the woo button as "disagree" because that's what it should mean.
I think that's what everyone was generally rooting for when we got 'woo' instead.
If we all use it that way--it will become the meaning.
You'd think.... But until the reaction is unambiguously negative, new users will continue to wander in and think it is 'woo-hoo' and the cycle continues.
It suits MFP to have it be ambiguous. However, since most of us like "disagree" let's just use it that way. It can't be worse than it is now.
Excellent. You are now the Committee Chairperson in charge of PMing every new member and explaining this in full.
If any new member doesn't not post "woo" in this way, it's on you.
OK--you just get me the list.
You'll have to monitor chit-chat, too.
Ewwww... just be sure to take a shower afterwards. 4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions