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.

[Dendrobates Tinctorius]

Първоначално публикувано от loppantorkel:

Every user who gives a jester award with bad intent knows their intent.

i dont get it

can you explain that in more detail? thx

[Nx Machina]

Първоначално публикувано от loppantorkel:

You're welcome. I did prove more than that. Every user who gives a jester award with bad intent knows their intent. You can try to argue that the meaning of words or symbols have no meaning until they are fully explained to you, and perhaps you need that, but when a word or a symbol has a been adopted by a community for a certain meaning, your objections to that meaning become pretty meaningless.

You proved my point that unless the giver tells why, you will continue to assume.

Lets break down your post:

Първоначално публикувано от loppantorkel:

Here have a Jester award.

I hate to give them but it was necessary to prove you wrong. The intent can be known.

"Here have a Jester". Why?

"I want to prove you wrong". But you have not because you have told me why you gave it.

"The intent can be known". Yes because you told me, hence no assumption.


More odd is you quoted me and ignored the wording.

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

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.

And you told me why hence i can prove your intent.

[Capybara Jones]

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

Someone CAN write a negative review for a popular game because it is their personal opinion, hence valid.

And I've never said otherwise. The point I was making here was to show how this award is being used to dissuade people from sharing their beliefs. Look a sentence further please. I don't want people to stop writing negative reviews.


I assume that not because it fits my narrative, but much rather because it's obvious. If someone throws an orange at you. It would be fair to assume that it was, indeed, their intention to throw an Orange at you. Therefore, you stop giving that person oranges.

Also, how did I discourage the guy? How can you know that was my intention with these words? Feels like you're just assuming that because it fits your narrative.

[Capybara Jones]

Sorry for causing a mess here a second ago. I am trying to format this on my laptop, which is not working out for me.

[Unexpected]

someone fell for the bait and gave OP free points, disappointing

[Nx Machina]

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

And I've never said otherwise. The point I was making here was to show how this award is being used to dissuade people from sharing their beliefs. Look a sentence further please. I don't want people to stop writing negative reviews.

Your point in regard to a negative review for a popular game was:

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

No, but actions do often speak for themselves. If someone was to write a negative review on a popular game, which many people would end up seeing.

And my point was: Someone CAN write a negative review for a popular game because it is their personal opinion, hence valid.

Secondly:

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

It's pretty safe to assume that the clown-reactions that tge review would get, serve the purpose of discrediting the reviewer in question and the review.

Without offering any proof, just assumption on your part and i disagree due to:

When i read reviews i ignore everything but the wording of the reviewer as i am interested in why they recommend or not recommend a game. More importantly popular does not equal good or worthy of being played. Fornite, Fifa and CoD are prime examples of games i avoid.

[Castyles]

Jester should be cheaper for giving and for getting it. 100 points to both.

[Tanoomba]

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

Fair point. Using it that way seems like one of the fiew ways left to openly disagree with a review, as it seems comments are disabled by default.

I agree, but openly disagreeing with a review doesn't discredit it. It doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on the review in any way.

[rawWwRrr]

Първоначално публикувано от Capybara Jones:

Първоначално публикувано от rawWwRrr:

Hilarious and Mad Scientist have already made someone's list of awards that need to be removed/replaced.

I've gone into decent enough detail as to why I think it can easily be used in an insulting manner in a way others cannot. I don't think there is any substance in any of the other awards that could really be thought of as disrespectful.

Maybe not to you but users have thought the other awards were being used in an insulting manner. That's the point you're missing. Why should there be any substance to any of the awards? It's just a silly picture. Leave it at that.

[76561198407601200]

Първоначално публикувано от 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.

Strange you find that disrespectful but not blatantly disrespecting another user.

https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/discussion/2863606617/5241649843384241067/#c3361397532255524233

[Wai]

Many years ago, a music hall singer called Mary Lloyd was taken to court, in the UK on a charge of public obscenity. (A serious matter in those days.)

To paraphrase her defence she gave the following argument; The interpretation of my words is in the mind of the listener. Her words were what we call today a double entendre. She won her case.

Next time you see or receive the jester award remember; The interpretation is in the mind of the viewer. Unless you have windows into the souls of others, which I doubt, you cannot know the intention behind the jester award.

[loppantorkel]

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

Първоначално публикувано от loppantorkel:

You're welcome. I did prove more than that. Every user who gives a jester award with bad intent knows their intent. You can try to argue that the meaning of words or symbols have no meaning until they are fully explained to you, and perhaps you need that, but when a word or a symbol has a been adopted by a community for a certain meaning, your objections to that meaning become pretty meaningless.

You proved my point that unless the giver tells why, you will continue to assume.

Lets break down your post:

Първоначално публикувано от loppantorkel:

Here have a Jester award.

I hate to give them but it was necessary to prove you wrong. The intent can be known.

"Here have a Jester". Why?

"I want to prove you wrong". But you have not because you have told me why you gave it.

"The intent can be known". Yes because you told me, hence no assumption.


More odd is you quoted me and ignored the wording.

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

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.

And you told me why hence i can prove your intent.

You're proven wrong since I am the giver. I know my intent. I don't need to tell you to know my intent. Your premises and your conclusions are flawed. Please stop lawyering people who posts with good intent based on flawed assumptions of your own.

OP isn't complaining about single instances where he has received the Jester award, and assumes bad intent. OP is bringing up a general use/misuse of an award. Interpretations can be made nad he doesn't have to prove the intent of a group of people.

[Lily McFluffy Butt]

Nothing wrong with the jester award.

[Bored Peon]

Coming from an experience with an extreme case I have been experiencing for months now I have to agree with the OP that the jester award is being abused by people to harass people anonymously.

This person hides behind a private profile so it cannot be shown they given out. Now would it include an alternate family profile account to hide the behavior.

Around September I got in an argument with someone in one forum community. My posts received a few jester awards. Right, no big deal. A few random people tossing them out is typical behavior.

However the following week in another forum community more jester awards appear start appearing on my posts.

Since then every couple of days any post I make receives one in any forum. I am talking about posts where I give technical or game help as well.

I have received over 130 jester awards from the same person during this period of time. I have tried reporting this harassing behavior to Steam and get the usual canned responses followed by nothing being done.

One of the topics I received some in I pointed out it was happening. Does Steam go after the person doing it? Nope. Instead I get a ban for posting spam.

I think someone with this sort of obsessed behavior to continually harass someone on a nearly daily basis a possible threat to public safety. I have told Steam Support this and still nothing.

While I do not quite agree with the complete removal of the jester award I think there needs to be some sort of oversight regarding the usage to stop this sort of harassment.

[Psymon²]

we really should get a mega thread for this suggestion/idea.
comes up all the time, with the same valid reasoning.
boring as hell seeing the same nonsense retorts to keep the jester too, madness.