every once in a while you see a really horrible post, but you don't know which admin to PM.
perhaps if there was a "report this post" next to the "quote" etc on the top right this would make it easier. it would send a pm to all admins and lead them right to that post.
of course, it would require a description by the reporter of what the offense is.
The only thing I can think of would be forum semi-mods that only act as advisors when mods aren't around. These would have to be very respected people in the community or what not.
However, I don't think implementing this would be worth the trouble.
People would report shit all the time, and I personally don't want to spend time sifting through PMs or a junk box full of complains.
If you see something bad enough that it should definitly be brought to attention, check the active members list at the bottom of the page (every page) and PM the first mod you see down there. That's what I always did before I was staff.
On October 17 2007 07:55 ManaBlue wrote: The main problem is that this would be abused.
People would report shit all the time, and I personally don't want to spend time sifting through PMs or a junk box full of complains.
If you see something bad enough that it should definitly be brought to attention, check the active members list at the bottom of the page (every page) and PM the first mod you see down there. That's what I always did before I was staff.
Well in addition to the "report" system, we should have a second system where users can report people who will make bad complaints, so the Mods can read those complaints and know which real complaints to ignore, thus saving them lots of time.
On October 17 2007 07:55 ManaBlue wrote: If you see something bad enough that it should definitly be brought to attention, check the active members list at the bottom of the page (every page) and PM the first mod you see down there. That's what I always did before I was staff.
active members list? where?
maybe you're confusing a feature available to staff only?
i think that's been discussed before, and there was some concern that while it allows people to see mods who are online, it also allows people to see when no mods are online.
bigballs would be trying a revolution every week if he had that kind of information
i don't know, at most other forums i frequent they all have this report function and none of the admins/mods have mentioned anything about it being abused (including myself, as i am a mod at other forums)
so basically: from what i've experienced people using their own discretion on whether to report it or not works 99% of the time.
An alternative solution would be just to ban more and for longer periods of time. I remember back when I first joined people could be banned for sheer stupidity, right now they get away with multiple warnings and minuscule 2 day bans after they did 2 months of damage.
Well new people probably should get a warning or two, because they may not realize that the standards here are different than other forums.
Anyway, about the report function. I'm not sure how many reports mods would have to go through, but it may be a good idea to normalize them by the amount of views of the thread. For example, a post with 12 reports in the general section might be as important as one with 3 reports in the strategy section (because the a thread there would probably have 4 times as many views/posts). Just an idea.
On October 18 2007 10:56 fight_or_flight wrote: Well new people probably should get a warning or two, because they may not realize that the standards here are different than other forums.
Anyway, about the report function. I'm not sure how many reports mods would have to go through, but it may be a good idea to normalize them by the amount of views of the thread. For example, a post with 12 reports in the general section might be as important as one with 3 reports in the strategy section (because the a thread there would probably have 4 times as many views/posts). Just an idea.
That sounds good in theory, but I don't think it works. There are so many shitty new posters that if they all get a warning or two, it means that by the time they get banned, 2 will have taken their place. I really like haji's recent state of banning activity, but I think we need even more of it. The rate of shitty posters joining is greater than the rate of them being banned.
Just redirect them to the Mensrea's Ten Commandments and Manifesto's How to Use TL.net when they sign in. If they don't read it, then its grounds for a ban.
On October 18 2007 10:56 fight_or_flight wrote: Well new people probably should get a warning or two, because they may not realize that the standards here are different than other forums.
Anyway, about the report function. I'm not sure how many reports mods would have to go through, but it may be a good idea to normalize them by the amount of views of the thread. For example, a post with 12 reports in the general section might be as important as one with 3 reports in the strategy section (because the a thread there would probably have 4 times as many views/posts). Just an idea.
That sounds good in theory, but I don't think it works. There are so many shitty new posters that if they all get a warning or two, it means that by the time they get banned, 2 will have taken their place. I really like haji's recent state of banning activity, but I think we need even more of it. The rate of shitty posters joining is greater than the rate of them being banned.
Just redirect them to the Mensrea's Ten Commandments and Manifesto's How to Use TL.net when they sign in. If they don't read it, then its grounds for a ban.
How about when someone's post gets reported over a certain amount, they will automatically get a PM. This could serve as their "warning". When a mod looks at their account, they can see how many warning PMs they've received.
You can turn these pm's off, but only after 100 posts.
Edit: or instead of a pm, you can see how many reports the post got by a small number by the post only visible to the poster.
If you really believe there is a problem with something / someone, pm me. If I recognize your ID, I will take your pm seriously. If not, I will probably ignore it. If I do know your ID and your claim was BS, I'll bitch at you.
The way we did this in another online community back in the day was, we had a public mailbox for complaints. Staff checked it if they wanted to, and harshly punished people who wasted their time. I think you could do something similar here. How hard would it be to make people afraid to screw up a PM to such a box?
edit: i.e., if they do, ban them if they can't follow instructions about a complaint box they were going to be banned anyways, so it would just save you time of reading all their posts before they got banned anyways.
On October 18 2007 05:37 GrandInquisitor wrote: Post reporting is a great idea.
Just ban those people that abuse it. ez. Virtually every forum has this option, they can't all be wrong.
You miss my point.
I don't care about the marginal amount of good it might do, because the effort of sifting through them wouldn't be worth it. If anyone actually tried to implement and run this system, they would burnout and quit.
there are just too many noobs on TL, hell even the veterans have ill judgement with regards to what constitutes a "reportable" post.
i highly doubt the mods will sign up for what, as manablue described, is essentially an inbox full of junk mail to sift through. however if someone on the mod team was willing to sign up for such a job it might be a good idea, but all in all my point is that there are enough negatives for it to be a low priority concern regarding this idea. obviously i don't speak for the staff though
edit: damn manablue has a quicker trigger finger than me
I don't think it's nearly as much effort to sift through as you guys are imagining. You just make it so that a given post does not show up as reported multiple times, every additional report by a different person simply increases a number associated with it.
So, a new report would be like <table> <tr><th>Forum</th><th>Thread/Post</th><th>Reporter</th><th>Reason</th><th># of reports</th></tr> <tr><td>Website Feedback</td><td><a href='http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?currentpage=2&topic_id=60923#31' target='_BLANK'>"report" function?</a> (post by <a href='http://teamliquid.net/forum/profile.php?user=a-game' target='_BLANK'>a-game</a>)</td><td><a href='http://teamliquid.net/forum/profile.php?user=HnR)Insane' target='_BLANK'>HnR)Insane</a></td><td>This guy is from canada! Ban him!</td><td>7 (display other reporters) {this would link to something which says who else reported too, and show what reasons they provided}</td></tr></table> Even forums as huge as somethingawful have a report system, which gets worked through fine. You just need to have harsh penalties for abusing it, and you only generate one report per problem, no matter how many people try to report it.
I also like what HnR)Insane is saying. You could require 3+ complaints for the same post before the complaints become visible. Tweaking the number as needed. Box gets too full, raise it. Box too empty, lower it. Heck it could auto-adjust.
I mean, you guys can go on and on talking about how flooded your inbox is, and how no mod will want to sift through it - but empirically, virtually every other forum I go to has this. The "this works in theory but will not in practice" argument is patently false. Clearly they have all survived it. Clearly it is an effective system of moderation that minimizes messages slipping through.
I am perfectly okay with it being only available to members above a certain post count, or of a certain rank, and harsh penalties for people who abuse the system, even appointing more moderators to work through the queue - so long that it ensures that worse posts are now almost guaranteed to be kept off the forum. If some forum vet thought a post was borderline, it probably deserves to be at least looked at by a moderator.
GameFAQs forums is huge and that's the only way they've managed to keep on top of moderation. Mods go to the mod queue immediately, and sift through messages marked for moderation and see what is worthy and what isn't. Something like 90+% of all reported messages end up being worthy of moderation. (They even have a cute little color alert thing - Queue Color BLACK if there are lots of stuff in there; GREEN if it's less, etc.)
On October 19 2007 04:48 thedeadhaji wrote: If you really believe there is a problem with something / someone, pm me. If I recognize your ID, I will take your pm seriously. If not, I will probably ignore it. If I do know your ID and your claim was BS, I'll bitch at you.
that seems good, seeing as haji probabably know all forum veterans, being that he is 23 hours online a day haha
There's no good reason to not have a report feature. Just explicitly say that abuse of the report feature is grounds for an immediate ban. There are, occasionally, posts I wish I could show to a mod so they could do something, but frankly I have no idea what mod to contact about what anymore.
Everyone seems to be saying to just PM haji, so I guess I'll just do that. :/