Reporting posts: what's the point if the system is not transparent?

Iwannahurl

I have reported a few posts in a particular forum and the response has been inconsistent, to say the least.

Members are thanked for trying to make Boards a better place, but how can the Report Post function contribute to this effort if it is so lacking in transparency and accountability?

When you report a post the message goes to the Mod(s) but there is absolutely no feedback regarding the Mods opinion of the reported post or of the reporter's comments on it.

It is frustrating to report a post only to find that no action has been taken and no explanation forthcoming for that inaction. Attempting to enquire by PM is not satisfactory either, as in my experience this approach can just be ignored.

Without an 'audit trail' for the Report Post function, it is not possible to use it systematically and constructively, IMO.

Insect Overlord

Same problem as last time, or something new?

Iwannahurl

Jeepers, you have a good memory. I had to go back and remind myself.

Same forum, but not the same problem exactly (as I see it). On that occasion I was thoroughly hacked off at what I saw as a disingenuous response not just from a Mod but from a CMod too. Clearly I am not on the same wavelength as they are!

I realise and accept that there is bound to be subjectivity and individual difference in these matters. That is why I refer to the transparency of the Report Post feature rather than to the specifics of the post I reported and my reasons for reporting it.

Fair enough, a Mod may not concur that the post needs reporting, but where is there a record of the refereeing process?

Mr Magnolia

It's been explained to you previously that every reported post gets reviewed and it's up to the mod to make a call on any appropriate action. If the mod is unsure a discussion normally starts either on the reported post thread or by PM or in the specific moderator forum. If you feel no action has been taken and you are certain that the post required an intervention from a mod that isn't forthcoming you are of course entitled to PM the mod to ask the question (give the mods 24hrs or so after the report). If you get no response then PM the CMod.

You should really go to the helpdesk and start linking specific occurrences of concern as the speculative threads in feedback don't seem to be mitigating any of your concerns.

Elmidena

With the high volume of reported posts, it would be not only impractical but all the more time consuming for mods to reply to the ones that reported them. They're here on an unpaid voluntary basis, giving up their time to help run the site. You can't really expect them to give up even more of their time responding to everyone--what if there's say fifteen reports on one post? The time taken to reply to each of those could have been spent cleaning up fifteen other posts.

As suggested, PM the mods of the forum in question, and if you don't get an answer then drop the CMod a line

Zaph

Just as an indication, since yesterday to right now, there have been 188 reported posts. And bear in mind that boards is much quieter at the weekends, that number increases significantly on weekdays. The sheer volume of reported posts makes it impossible to respond to each one individually, if mods were to do that they'd be doing little else. If you have a concern over a particular reported post then PM the mods. If you get not response pass it on to the CMods.

EPM

Elmidena wrote: »

With the high volume of reported posts, it would be not only impractical but all the more time consuming for mods to reply to the ones that reported them. They're here on an unpaid voluntary basis, giving up their time to help run the site. You can't really expect them to give up even more of their time responding to everyone--what if there's say fifteen reports on one post? The time taken to reply to each of those could have been spent cleaning up fifteen other posts.

As suggested, PM the mods of the forum in question, and if you don't get an answer then drop the CMod a line

I'd have to agree. There are often times where forum moderator may not be online for a day or more due to work/life commitments. If action isn't taken on a reported post a PM is most definitely the way to go. However, give a day to allow people review the posts. Reporting posts an hour later and bombarding mods with PM's almost as regularly just serves no other purpose than to clog inboxes and get people's back up.

P. Breathnach

Zaph wrote: »

Just as an indication, since yesterday to right now, there have been 188 reported posts...

Can you clarify, please? Does that mean that across all of Boards in a period of almost 36 hours there were 188 reported posts? Have you excluded double-counting, where particular posts have been reported more than once?

pickarooney

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Have you excluded double-counting, where particular posts have been reported more than once?

Why differentiate if each of the people reporting it would expect a response?

Zaph

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Zaph wrote: »

Just as an indication, since yesterday to right now, there have been 188 reported posts...

Can you clarify, please? Does that mean that across all of Boards in a period of almost 36 hours there were 188 reported posts? Have you excluded double-counting, where particular posts have been reported more than once?

That's 188 individual posts that were reported and excludes how ever many multiple reports of posts there may have been.

ToadVine

So if there has been 188 reported posts ... and if there are (say) 300 mods ... would that mean that responding to the reported posts wouldn't actually be that big a deal? The maths would suggest this would create very little extra work for mods ...

Or am I missing something here?

EPM

ToadVine wrote: »

So if there has been 188 reported posts ... and if there are (say) 300 mods ... would that mean that responding to the reported posts wouldn't actually be that big a deal? The maths would suggest this would create very little extra work for mods ...

Or am I missing something here?

To be fair it is the weekend, and on top of that you're relying on that particular forums mod(s) being available too. Mods might be online but may not have control of the the forum where the reports originate from.

Insect Overlord

ToadVine wrote: »

So if there has been 188 reported posts ... and if there are (say) 300 mods ... would that mean that responding to the reported posts wouldn't actually be that big a deal? The maths would suggest this would create very little extra work for mods ...

Or am I missing something here?

Take into account that most mods have lives outside of the site (*forever alone*), and that Friday and Saturday nights are, typically, the times when people go out/meet up/switch off. Then there are people out shopping, parents with children to look after, students with weekend jobs, sports people playing/training/coaching, musicians jamming, motorists travelling, etc...

Certain busy forums also generate more reported posts than many other (quieter) forums put together. The work-load isn't always evenly spread.*

It wouldn't take too long to send a reporter a quick PM in response. A lot of mods do that anyway, when the time allows. The trouble is when the reporter isn't satisfied and that one message leads to a few hours of back and forth arguing. If that happens during a busy spell, or during a major event, then it gets in the way of the whole forum being looked after.

(* there's more to modding a forum than just looking after reported posts, of course.)

P. Breathnach

pickarooney wrote: »

Why differentiate if each of the people reporting it would expect a response?

I'm not taking a position on that at the moment. From time to time we are told that the volume of reported posts is very high. The figure Zaph has given us is interesting, and far lower than I would have expected.

Morag

It depends on the amount of traffic and posts a forum gets.
A quiet forum with a small group of posters using it may not get even one reported post in 9 months. The likes of the soccer forum over the time frame of a 'lively' game could end up with 188 reported posted in the space of 2/3 hours, the same may be possible with forums with the bulk of the traffic like AH.

So the load is not spread evenly.

Ickle Magoo

Take this morning; according to my inbox we're around the 13/14 reported post mark at the last count since I logged off late last night - I've also had to deal with the troll who was re-regging and generating many of the reports. Add being obliged to reply to each of the reported posts on top of that and suddenly my "job" just got much harder/longer/more like an actual job.

That's before you even get to those who report posts which don't need actioned and who would argue why that shouldn't be the case, those who report posts they disagree with or want sanctioned and you'd find yourself discussing/arguing/defending one posters warnings/infractions/bans with the poster who is gunning for that action to be taken.

Reports are a handy tool that alerts mods to posts that potentially require action, I don't there is any need to view them as a personal message to the mods that require a personal response. It's not obligatory to report posts, it's often helpful as a heads up but I certainly wouldn't be keen on getting into the situation where as well as taking action and often having to deal with the fall-out from that from the poster concerned, I'm also potentially required to get into PM tennis with multiple posters regarding whether that action/inaction is warranted/correct/harsh/etc - decisions which are often based on a posters history and details which are not available for public viewing.

Zaph

ToadVine wrote: »

So if there has been 188 reported posts ... and if there are (say) 300 mods ... would that mean that responding to the reported posts wouldn't actually be that big a deal? The maths would suggest this would create very little extra work for mods ...

Or am I missing something here?

I'm afraid you are. You're assuming that those 188 posts are spread across all forums equally, however the vast majority of forums will have no reported posts at all, whereas others such as AH and Soccer (particularly at the weekend) will be responsible for a fairly high percentage of the reports. There simply wouldn't be the resources available to reply to every single report in those forums, and if we were to introduce such a requirement for mods it would have to be across the board, not just for smaller forums where the mods may have time to respond to the odd reported post.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I'm not taking a position on that at the moment. From time to time we are told that the volume of reported posts is very high. The figure Zaph has given us is interesting, and far lower than I would have expected.

That's just a quick count, but I have no idea how that compares to the same period on other weekends so I wouldn't be reading too much into it. And as I said, the volumes are much higher during the week.

What also needs to be pointed out is that if mods did have to PM everyone who reported a post, it wouldn't just end there. There are a number of posters, no names mentioned, who report posts quite often and would not be satisfied with a PM telling them that no further action was necessary. The mod would get drawn into long PM debates with these people, and ultimately we'd get to the point where nobody would ever agree to be a mod if they knew they had to put up with that sort of thing. I'm not in any way saying that mods (or CMods or admins) are without fault and cannot be questioned on their actions or inactions regarding reported posts, but it should be reasonable and reporters should realise that they may not always be right themselves.

P. Breathnach

Zaph wrote: »

That's 188 individual posts that were reported and excludes how ever many multiple reports of posts there may have been.

Thanks.

Supplementary question: is there any way of knowing if a mod has seen a report in his/her forum? Something like it being marked as having been read?

I ask this because I sometimes check if a mod has been online after I have reported a post, and if he or she has, and no action has been taken, I infer that the mod has deemed that no action is needed.

There is also a situation where I reported a post several days ago. The sole mod of that forum has not posted there in years (yes, literally years) and seems to be online only sporadically. Is there a mechanism for having reports dealt with where there is prolonged mod absence?

Elmidena

I report posts because it's impossible for a mod to read every thread and every comment (no need to PM me about the few I gave you heads up on this morning Ickle :P) I don't for one minute think that anyone has to get back to me. Once or twice I've thrown in a couple of sentences on why I think it's worth a look over (such as the one in Prison Gordon changed to disemvowelled) but the majority of the time I write things like "repost" if it's in YLYL, "spam" if the shoe fits, "troll" if it's obvious or "unhelpful to OP/sharp tones" if in RI. I'm doing my bit to help out, why on earth should I expect people to come along and thank me for it? I don't do it for gratitude after all. If a post isn't sanctioned, either it slipped through the cracks or you need a think about why it doesn't really need modding. If you still have questions after thinking with an unbiased mind, then PM. But I am not in favour in any way to force more pressure on the staff. They've enough to deal with without dumping more rules and restrictions on their plate. They're people too, and I think a lot of people forget that. Namely the ones that start going off about them being jumped-up gods on a power rush!

Otis Driftwood

IMO,if there is a forum with only one mod and said mod isnt active then it should be brought to cmod/admin attention to address.Its possible that for smaller forums,say like the mustard forum for example,that gets little no traffic that the mods just dont bother logging in and as a result,for all intents and purposes it is unmodded.

I think though that when a post is reported in a forum,the cmods get email notification too however Im open to correction on this.

It was discussed before I believe that a number of mods,particularly on a mental busy forum like AH thank reported posts as a way of letting the other mods know its been seen/dealt with.

Insect Overlord

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Supplementary question: is there any way of knowing if a mod has seen a report in his/her forum? Something like it being marked as having been read?

Not always. When a post is reported, it creates a new thread in the Reported Posts forum. Sometimes another mod can tell it's been looked at from the "threads views" column, or if the OP/reporter has been thanked. However, the report also automatically e-mails the relevant mods. A lot of mods just follow the e-mail link instead of stopping off in the RP forum along the way.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I ask this because I sometimes check if a mod has been online after I have reported a post, and if he or she has, and no action has been taken, I infer that the mod has deemed that no action is needed.

There's also a feature on your profile that lets you "hide" whether you're on-line or not. I use it, so the green light and "last time on-line" status don't show up for me, even though I tend to spend a lot of time on the site. Just to confuse matters!

P. Breathnach wrote: »

There is also a situation where I reported a post several days ago. The sole mod of that forum has not posted there in years (yes, literally years) and seems to be online only sporadically. Is there a mechanism for having reports dealt with where there is prolonged mod absence?

PM the CMods. They'll sort that out.

Zaph

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Supplementary question: is there any way of knowing if a mod has seen a report in his/her forum? Something like it being marked as having been read?

I ask this because I sometimes check if a mod has been online after I have reported a post, and if he or she has, and no action has been taken, I infer that the mod has deemed that no action is needed.

Some mods may thank a post or comment on it in the Reported Posts forum to indicate to their co-mods that they have seen it and dealt with it appropriately, which may mean no further action is required. However this isn't a specific requirement and the only way of knowing if a report has been thanked would be to trawl through every thread in the Reported Posts forum individually, which isn't really practical.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

There is also a situation where I reported a post several days ago. The sole mod of that forum has not posted there in years (yes, literally years) and seems to be online only sporadically. Is there a mechanism for having reports dealt with where there is prolonged mod absence?

CMods also receive e-mails advising them of posts reported in their category. In this case I'd say your best bet is to PM the CMods and tell them what you've posted above. It sounds like there's a need for an additional mod or two in that forum and they can look into it.

P. Breathnach

Insect Overlord wrote: »

... There's also a feature on your profile that lets you "hide" whether you're on-line or not. I use it, so the green light and "last time on-line" status don't show up for me, even though I tend to spend a lot of time on the site. Just to confuse matters!

I don't see the point of hiding your online status. If I was checking whether you had been online, I'd look at your posting history: post, and I'll know that you were online.

PM the CMods. They'll sort that out.

I thought that might be the case. That leads to another thing that irks me: I don't have a record of reports I made - when I reported, and what I said.

Insect Overlord

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I don't see the point of hiding your online status. If I was checking whether you had been online, I'd look at your posting history: post, and I'll know that you were online.


I thought that might be the case. That leads to another thing that irks me: I don't have a record of reports I made - when I reported, and what I said.

Part 1: personal preference at the moment. I always invite PMs when I moderate a thread, and there's a note in the Midwest charter that I can be contacted any time, so I suppose it doesn't make much of a difference.

Part 2: I found the report you were talking about using the thread display options. Given the time-frame and the thread-starter, the reports can be found very quickly, even if you don't have the link yourself. Not the most elegant of solutions, but a perfectly feasible one all the same.

Gordon

I think our system is much more transparent and accountable than many, many websites out there like Facebook, Twitter, Google+ for example. Every reported post is viewable by all boards mods if needs be which means full transparency. Also, the mods of the forum are accountable for the reports, so you'll know who to check with in case you need to.

The Volt

Out of curiosity, what happens if you report a mod's post? Can that mod see it?

Zaph

Voltwad wrote: »

Out of curiosity, what happens if you report a mod's post? Can that mod see it?

Yes, all reported posts are visible to all mods, although I doubt anybody actually goes searching for posts of theirs that have been reported.

RoundyMooney

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

IMO,if there is a forum with only one mod and said mod isnt active then it should be brought to cmod/admin attention to address.

This. I reckon no forum, no matter how much tumbleweed floats by in there, should have any less than two mods anyway. Private and hosted fora in particular.

I think the reporting system is quite transparent-there are a couple of hundred people who can see it-and all it is is a headsup anyway, nothing more.

P. Breathnach

Zaph wrote: »

Yes, all reported posts are visible to all mods, although I doubt anybody actually goes searching for posts of theirs that have been reported.

You were doing well in this thread up to this point, where you seem to have abandoned your understanding of human nature.

Zaph

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Zaph wrote: »

Yes, all reported posts are visible to all mods, although I doubt anybody actually goes searching for posts of theirs that have been reported.

You were doing well in this thread up to this point, where you seem to have abandoned your understanding of human nature.

I take your point, but unless it's a post in their own forum they won't be alerted to it, and why would you go looking for something that may or may not be there? The only exception might be if they post something that they expect to be reported. Regardless, if a post needs to be reported for any reason, the fact that it's a mod's post and that they can see the report should they be bothered looking should not stop anyone from reporting it. But if people are really concerned about this they can PM the CMods instead.

pickarooney

Elmidena wrote: »

Browser crashed and when I rebooted it wound up with a double post, sowwy

Tip: You can use the Delete button to get rid of the second post.

Question: If a mod thanks your reported post, does your number of thanks increase?