Suggested Change to the "Report A Post" Function

P. Breathnach

hullaballoo wrote: »

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!

I think you will find that you have confused me with PBreathnach.

Also, you can just switch on track PMs. That will tell you whether you PM has been read by whomever. If it has and nothing happens, I mean, nothing actually happens, then it's likely the person didn't think anything needed to be done.

That's the sort of thing I would like! "Report post" does not function in that way. I do not have a record of what I said. In most cases, it doesn't matter; once in a while it does.

Thanks for the positive engagement.

OldGoat

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's the sort of thing I would like! "Report post" does not function in that way. I do not have a record of what I said. In most cases, it doesn't matter; once in a while it does.

Thanks for the positive engagement.

It's unworkable as outlined. To generate a "report read" receipt would rely on a mod opening the post in the reported post forum but the majority of mods now respond to reported posts via the email link that is sent to them rather then actually going into the reported posts forum.

On the other side I frequently go into the reported posts forum and read posts there without taking any action on them. My browsing would generate a 'Report Read' reply but it would not mean that I've done anything about it and have left it for the forum mod to take care of.

As things stand adding a trying to add a 'report read' auto-notification would be redundant.

To make it feasable you would have to remove access to reported posts via emails which means that the mods and cmods would not receive notifications and that would be to the detrement of the forum.


EDIT: I may have misunderstood what you are suggesting. I'm working on the assumtpion that you would like to see a 'Report read' receipt auto-generated when a reported post is read by the mods in the Reported Posts fourm.

Zaph

hullaballoo wrote: »

Also, you can just switch on track PMs. That will tell you whether you PM has been read by whomever.

It's probably worth mentioning that it is possible to click no to sending a read-receipt notification, so although the PM may have been read the sender wouldn't necessarily know it had.

hullaballoo

Zaph wrote: »

It's probably worth mentioning that it is possible to click no to sending a read-receipt notification, so although the PM may have been read the sender wouldn't necessarily know it had.

Yes, I meant to mention that. But again, that may have its own value.


Tbh, I don't think this is a reported posts issue anymore. It's turned into an issue that has been discussed many times in the past: whether there can be an obligation to let people know that a report/PM/request has been addressed. That's totally a trust issue and not something that can be fixed by an automated feature.

This exact issue was discussed last month, here. As you can see, there are plenty of viewpoints. The main one from a Mod point of view is that it is a time-sink. The other major point is that even a tick-box/auto-PM feature would require site dev and seemingly the resources are not there at the moment to add features on a whim.

mathepac

MugMugs wrote: »

Why? What's it got to do with you what happens? You've raised your concern your interest ends there.

I don't agree. If I report and nothing happens I'll know not to waste everyone's time the next time I see a similar post. Similarly if I report and see an action I'll know that was appropriate. It's called learning. I'd need to keep track of my reports to learn.

mathepac

Dades wrote: »

And an automated personal reminder of what posts you've reported is going to solve what, exactly?

See above

mathepac

hullaballoo wrote: »

... The other major point is that even a tick-box/auto-PM feature would require site dev and seemingly the resources are not there at the moment to add features on a whim.

I don't request changes on a whim - I make suggestions to improve the site from a poster's perspective.

Orion

mathepac wrote: »

I don't request changes on a whim - I make suggestions to improve the site from a poster's perspective.

I fail to see how this would improve the site as you say. Even in a relatively peaceful forum such as Parenting I see reported posts which we take no action on because they are not in breach of charters or site rules. Those reports just get read and ignored. What a poster may see as an actionable post may not be - we are constrained by the charter ourselves too.

If you really feel that a post is actionable and nothing happens then you can PM the mods/Cmods for further action and they will be read - even if no further action is taken. I really fail to see why you would need anything more than that. you have done your civic duty in reporting the post - pat yourself on the back and move on.
I'll give an analogy: if you suspect a child protection issue (neglect, abuse, whatever) you are mandated to report it to either the HSE or police. Once that's done and they are investigating you will never hear the result of the investigation or what actions have been taken. Ever. I'm not drawing a comparison to someone acting the dick on boards to neglect of a child but the principle of your report being looked into and you left out of the result is the same.

mathepac

Orion wrote: »

I fail to see how this would improve the site as you say. ...

I know and I believe that feedback exists because you don't see the site or use it from an ordinary poster's perspective

Orion wrote: »

.... Even in a relatively peaceful forum such as Parenting I see reported posts which we take no action on because they are not in breach of charters or site rules. Those reports just get read and ignored. ...

And maybe if the loop was closed to the reporter (as I suggested before) by explaining why no action was taken, the number of reported post would reduce, thus freeing up valuable time / reducing the need for so many mods.

Orion wrote: »

.... you have done your civic duty in reporting the post - pat yourself on the back and move on.....

There is nothing to remind me that I did a "Report Post" a lot of the time. Unless I am an active participant in a particular thread, it may not be at the forefront of my mind and may just fade away. And I may then report / not report a similar post because I heard nothing back.

Orion wrote: »

.... I really fail to see why you would need anything more than that. you have done your civic duty in reporting the post - pat yourself on the back and move on. ....

Ah always the hard word. Sarcasm? Trolling? Is it worth reporting?

Orion wrote: »

... I'll give an analogy: if you suspect a child protection issue (neglect, abuse, whatever) you are mandated to report it to either the HSE or police. Once that's done and they are investigating you will never hear the result of the investigation or what actions have been taken. Ever. I'm not drawing a comparison to someone acting the dick on boards to neglect of a child but the principle of your report being looked into and you left out of the result is the same.

That's not an analogy. You most assuredly are drawing comparisons and it's outrageous you can see even the remotest similarities.

Insect Overlord

This is the advice given with the Report Post button:

This is used to report a post that needs to be brought to the attention of a forum moderator. Please say briefly why you reported this post, and the relevant moderators will consider if the post warrants any further action. All reported posts are recorded, reviewed and considered.

Thank you for helping to make boards.ie a better place.

I've added the bold emphasis myself. The point is this:

A user should report a post if they feel, for whatever reason, that a moderator should be made aware of it. You send the report based on how you feel about the post. It's not about how you imagine the moderators might feel.

That's all there is to it.

Dades

mathepac wrote: »

I don't agree. If I report and nothing happens I'll know not to waste everyone's time the next time I see a similar post. Similarly if I report and see an action I'll know that was appropriate. It's called learning. I'd need to keep track of my reports to learn.

Do you currently follow up every reported post to see if anything has been done?

Again, everyone keeps ignoring the invisible moderation that often happens. How do know this hasn't happened before you decide not to 'waste everyone's time' reporting a similar post?

mathepac

Dades wrote: »

Do you currently follow up every reported post to see if anything has been done?

I've just finished explaining how that is impossible as I have no link back to any post I report. If you want to make a constructive contribution at least take the time to read the thread.

very foggy lad

Leave the damxthing along all ye want is someone to thanks yer post. You are worse than be drivers..

OldGoat

mathepac wrote: »

I've just finished explaining how that is impossible as I have no link back to any post I report. If you want to make a constructive contribution at least take the time to read the thread.

OldGoat wrote: »

As has been pointed out in other threads similar to this one you won't necessarly see any actions taken on your reported post. Some actions taken by mods are not going to be visible. Hence your record of report/action taken would never be complete.

Even if you did get notification of your reported post you would not have access to the full range of mod actions. If one of your reported posts subsequently shows no visible action will you assume that no action has been taken and would you then raise it again either as a fresh report or via PM to the mods?

What I'm trying to understand is that if you have a list of reported posts and some of those have no visible action taken on them what have you achieved? What do you expect to happen then?

oscarBravo

mathepac wrote: »

And maybe if the loop was closed to the reporter (as I suggested before) by explaining why no action was taken, the number of reported post would reduce, thus freeing up valuable time / reducing the need for so many mods.

We've had this conversation before. While accepting your view that it might contribute something to the quality of moderation, it is our belief that the potential benefits that might accrue wouldn't justify the fairly considerable increase in workload for our volunteer moderators.

There is nothing to remind me that I did a "Report Post" a lot of the time. Unless I am an active participant in a particular thread, it may not be at the forefront of my mind and may just fade away. And I may then report / not report a similar post because I heard nothing back.

Yes. But that's the system we currently have, and it works reasonably well. I don't think you've successfully made the case that the system is so deeply flawed that it requires development effort (which is a scarce and therefore not a free resource) as well as increasing the moderators' workload.

That's not an analogy. You most assuredly are drawing comparisons and it's outrageous you can see even the remotest similarities.

I'm puzzled as to why this issue has you so exercised that you're outraged by what struck me as a not unreasonable analogy, especially when it was suitably qualified.

Dades

mathepac wrote: »

I've just finished explaining how that is impossible as I have no link back to any post I report. If you want to make a constructive contribution at least take the time to read the thread.

Ignoring your theatrical exasperation for the moment, if you were that bent on following up there are options open to you. You could cut and paste the link to and text of every reported post into a draft email. Or make a wee note on a sheet of paper.

Personally I don't think you want this option for anything other than attempting to build a record of mods failing to act, for reasons yet unknown. And still no acknowledgment that posts/posters are moderated off-thread meaning even a log is pointless.

mathepac

oscarBravo wrote: »

We've had this conversation before. ...

I didn't realise there was a limit to the number of times a topic could be discussed, albeit in passing.

oscarBravo wrote: »

... While accepting your view that it might contribute something to the quality of moderation, it is our belief that the potential benefits that might accrue wouldn't justify the fairly considerable increase in workload for our volunteer moderators. ...

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. It is my firm belief that my current proposal could over time reduce the workload as I have already described in the thread. And please leave the volunteering thing out, it's done to death. If mods want to mod, let them shut up about the "volunteering" and mod away, otherwise let them find alternative hobbies.

oscarBravo wrote: »

... Yes. But that's the system we currently have, and it works reasonably well. I don't think you've successfully made the case that the system is so deeply flawed that it requires development effort (which is a scarce and therefore not a free resource) as well as increasing the moderators' workload. ...

I don't see how. As I've said before, as none of you seem to want feedback, delete the forum.

oscarBravo wrote: »

... I'm puzzled as to why this issue has you so exercised that you're outraged by what struck me as a not unreasonable analogy, especially when it was suitably qualified.

boards.ie is merely a commercial website. To attempt to put it on a par or to use it in a comparison with child safety stretches the imagination beyond any credible limit.

The Hill Billy

mathepac wrote: »

?..And please leave the volunteering thing out, it's done to death. If mods want to mod, let them shut up about the "volunteering" and mod away, otherwise let them find alternative hobbies...

You raise this yet again. Really, let it go.

The 'volunteer moderator' model is how the site owners & administrators want boards.ie to be run. It works very well for most forums & most posters seem to be content with it. As a matter of fact, the only poster out of the hundreds of thousand registered users who consistently complains about this is you.

Have you thought that maybe the issue is with you & not this site?

oscarBravo

mathepac wrote: »

I didn't realise there was a limit to the number of times a topic could be discussed, albeit in passing.

There certainly doesn't seem to be any limit to the number of times you ask this website to invest developer effort and/or change procedures for reasons that are never quite completely clear.

Yes, I get that you believe it could improve moderation, but generally when someone goes on and on and on about how something could be improved, it suggests that they feel that it is badly lacking and desperately needs the improvement.

If you feel that the moderation is so badly lacking that it requires diverting developer resources towards systems for improving it, or the introduction of new procedures which we would (presumably) require all our moderators to follow, you're really going to have to make a case for it. I don't think I'm alone in feeling that you haven't made that case.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. It is my firm belief that my current proposal could over time reduce the workload as I have already described in the thread.

It might. It might not. It's quite the risk to take, and - given that I think our moderation process works pretty well in general - I can't see the payoff.

And please leave the volunteering thing out, it's done to death. If mods want to mod, let them shut up about the "volunteering" and mod away, otherwise let them find alternative hobbies.

And if they're happy to moderate according to our current processes, but don't want to take on the extra workload required to be fully mathepac-compliant, that's OK? We'll just have to make do with whatever smaller number of moderators are willing to do things to your satisfaction?

I don't see how. As I've said before, as none of you seem to want feedback, delete the forum.

With all due respect, it comes across as rather petulant to suggest that there shouldn't be a Feedback forum just because we don't implement your every suggestion.

boards.ie is merely a commercial website. To attempt to put it on a par or to use it in a comparison with child safety stretches the imagination beyond any credible limit.

The person who made the analogy stated clearly that he wasn't comparing the two. You rejected this qualification out of hand, which strikes me as little more than an excuse to ignore the actual (valid) point of the analogy.

If I'm coming across as dismissive, it's because, frankly, I don't get what your motives are for the changes you seek. Nominally, you are claiming that these changes are in the best interests of the site, but your generally hostile and snarky tone in these threads doesn't ring true.

If you feel you badly need a record of every post you've reported for reasons you haven't fully articulated here, copy and paste the URL of each post you report into a spreadsheet.

Turtwig

mathepac wrote: »

And please leave the volunteering thing out, it's done to death. If mods want to mod, let them shut up about the "volunteering" and mod away, otherwise let them find alternative hobbies. .

If modding were to become a ridiculously impractical labour exploitation like role there'd probably be no mods left.Even if mods were getting paid they'd still have limits to the work the do. So, please don't tell people to shut up about volunteering. Your solutions needs to be workable. Dismissing the people who'll implement your proposed solutions, is well, frankly, a god awful morbid and insensitive way of running any venture, never mind the fact that this is supposedly an online community.

Overheal

as none of you seem to want feedback, delete the forum.

That's ironic: you don't seem to appreciate the responses you get, and closing your account is also an option.

mathepac

The Hill Billy wrote: »

You raise this yet again. Really, let it go.

The 'volunteer moderator' model is how the site owners & administrators want boards.ie to be run. It works very well for most forums & most posters seem to be content with it. As a matter of fact, the only poster out of the hundreds of thousand registered users who consistently complains about this is you.

Have you thought that maybe the issue is with you & not this site?

Read the thread please, I did not raise the issue of volunteering, someone else did. It has no relevance to the current (or any) discussion and yet it is inevitable in feedback that it gets trotted out as a reason not to change or why expectations should be low.

hullaballoo

mathepac wrote: »

I don't request changes on a whim - I make suggestions to improve the site from a poster's perspective.

Yes, you do - no, you don't.


Anyway, it wasn't your whim I was talking about. It's for Admins to do things on a whim. Or not.

The Hill Billy

mathepac wrote: »

Read the thread please, I did not raise the issue of volunteering, someone else did. It has no relevance to the current (or any) discussion and yet it is inevitable in feedback that it gets trotted out as a reason not to change or why expectations should be low.

I have read the thread, & yes another poster mentioned it in passing & you felt that it was serious enough to challenge on-thread.

And as for it getting 'trotted-out' as an excuse not to implement change - well, that's not entirely true is it? The time & effort that moderators put into this site is very relevant to the Reported Post process. If that process became overly complicated & time-consuming it is possible that it would be unworkable. The possible outcome being a site with few moderators & very little moderation. If that is what you are looking for there are many other sites out there to suit you.

mathepac

oscarBravo wrote: »

There certainly doesn't seem to be any limit to the number of times you ask this website to invest developer effort and/or change procedures for reasons that are never quite completely clear.

Yes, I get that you believe it could improve moderation, but generally when someone goes on and on and on about how something could be improved, it suggests that they feel that it is badly lacking and desperately needs the improvement.

If you feel that the moderation is so badly lacking that it requires diverting developer resources towards systems for improving it, or the introduction of new procedures which we would (presumably) require all our moderators to follow, you're really going to have to make a case for it. I don't think I'm alone in feeling that you haven't made that case. It might. It might not. It's quite the risk to take, and - given that I think our moderation process works pretty well in general - I can't see the payoff. And if they're happy to moderate according to our current processes, but don't want to take on the extra workload required to be fully mathepac-compliant, that's OK? We'll just have to make do with whatever smaller number of moderators are willing to do things to your satisfaction? With all due respect, it comes across as rather petulant to suggest that there shouldn't be a Feedback forum just because we don't implement your every suggestion. The person who made the analogy stated clearly that he wasn't comparing the two. You rejected this qualification out of hand, which strikes me as little more than an excuse to ignore the actual (valid) point of the analogy.

If I'm coming across as dismissive, it's because, frankly, I don't get what your motives are for the changes you seek. Nominally, you are claiming that these changes are in the best interests of the site, but your generally hostile and snarky tone in these threads doesn't ring true.

If you feel you badly need a record of every post you've reported for reasons you haven't fully articulated here, copy and paste the URL of each post you report into a spreadsheet.

You'll have to explain to me in detail how sending me a copy of a post I report from the "Report a Post" function increases the workload of a mod in any respect by even one iota. As I've already said several times it will over time reduce the volume of reports and improve the quality as users learn when/what it is appropriate to report.

Volunteering - no relevance
Child safety issues- no relevance
Increase in mod workload - Urban myth

The only thing likely to increase in the short term is the volume of "Report a Post" messages flying around. Through dint of the application of mathematics I've worked out this will exactly double but I believe this will ultimately reduce.

The functionality is simple as already described and everything needed already exists, the only change is to the backend to format a PM to the user from the existing data as well as whatever it does now:

my user-name: known
mod name:known
url of the post: known
text I typed: known
the PM function: known

6 or 7 lines of pre-existing code combined in a new routine called from within the "Report a Post" function.

mathepac

The Hill Billy wrote: »

I have read the thread, & yes another poster mentioned it in passing & you felt that it was serious enough to challenge on-thread.

And as for it getting 'trotted-out' as an excuse not to implement change - well, that's not entirely true is it? The time & effort that moderators put into this site is very relevant to the Reported Post process. If that process became overly complicated & time-consuming it is possible that it would be unworkable. The possible outcome being a site with few moderators & very little moderation. If that is what you are looking for there are many other sites out there to suit you.

I can only conclude that you have either not read my proposal or that you and others cannot understand it.

My proposal increases mod work-load how? Explain to me where i have made any proposal to change or increase the time requirement or workload or work practices for moderators. As I have said from the start, this is a proposal to reduce the "Report a Post" traffic and any resultant moderator work by user learning.

The work required is developer time (a couple of hours at most) to code and test it, and user time to action whatever they feel needs actioning.

There could also perhaps be a pop-up (or just some text in the dialogue box) to warn users that the report a post will send them a PM as a record. This in itself might be enough to discourage frivolous / un-necessary reports

Orim

mathepac wrote: »

You'll have to explain to me in detail how sending me a copy of a post I report from the "Report a Post" function increases the workload of a mod in any respect by even one iota. As I've already said several times it will over time reduce the volume of reports and improve the quality as users learn when/what it is appropriate to report..

I would imagine that your PMs and threads regarding the reports you felt weren't actioned correctly would lead to an increase in the mod workload.

As for when it's appropriate to report, it's appropriate whenever you feel it is. But in order for it to work you need to trust the mods to do their job.

mathepac

hullaballoo wrote: »

Yes, you do - no, you don't.


Anyway, it wasn't your whim I was talking about. It's for Admins to do things on a whim. Or not.

This kind of crap is really unhelpful as I'm sure you and your colleagues know, but as usual you get to indulge yourselves in behaviour and commentary that would get ordinary posters punished.

hullaballoo

mathepac wrote: »

This kind of crap is really unhelpful as I'm sure you and your colleagues know, but as usual you get to indulge yourselves in behaviour and commentary that would get ordinary posters punished.

Just report the post?

mathepac

Overheal wrote: »

That's ironic: you don't seem to appreciate the responses you get, and closing your account is also an option.

No I do not appreciate the sarcasm, dismissive tones and downright bad manners and attempted bullying displayed in some of the responses.

As it happens there are aspects of boards.ie that I enjoy, hence my efforts to try and suggest improvements. As for closing my account, I couldn't possibly give those who post in the manner I describe above the satisfaction.