Should the clown emote be changed?

[Capybara Jones]

Hey everybody!
Recently, I have started to notice that the jester reaction is used in a disrespectful way. In this context it is often used to ridicule people for their views and to spam it onto community contributions to shame the creator. Needless to say, that is pretty toxic and probably not the intended use of the award. I like the design and the idea behind it comes from a good place. So, it should probably only be changed fulfill a more encouraging, positive function.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

Just for anyone seeing this just now, the OP was completely change.

It was originally a post saying that the award should be completely banned, not changed. It was only recently change to what is shown below.




To answer both the original post and the new version, no.

The award is free points and if someone wants to give those away in an attempt to rile someone up, let them.

I appreciate how you didn't read either post fully. Even the original version said that the basic design in endearing and that it should be kept but changed up. Also 'banning' was not really a good term to use in this context as it would remove past contributions fully, which would be pretty sketchy. That's why I changed it as well as the fact that my initial post was a bit harsh. I still do believe it should be changed as it is often used to 'clown on' people for sharing views others don't agree with,

If it were to be changed, it would only be replaced by another award.

I have seen 'slow clap', 'hot take', 'spicy', 'Michelangelo', etc. used in a mocking way towards posts.

[Capybara Jones]

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

Downvoting is one thing and part of valuable discource, but I think spamming certain reactions does create an unneeded air of humiliation. As I said, jesters are not taken serious in any context, making any of the things they say worthless, which is where I get the opinion that the jester can rightfully be received pretty negatively.

Receiving a mass of down-votes can create the same air of unneeded humiliation. It is something that happens consistently on sites that have them, a big example being Reddit.

Historically, jesters are highly respected. They were not only the direct entertainment for the king but also acted as a counsel since they were considered part of the common people. Not anyone was chosen as a jester because of how close they were to the king.

I entirely agree with the last part. Yes, jesters can be a pretty good thing and that's what I'd like to see encouraged in a redesign or a renaming of the currently existing award.
Downvotes on the workshop are not as visible and carry less stigma with them. So, if something was to get downvoted, it could still be compensated by upvotes, which could ultimately invalidate the downvotes through hard work of the creator improving on the contribution. Jesters cannot be removed, on the other hand.

[Capybara Jones]

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I appreciate how you didn't read either post fully. Even the original version said that the basic design in endearing and that it should be kept but changed up. Also 'banning' was not really a good term to use in this context as it would remove past contributions fully, which would be pretty sketchy. That's why I changed it as well as the fact that my initial post was a bit harsh. I still do believe it should be changed as it is often used to 'clown on' people for sharing views others don't agree with,

If it were to be changed, it would only be replaced by another award.

I have seen 'slow clap', 'hot take', 'spicy', 'Michelangelo', etc. used in a mocking way towards posts.

I don't think that's as wide-spread and has the same appeal to it. Spamming a clown emoji on a post, to me, gives off an entirely different energy as the slow clapping. Hot takes have earned their place in internet culture for what I have found and are a generally respected outlet for unique views much rather than views that are stupid. 'Spicy' is probably not a big deal as to me that seems more positive than anything. I just don't see any negative association there. I am not into art, so I can't comment on 'Michelangelo' but I have rarely even seen that one to begin with.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

If it were to be changed, it would only be replaced by another award.

I have seen 'slow clap', 'hot take', 'spicy', 'Michelangelo', etc. used in a mocking way towards posts.

I don't think that's as wide-spread and has the same appeal to it. Spamming a clown emoji on a post, to me, gives off an entirely different energy as the slow clapping. Hot takes have earned their place in internet culture for what I have found and are a generally respected outlet for unique views much rather than views that are stupid. 'Spicy' is probably not a big deal as to me that seems more positive than anything. I just don't see any negative association there. I am not into art, so I can't comment on 'Michelangelo' but I have rarely even seen that one to begin with.

It isn't as wide-spread. Removing or changing the jester award will shift the perceived negative connotations to the awards I mentioned.

[Capybara Jones]

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I don't think that's as wide-spread and has the same appeal to it. Spamming a clown emoji on a post, to me, gives off an entirely different energy as the slow clapping. Hot takes have earned their place in internet culture for what I have found and are a generally respected outlet for unique views much rather than views that are stupid. 'Spicy' is probably not a big deal as to me that seems more positive than anything. I just don't see any negative association there. I am not into art, so I can't comment on 'Michelangelo' but I have rarely even seen that one to begin with.

It isn't as wide-spread. Removing or changing the jester award will shift the perceived negative connotations to the awards I mentioned.

I don't think so. All of them just lack the negative association. I would be hard-pressed to see something bad in someone calling me 'spicy'.

[Jellyfish]

im not trying to be rude but, cry some more. we dont need to remove something just because a random person on steam is buthurt over it.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

It isn't as wide-spread. Removing or changing the jester award will shift the perceived negative connotations to the awards I mentioned.

I don't think so. All of them just lack the negative association. I would be hard-pressed to see something bad in someone calling me 'spicy'.

As time goes on, the association can be changed the more it is used for it.

[Capybara Jones]

Jellyfish님이 먼저 게시:

im not trying to be rude but, cry some more. we dont need to remove something just because a random person on steam is buthurt over it.

The only one who seems to be 'buthurt' is you. My guy, I just said it should be changed up a bit because people spam it to be toxic.

[Capybara Jones]

SlowMango님이 먼저 게시:

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I don't think so. All of them just lack the negative association. I would be hard-pressed to see something bad in someone calling me 'spicy'.

As time goes on, the association can be changed the more it is used for it.

With the jester you at least have a base for a negative association though. It looks like the clown emote that some like to use to ridicule others and terms like ''jester's privilage'' give some substance for it to be used in a disrespectful way. There simply is no or just very little 'substance' that could even be interpreted as insulting on the other awards you've mentioned.

[Nx Machina]

Context? As in you changing the opening post.

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

Downvoting is one thing and part of valuable discource, but I think spamming certain reactions does create an unneeded air of humiliation. As I said, jesters are not taken serious in any context, making any of the things they say worthless, which is where I get the opinion that the jester can rightfully be received pretty negatively.

Humiliation?

Can YOU "prove" the intent of the giver?

Oddly you have no issue with trying to discredit another poster when they answered the "question" you asked in the thread title.

Should the clown emote be changed?

With a simple:

Shoas님이 먼저 게시:

No.

[Tanoomba]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

All I am saying is that it's dumb that someone in the community works on a certain artwork and a few people spam this clown award, it ridicules a lot of good work.

You're right. It's dumb that trolls need to exploit any avenue available to them to try to annoy or frustrate others. Having said that, does your opinion of on artwork go down if you see it was given a Jester Award? Do you lose respect for the creator of the artwork? I sure don't. Jesters given with the intent to disrespect say more about the one giving them than the one receiving, and since they're given anonymously then the point is moot and there is no reason to pay them any attention.

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I just honestly think that being able leave a pay-to post reaction on posts opens a lot of avenues for harassment and toxic behavior.

I believe the exact opposite. Making it so that a troll has to pay points, not just to Steam but to the recipient, in order to give them a cute clown face that they hope will offend the target, is pretty much the best way to allow trolls to act out in a way that has the least negative effect on the community. It's far less toxic and disruptive than an insulting post would be, and its role as an insult is only fulfilled if the recipient chooses to interpret it as such. If anything, the Jester is a buffer that prevents toxic behavior.

[MoonC A T]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

Shoas님이 먼저 게시:

No.

I appreciate this detailed insight into your opinion. Your contribution has brought great value to this discussion.

His No post is better than your OP

[rawWwRrr]

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I have started to notice that the jester reaction is used in a disrespectful way.

As can any innocuous thing.

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

So, it should probably only be changed fulfill a more encouraging, positive function.

Until the next thing is perceived as being misused. Hilarious and Mad Scientist have already made someone's list of awards that need to be removed/replaced.

[loppantorkel]

Nx Machina님이 먼저 게시:

Jester - "A valued member of the King's Court" plus free points.

Secondly you cannot "know" the intent of the person giving the award instead you "assume" it is negative, malicious etc.

(INTENT: Something that is intended) - "No one is a mindreader to know the giver's intent".

In turn this leads to:

(ASSUME: To make a supposition; suppose or believe:) - As in, it fits your narrative to have it be negative malicious etc which goes back to "No one is a mindreader to know the giver's intent".

And finally you have to "prove" the intent of the giver but you cannot unless they actually state the reason why.

Here have a Jester award. I hate to give them but it was necessary to prove you wrong. The intent can be known. Your post is hereby proven wrong and it's an awfully unconstructive post at that for this forum. Hope you never post this again since you've factually been proven wrong.
At least I'll not give a Jester hiding in anonymity.

[Capybara Jones]

MoonC A T님이 먼저 게시:

Capybara Jones님이 먼저 게시:

I appreciate this detailed insight into your opinion. Your contribution has brought great value to this discussion.

His No post is better than your OP

Hence I appreciated him for contributing to this discussion.