The Origin and Meaning of "Woo"
Replies
-
: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.
Ugh, I wrote affect when I meant effect. Hate that.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.
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.
Ugh, I wrote affect when I meant effect. Hate that.
Is there a club for people like you & me?
1 -
I got woo’d for simplying saying “ I lost all my weight without counting calories” in a thread that was asking if anyone has lost weight without counting calories. It gets people mad mad. Whenever I say I don’t count calories people can’t seem to handle it or something.Hehe. I low key love it.
I thought woo meant woo like ric flair, a positive thing at one point.3 -
I'm still pretty new here and thought "woo" was more like "woo-hoo," in other words a good thing. I didn't realize it was meant to be an insult. So I'm sure I've wooed people who didn't deserve it, and for that I apologize. And if I've been wooed, I'll just assume it was from people who were under the same false impression.4
-
I got woo’d for simplying saying “ I lost all my weight without counting calories” in a thread that was asking if anyone has lost weight without counting calories. It gets people mad mad. Whenever I say I don’t count calories people can’t seem to handle it or something.Hehe. I low key love it.
I thought woo meant woo like ric flair, a positive thing at one point.
Weird, lots of people on that thread said they didn't count or said there are lots of strategies that may work for people who don't like to count, and the vast majority seem not to have been woo'd.
You posted yours not as advice, but simply as an "I did this!!!!!" and so I suspect strongly that the 2 woos were mistaken woo-hoos.
But if it makes you feel good to think people are somehow mad that you didn't count, that's cool too.
I got woo'd for saying I can't stand cold cereal. Guess that made people mad! (Or one shouldn't actually assume things about a woo.) Heck, I got woo'd in the IF/hormone thread for saying I made a typo and had rewritten the post a bit to make it clearer. (I kind of suspect that it's a woo stalker I seem to have, but could be some accident or joke I don't get or, heck, someone who thinks typos are to be cheered.)3 -
MrsBradyBunch wrote: »I'm still pretty new here and thought "woo" was more like "woo-hoo," in other words a good thing. I didn't realize it was meant to be an insult. So I'm sure I've wooed people who didn't deserve it, and for that I apologize. And if I've been wooed, I'll just assume it was from people who were under the same false impression.
It's not meant to be an insult, actually. It means that the stated opinion or 'fact' that has garnered woos isn't supported by legitimate sources. 7 -
If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.7
-
pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.12 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.
Truth. Imagine a post with 30 woos instead getting 30 separate replies all saying basically the same thing. People love to hate the woo reaction, but a lot of them haven't been here long enough to see what it's like without some method to disagree passively, regardless of how flawed it is.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.
Ugh, I wrote affect when I meant effect. Hate that.
Is there a club for people like you & me?
That is one I can join (since I cannot join the orange kitty avatar club)2 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.
It is flawed but it really is better than what we had before. i remember those days well.4 -
13 -
The dog pile is very cute. Looking for a cat pile, better IMO.
7 -
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.
It would be easy enough to change to "disagree". After all "woo" is a name change from what it was originally.
2 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.
Truth. Imagine a post with 30 woos instead getting 30 separate replies all saying basically the same thing. People love to hate the woo reaction, but a lot of them haven't been here long enough to see what it's like without some method to disagree passively, regardless of how flawed it is.
I really don't see people inclined to dogpile switching to passive disagreement.
I think what fixed the previous situation was aggressive moderation.6 -
kshama2001 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.
Truth. Imagine a post with 30 woos instead getting 30 separate replies all saying basically the same thing. People love to hate the woo reaction, but a lot of them haven't been here long enough to see what it's like without some method to disagree passively, regardless of how flawed it is.
I really don't see people inclined to dogpile switching to passive disagreement.
I think what fixed the previous situation was aggressive moderation.
I wonder what the moderation would be like if people responded with saying WTF rather than click on the HTML tag which says WTF?
6 -
kshama2001 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »If MFP wanted to ratchet-up the quality of its discussion community, it would ax the woo button. It's the source of more subliminal conflict here and a way for many to engage in passive aggressive behavior, much easier than adding a meaningful and well-thought out and impeccably-expressed point of view because that takes effort.
You are new here. The woo button keeps the dog pile to a minimum.
Truth. Imagine a post with 30 woos instead getting 30 separate replies all saying basically the same thing. People love to hate the woo reaction, but a lot of them haven't been here long enough to see what it's like without some method to disagree passively, regardless of how flawed it is.
I really don't see people inclined to dogpile switching to passive disagreement.
I think what fixed the previous situation was aggressive moderation.
I wonder what the moderation would be like if people responded with saying WTF rather than click on the HTML tag which says WTF?
i think there would only be about 6 people knocking about in the forums after everyone else was banned... :laugh:7 -
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.
Oh hey, let's not exagerate. I do have a life.2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »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.
Oh hey, let's not exagerate. I do have a life.
But chit-chat is just so...
...enlightening. 7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »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.
Oh hey, let's not exagerate. I do have a life.
But chit-chat is just so...
...enlightening.
Is that what we call it now a days? 3 -
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.
It would be easy enough to change to "disagree". After all "woo" is a name change from what it was originally.
100% this! All they have to do is change the label, they don't even have to change the "wtf" code underneath.6 -
"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.9
-
snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
I agree! !2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.5 -
snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.
Do we need a Where's Your Evidence button then?
WYE!
Pronounced WHY?
7 -
snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.
Everything is opinion--"insightful", "inspiring", "like", and "hug", so don't agree with you. So, I'm asking: if I disagree with a post, what're my options? Only "woo"?3 -
snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.
Everything is opinion--"insightful", "inspiring", "like", and "hug", so don't agree with you. So, I'm asking: if I disagree with a post, what're my options? Only "woo"?
Yup.
Here's what I do. If there's a post that's a woopalooza, and another poster has already responded with what I would have said, I'll Woo the original post and then use the Like or Insightful button to support the post responding to it.5 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.
Everything is opinion--"insightful", "inspiring", "like", and "hug", so don't agree with you. So, I'm asking: if I disagree with a post, what're my options? Only "woo"?
Yup.
Here's what I do. If there's a post that's a woopalooza, and another poster has already responded with what I would have said, I'll Woo the original post and then use the Like or Insightful button to support the post responding to it.
Woopalooza should be the word of the day. Most people are using woo as disagree already, so it doesn't feel like much of a leap to just make it so and stop confusing all the newbies.
I'm still a fan of kitten gifs. There's a kitten gif for every occasion.6 -
If we keep bumping this thread more people may learn.7
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »"Disagree" is so much clearer than "woo". If I disagree with what has been posted, I have no option but to use "woo" or respond to the poster. I "disagree" is a lot more mild than "woo" (you're full of ****). So, I don't understand the problem of changing it. I also miss "awesome". Some posts are just...awesome, and it's a way to compliment a wonderful post.
Actually, it defeats the purpose of the "Woo" button. Woo means that evidence supporting the comment is lacking. Disagree means that you do not agree with the post. One is referring to supportive evidence or the lack thereof and the other is opinion.
Everything is opinion--"insightful", "inspiring", "like", and "hug", so don't agree with you. So, I'm asking: if I disagree with a post, what're my options? Only "woo"?
Yup.
Here's what I do. If there's a post that's a woopalooza, and another poster has already responded with what I would have said, I'll Woo the original post and then use the Like or Insightful button to support the post responding to it.
This is what I do too. Oh Snicks--love your vocabulary "woopalooza"! I am still snickering over your "jimmies in a jam".3
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