Backstage - OOC Forums
General Discussion => Moderation Discussion => Topic started by: Nicoletta Mithra on 13 Apr 2013, 10:17
-
At first, I'm not overly familiar with how the reporting works and such, but after using it about twice, I wonder whether one gets a feedback if one reports a post: Usually, if the reported post gets moderated, the feedback is there already.
Still, I'd like to get some feedback if a post that is reported doesn't get moderated. It seems to me that the latter isn't done. If so, why isn't it?
-
We don't exactly have a policy for that. Generally we're figuring people are able to guess that if the report doesn't result in any visible action being taken, the moderation team disagreed with the report.
We don't always act immediately on reports either, especially if we're debating whether there needs to be additional action taken beyond shitcanning a post - sometimes it's easier to do everything at once just to make sure we don't miss anything.
Silver also works stupidly long hours, so if we want to run something past him before doing it, that can gum up the works as well.
-
Usually when I report a post, I am either :
- Thinking it's borderline, but not totally convinced. Just that I would see it subject to moderation but... Generally if it's not modded I understand why.
- Thinking it should be moderared and totally convinced about it. Then seeing it not modded makes me wonder why.
However, I don't see how the mods could answer to everyone when a report is not acknowledged...
-
The thing is that I can of course guess that if no visible action is taken, that the moderation team disagreed with the report: I might want to know in some instances, though why they disagreed. - Just as reasons are given when a post gets moderated. Of course I don't expect a thread to be opened up for every post that didn't get moderated and the reasons why: A PM would be nice, though.
Also, I just like to hear after a while that my report has been looked at at all. It might not make that much of a difference with what happens, but it gives me the knowledge and feeling that my report has at least been looked at.
I guess that others feel similar about it.
If that would mean that the one to two minutes per report add quickly up to hours of work for the moderation team, I'd understand why they just skip it. I can also understand that the moderation process takes some time, given that the moderators have a real life and are spread over different time zones.
So, that said, I'd like to see a policy for how to handle reports that aren't acted upon. I'm also okay with a policy that says "We don't give feedback if we don't see the need to act on a report, because we don't have the time to." or something like that, as long as I know what I can expect - though I'd be happier if I'd be able to expect to get some kind of feedback after a while.
-
In general I am not fond of any kind of feedback system for explaining our actions on reports that nothing has been (visibly) done for.
Opening to the public domain on explaining the 'why' can lead to a can of worms. Usually in the form of disagreement and argument that the post should have been moderated. We could minimize that possibility by privately informing the reporter, but it only takes one person trying to stir up shit to make our jobs unnecessarily difficult. This can also lead to a game of chicken with problem posters who are trying to feel out the borders for how far they can get away with their bad posting.
I understand good behavior posters will probably want to make sure they aren't overstepping by doing too much reporting. Frankly if that becomes an issue, it is easier to work it out with that particular over-reporter than institute a whole system for every non-action report. I'm personally in favor of over-reporters, since some posts slip past our radar in their toxicity.
At the poster-level of duty, I feel a poster reporting a post then completely ignoring that post + its strain of related posts is best. You've done your forumly duty by notifying the administration and refraining yourself from complicating the situation. It isn't necessary to concern your attention from that point onward. Granted, it can be hard to ignore a whole strain of posts particularly if others are engaging it or derailing the thread because of it. Nonetheless, reporting then participating in the strain of posts you have reported is not looked favorably upon. I'm personally in favor of warning users who do so, because if you honestly think the fundamentals of those posts are breaking the rules you should not be furthering them along.
That all aside, perhaps a system 'your post has been reviewed' notification may suffice. It is sufficiently neutral to avoid the issues I described above, while letting people know the administration has seen it. There are some issues with this idea as well, mostly in the form of 'oh you took no action waah' or 'why do you never look at my reports?'. It's hard to explain our reasoning without giving away what might be case building or private resolution with the problem source.
-
If you want to know whether a post you have reported has been looked at, you can also always PM a mod. We probably won't go into any details, but we will let you know either 'We are sitll discussing it' or 'We decided not to take action'. That way you know if you can, for example, respond to the post in question or what have you. I don't think we will be implementing a system where we respond with a PM to every single report.
-
Well, thanks for the responses. Especially what you said, Silver, helped me, as I'd naturally tend to bother the moderation team as little as possible. But if you say it's okay to ask, then I'll take your word for it. :) Also, I'm happy to know how it is handled.
-
I don't think a system to respond to every report is required or desired. But it is nice to get a clarification on the rules or on their interpretation sometimes. I also do that on the EVE-O forums, and it has cut down on my "over-reporting" considerably.
-
Well, we have this section, and also again, you can feel free to PM a mod if you have a specific question about the application of the rules. In some cases, we tend to not draw extremely clear lines about what is and isn't allowed, because given a line, some people have a tendency to tiptoe along it.
-
The problem with not having a clear line is the fact that the personal feelings of the mods will affect the outcome.
-
The problem with not having a clear line is the fact that the personal feelings of the mods will affect the outcome.
The problem could be that moderators do have a clear line but the personal feelings and preconceptions of forum users affect their perception.
Edited for spelling and stuff