how come i have deviant, semper fidelis,achievement if i can;t use them?
Yeah I have noticed this too. Like whats the point of having them if you cant use them? Do you have to be a certain level of seniority in order to use them?
And just so I, as a complete n00b to these forums, am interpreting this right, each rating's meaning is as follows, correct?
Like: Pretty straightforward. You like the post.
Dislike: Also straightforward; you dont like what was posted.
Agree: A bit murky here, as it seems to be more or less simultaneous with Like, but with the specific meanign that you explicitly agree with what is being said as opposed to liking the post in general.
Disagree: Same problem here, but for Dislike
Achievement: I cant seem to use this one, but I assume it is for awarding posters who make a significant contribution to a thread?
Winner: A form of Super Like, when the poster really nails it on the head.
Semper Fi: I also cannot use this one, but it seems to be meant to award veteran members who continually prove their worth and show us why they are valued pillars of the community when they post something significant or insightful?
Deviant: Also cannot use this one, but seems to be for marking posters who arent too subtle about some of their more bizarre fetishes.
Informative: Finally a clear and easy one; marks a post as educational. If you learned something you otherwise wouldn't have known, its Informative.
Thunk Provoking: For things that make you go "Hmmmm". Usually for comments that pose a question or make implications in such a way that you consider them for a moment.
Feels: Tends to be used as a sort of Super Like, but also as a "I relate to that" sentiment. A bit confusing, and could be split into two separate ratings with clearer definitions.
Islamic Content: Also cant use this one, but it seems it was meant for posts that imply or endorse terrorism, misogyny, or marking things as "haram". Seems a bit out of nowhere compared to the rest, because you would thing that it would naturally imply that there should be other faiths that could be represented too? Christian, Satanic, Pagan/Heathen, Jewish, Atheistic, Agnostic, Bhuddist, Hindu, Shinto, Pastafarian, Lovecraftian, etc....
DRINK!: I'm confused about this one. It seems to be simultaneously used for "I need a drink after reading that post" or as a sort of drinking/bingo game where the post ticks a "predictable" box that would cause anyone playing the game to take a shot. Both seem valid, but each could ideally have their own separate rating icons.
Autistic: This ones the biggest enigma for me, as Ive seen it used to mark both individual posts/posters as autistic ("lol this dude on KW is a sperg!") and the subjects that clearly non-autistic posters are commenting on which ARE autistic. ("Lol the subject of this post from a cool member whom I respect is an exceptional individual"). Could easily give a wrong impression depending on how it is used and who is using it, especially if it negatively impacts your score.
Horrifying: Pretty straightforward; the post, or the thing described by the post, is disturbing or has unfortunate implications.
Optimistic: This one is confusing. Does it mean that the post makes you feel optimistic in a positive way and thus you mark it as such, or are you mockingly refering to the poster as being unreasonably optimistic about the subject they are writing about?
TMI: I cant use this one, but it's straight forward; the poster is risking their anonymity by saying something that might identify them IRL.
Late: Also straightforward. The poster is late to the party and forgot to Lurk Moar, and removed all doubt of this by posting outdated or ignorant information when those things were already answered or clarified in earlier comments.
Dumb: Tends to overlap with Autistic. Youre either calling the poster dumb for what theyve said, or you are describing something they made a post about as dumb. The line between the two is a blurry one.
Mad at the Internet: An easy one. The poster is clearly taking a matter they have no control over WAY too seriously and is throwing a pissy fit over it for all of us to see and/or gawk at.
I HOPE I got all of these right.
Honestly, I'm thinking some of them could be combined with others, or clarified if not split into separate ratings with more specifically defined meanings. But hey, should that never come to pass, I'll just have to deal with it.
