I won't complain any: It is two ways to "get points", whereas fb has one! Personally, I do often agree with stuff I don't like, for instance sometimes "the truth"; and I also disagree with stuff I like...like fiat money. It does take some moral, philosophical and sometimes physical stretching-power (take Yoga, for instance) to settle into a paradigm, or rather meta-paradigm, where you can entertain opposing ideas without necessarily agreeing with both, while also suspending bias enough to give a qualitative judgement somewhat free of any bias you may normally be subject to.
I don't, however, know if that is exactly the kind of emotive and mental paradigm the creator(s) of this system are effectively molding us into or not (I do wonder, though). All-in-all, I personally, am a fan of entertaining opposite ideas to the point that they destroy each-other and then give birth to third, transcendental idea, that partakes of the natures of their parent ideas, yet supersedes them as a solution to a paradox.
Maybe we need a Proof of Synthesis that pays us all for creating new ideas based on "liked" "disagrees" and "unliked" "agrees" that yield new ideas with quantitative value? Though, such a thought is probably a little too abstract and whimsical. I'm fine with such not occurring until It's time. And I also support fully the option to "Like" and "Agree", even if this question has yet to be answered to my own satisfaction (I really do wanna know Why the two buttons!)
At the very least, it gives all a chance to just kinda like something, and REALLY like something!
