Do you think people would be nicer if they had to answer these questions using voice?

Question

If you had to answer these questions using your own voice, would you be kinder.
I think I would rather people knew me for being the one who said a kind word, gave a good bit of advice, told a really funny joke or gave an informative answer. I think you would be able to tell how sincere the respondent is being.
The one good thing about this is that no one would chide you for spelling wrong or grammatical errors in sentence formation.
Thoughts anyone?

Answer 1

sand&sea brings up a major point,
If you used sound, people would then start recording their bodily functions as answers, i.e. burps & farts. They would be screaming at each other, etc.

Then Yahoo! police would have an additional job and have to hire more resources.

It is not going to happen on a large scale.

However, on a smaller scale, you could always answer with sound by enclosing a link in your current text answer to a soundbite on your personal webpage. The same goes for video. People link to YouTube all the time on Answers.

If you would like to listen to my burps and farts, email me for the stink, I mean the link.

Answer 2

Its a yes and a no. 60% YES most people would give their views politely, clearly and especially if the question is a serious one, it would be a great boost for the person asking to hear so many positive, friendly people giving helpful feedback.
The 40% NO is because there will still be pranksters who will make the odd joke that goes too far, and the small minority who will deliberately say the kind of things they would never say to a persons face - it would bring out the obscene caller in them. A cure for this would perhaps be a penalty system, maybe ten offenses and their voice option is barred from their account for a set amount of time, most people would rather participate than be left out so this could work. But weighing up against how many people who would be hurt by a cruel word spoken as opposed to tapped out on a keyboard, maybe its not workable.
Spelling errors, well sometimes its down to bad grammar, sometimes its fingers too fast across the keyboard - Im sometimes guilty of that, as long as the content is meaningful and provides an answer I think most people can live with that.

Answer 3

Yeah it would but surely it would be a bit hard to get this to happen because I mean not everyone have an eye-cam or whatever they are called. It would be nice though because no one could lie or say stuff that they werent because you could tell. This could also see what the person asking the question thought about it by replying instead of waiting to see if you got the best asnwer or not. Also we could see if they are serious about the matter or just having a muck around for two easy points. Some people certainly would be nicer in case they looked rude in front of the asker even though some of the people on Y! Answers are also the nicest people you can find. Some though would still be silly and shout and curse but if you had video evidence of them being nasty it would be easier to track down familiar faces. Great suggestion and hopefully we can get this up and running in the future sometimes!

Cheers, Sainter

Answer 4

Yes, I agree that I would be kinder with answering. I just don't think I would be so prone to doing it that way. With answers being the way they are, you can maintain a certain amount of anonymity. I feel that having your voice heard by others, would cause discrimination on a best answer. There is, unfortunately, a lot of racial and religious discrimination floating around yahoo answers. An accent makes that sometimes easy to peg (moreso racial than religious) Plus you don't have to worry about stuttering or fumbling over your words when you can just pause whenever you wish while typing.

Answer 5

I'm all for the fact that I wouldn't have to endure people's horrible spelling and grammar, but I know I wouldn't be any nicer. I think it would be nice to be able to tell the answerer's sincerity, but...I'm sure people would abuse the voice thing - especially those weirdos here who enjoy tormenting others - and for that I would never approve of a voice answering system.

Answer 6

I would answer the same as I do now. I think things would be interpreted differently if we were all using voice because you cannot hear the tone of voice through typed/written words.

Answer 7

I try to be kind and sincere anyway (MOST of the time), and I try to write the way I talk and stuff. You just have to imagine it said in a phone-sex voice with an Aussie accent, that's all ... :)

Answer 8

Probably not. I'm a very straight-forward person and I say what I think, even if it hurts someone's feelings at times. There is no use to sugar coat the truth. Just spit it out!

Answer 9

I think the increased level of accountability would shame people into being nicer, sure, but sometimes the snarky answers are as entertaining as the sincere ones.

Answer 10

yamster,people will pee people off no matter what they say ,how they say it,,,,spoken word is made up of grammar ,syntax,thought construction,logical sequence,vocabulary,blah blah blah,,,,,,,reactions to tones of voice are just as varied as written info,so,given human variety'it'l end up the same,,,,,how bout paying someone 24/7 to ride herd on violation notices/providing email contact at west coast,seeing that racist qers get zotzed right after posting,,,,,,,adjusting software so every letter gets posted as typed,,,,,,,innocuous qs & as get deleted,protested,and issues never resolved./'if you can't think of anything else,,well,start passing out visor caps & pens with the yamster logo on it