IMO it’s not needed.
Let’s say you like a post, you like it. If there’s something wrong with it or you have a valid argument against it, then say it. People who ‘like’ your argument would show favour against the original idea.
Downvoting doesn’t help the discussion.
Why shouldn’t players also have to then express via replying that they like something? If I like something, I can simply click a heart. If I don’t, I have to post?
Oh, look at that, my post has been restored! Thanks, staff.
‘I agree with this suggestion’ is different from ‘this suggestion has ‘x’ flaw’
Yes, it is. And? Also, a more apt comparison would be a) “I like this suggestion,” and b) “I dislike this suggestion.”
Exactly so if I have the same talking points as you it’s succinct to leave a like.
However if you are in opposition to something there would be a reason for it.
If you dislike what someone said then the easiest way to express yourself is to communicate your thoughts to them.
Like what you did just now 
Downvoting sadly is a part of what all internet people are used to. When it was taken away it got replaced with flagging. Something that is 100 times more destructive.
Frankly I would rather have some form of downvoting back then deal with flagging.
Not everyone who disagrees has or wants to post talking points. The same as someone who likes something doesn’t necessarily wish to explain exactly what or why they like something.
As could be said for liking something, but instead we allow for likes.
Exactly why disliking is a bad thing. You can have an idea and have it bogged down by people who won’t tell you why.
They shouldn’t have to tell you why, if being consistent with likes. To be clear, as well, I am not suggesting that dislikes hide or remove posts.
Would you rather instead continue to use this current system in which posts are instead of being disliked, are falsely reported and actually silenced?
Likes meaning I agree with your points.
If you dislike something, upvote the counter argument or reply.
Of course they should.
Liking something means you agree. Disliking something means you don’t. They’re different sides of the same coin. If you believe someone shouldn’t have to post why they agree with something, to be consistent you should also believe that someone shouldn’t have to post why they disagree with something.
Personally the real problem was that posts that were disliked enough got “hidden”. Not that Reddit is the end all be all of the internet, it certainly has it’s problems, but I think they do it best in some places.
Have upvotes and downvotes, but don’t allow them to actually show up until 1-2 hours after a post has been made (even 30 minutes helps). Don’t allow downvotes to actually do anything; they don’t hide posts, they don’t result in bans or flags, they’re just a tick mark that shows agreement or disagreement.
The moment dislikes can hide posts, in a situation where those votes appear immediately, you have bandwagoning. If no one could see how others were voting for 30-120 minutes then they’d have to vote with what they think. Then, after the fact, even if it’s unpopular it doesn’t get “hidden” just because people didn’t like it.
Blizzard claimed that it reduced engagement because you could just “dislike” a post and move on. I think people already “like” posts and move on, so I personally do not see a reason for either version if that’s what you’re attempting to get rid of. If you want to stop discussion-less-engagement then votes of any kind must go away.
The dislike tool was for reporting trolling posts also, hence them getting hidden. So same means to an end unfortunately.
Thank you. I didn’t use the forums when dislikes existed. However, to be clear, again, I am not suggesting dislikes hide or remove posts nor topics. The current system of false flagging topics and posts is ridiculous and has been done here.
I am not suggesting it be a report system to hide or remove posts.
No, the opposite of that is what happens.
Not really… I see it all of the time.
But it’s fine if they just support it without giving an reason why right? As I mentioned the only thing that change is now people just up vote posts that express their opposition to something. After all, an up vote doesn’t have to give any justification for why they agree.
Now we use flags that get stuff hidden. Flags that get people banned for 3 days for simply saying the word “rabble” if it’s flagged too many times.
How in the heck is this a improvement??
Before it was implemented the first time, I wanted it. After though, it just highlighted the echo chamber of opinions on the forum, rather than the actual state of the game, or the topic being discussed, or w/e the OP was hoping to communicate.
The forums have a lot of regulars that are consistently disruptive and constantly derail threads. The group think mentality happens as well. If a post receives one or two down votes, it is automatically perceived differently, and almost always negatively.
You can post the same comment in two different threads relating to the same topic and get wildly different results.
The only way it could work is if there was more active participation from the moderators on the forums. I’m sure there are blues that keep an eye on things here, but their presence is often not noticed. With more participation on there end, I think some of the topics could be handled a lot better.
As is though, unpopular opinions are consistently buried.