I’d say the standard of posting has gotten a lot worse.
You just said two things that are the same thing.
A post doesn’t have to break the rules to be bad.
Even better question, why shouldn’t the members get to decide what is/is not worthy of receiving an up/down vote.
If they trust us to like a post, or not, why shouldn’t we be able to dislike a post, or not?
If your answer relates to abuse of the system, or some variation/example of, delete it and try again.
These are not the same thing. In the abuse case, individual(s) are willfully disliking a post to harm/get back at another. In mass disliking, it typically involves an unpopular opinion.
The forum members do not make the rules since it is Blizzard’s forum. Blizzard can set it up as they see fit and moderate it as they choose. No one is obliged to post here.
That’s not what he said.
You got the first part right, and completely missed the point, again, with your next.
But thanks for providing more examples of why a down vote button is needed.
Mass disliking or down voting is abusing the system, is it not? Ie: The same thing… 
Mass disliking is having multiple unique individuals disliking a post that conflicts with their preferred position.
Abuse could be having one person target over and over again the same user for unjustified dislikes, encouraging others to do the same, or using multiple account/alts to dislike the same post.
= Abuse of the system.
= Abuse of the system.
You’re getting worse at this Micro.
Perhaps dislikes could be limited; you are only able to dislike a certain number of times per day, perhaps even further limitations per week, month and even year to limit excessive downvoting by trolls. You can of course like as many posts as you want.
I am befuddled by your response, especially in the context of your other posts in this thread.
New players are also a minority of the forum base.
I try to steer them to the New Player or Class forums to avoid getting buried under threads like this one and to get real answers to their questions.
This is a fair enough idea…actually, are likes limited? Or is that a TL based thing? Because that could also be worked into the equation.
Please continue to misrepresent arguments, straw man etc.
I shall now grant you the same courtesy, or maybe just ignore your points and say glad you agree with the OP.
You continue to be Exhibit A. 
True, but it was more in reference to new to the forums members as well. A lot of players have played for a long time never visiting the forums. Hence, the forum regulars are the minority of the player base.
Allowing likes, whilst disallowing dislikes, would be like a trial only allowing testimony from the defence witnesses and claiming any verdict based on the testimony provided was a just outcome.
Here you go for disagreeing with me, 
.
I would of used a slightly different Emoji just for you, but for some reason the people in charge of the forum Emoji’s won’t let me use it!
Maybe they should make downvoting costs $1 per click in the forum.
Poster A posted “D3 is the best”
D3 haters: How dare him to post that…[swipe credit card] to downvote the “D3 is the best”
Another D3 hater: Blasphemous! [swipe credit card] to downvote the “D3 is the best”
More D3 haters: It is about sending messages…[swipe credit card] to downvote the “D3 is the best”
Poster A who just came back from his lunch: Why is my post is greyed out? Why is my post has 547 dislikes?
D3 community manager at his table staring at the $547 transaction just made from D3 forum: …
That actually had me laughing. Thanks for that.
It is the opposite in my mind. In the forum and in the US justice system, the relevant parties are allowed to make their cases as long as it follow the rules. Removal of the dislike button does not prevent anyone from making their case and having it be visible (assuming that it does not violate the forum rules). Therefore, the “prosecution” and “defense” are allowed to make their cases.
Moreover, the dislike button as it was implemented in the old forum, promotes the very thing that you condemn in that one or even both sides might have their arguments “hidden” from view. In the old fourm, accumulation of dislikes led a post to be greyed out, thereby hiding the post, essentially removing it from view without clicking on it. It did not exclude the fact that it could be viewed but it was an extra step that some may not have done.
In the current forum iteration, if there are two opposing viewpoints described in posts, one can click “like” for the post that they prefer. Thus, poster still can convey what viewpoint they prefer. This action conveys where they stand without potentially leading to the opposing viewpoint post being hidden from sight.
Therefore, hiding CoC-compliant posts are making it so the juror is not allowed to see easily the full story, negatively impacting reaching a just outcome. The forum moderators are here to help regulate posts that violate the forum rules as an impartial outside observer.
From reading other posts in this thread, it is clear that some want the dislike button simply to hide other comments or the majority of another’s posts.
If they were to institute the dislike button again, my preference would be to have it based on trust level. Specifically, I would prefer limiting who can give dislikes to just trust level 3 forum members, since
I suspect that a significant percentage who would be most likely to abuse the dislike system were previously forum banned.
Certain criticisms that are common today would be down-voted to hell eight years ago.
Being TL3 grants you zero special recognition. Unfortunately there are certain people who think wearing a TL3 badge should grant them more respect, or recognition.
Ironically because of how some people have posted repeatedly about their TL3 status, to the point of straight trolling, a lot of people view it as the exact opposite.
While most people will not be surprised in the slightest that Micro would demand it only be available to TL3 members, that has taken a reasonable idea, and made it terrible.
In August 2020, the TL3 requirements were made much easier. This is something that I advocated for since nearly the first day of the new forum. See:
I want more posters to get the benefits of TL3 not less. The perks of being TL3 are modest and the requirements are now more straightforward and easier to achieve.
What I wrote is not a “demand” but clearly stating a simple preference given that the dislike button came back in the context of the number of dislikes was stratified by trust level as you suggested.
Most of that is completely irrelevant to the point I made.
Seems like we’re done here.
Personally, I am glad that the dislike button was not part of the new forum. Although I can not recall any post of mine that was grayed out in the old forum, other posts were unfairly hidden in my opinion.
In relation to my last post:
These points address my thoughts on trying to be more inclusive. You put forth the idea of having the number of dislikes based on trust levels (similar to how likes are handled). Since dislikes can lead to a post be hidden (if it was handed the same way as the old forum), it makes sense to put dislikes in the hands of those that meet the highest trust levels.
This would eliminate or at least make it more difficult for multiple accounts for a single user to dislike a post, leading to a post to be inappropriately hidden. It would make it harder for bad actors to abuse the system by encouraging others to target another poster. It would also make it so matters of personal taste where valid arguments are being made from becoming a popularity contest.
My experience from multiple forums is this:
The poster who post frequently without ever being subject to forum sanctions are far less likely to engage in inappropriate behavior in comparison to those posters who post less frequently, engage in factually inaccurate name calling, are subject to multiple forum suspensions, and who claim nefarious plots by other posters and the forum moderators to punish them unfairly.