-->
@David
You are not, you're undermoderating.
FYI: Reporting is no longer anonymous.
Posts
Total:
96
-->
@RationalMadman
Then tell to me why they can and apparently 'should' allow goldtop and zeichen who are sole-bullies to run rampage but clamp down hard on other users?Did you even see what Tyrone posted? The guy who agrees with you posted vile, racist vitriol yesterday intentionally trying to aggravate some users so his buddy Thett and a couple others could ROFL at their sake.
I haven't been monitoring this site enough to be familiar with anything any of the aforementioned users, but what you just described doesn't sound like anything a block/ignore-user feature can't solve. And if it rises to the level of flooding/spamming, the ban-hammer takes care of that rather easily!
This is so sad. RM is going insane. Again. And he's gonna end up getting perma-banned. Again.
History repeats itself.
-->
@Tyrone
Am I? Interesting. I can't call people sociopaths but you can call me insane? Let's test that.
-->
@Tyrone
threatening with mod action? add that to the list.
-->
@Logical-Master
It can but Tyrone is yet to be banned.
You're such a loser, dude 😂
Imagine thinking "OOOO YOU BROKE THE RULES" is a sick burn.
So, first you whine about someone violating the CoC and then a few posts later, violate it yourself. Have you no brains at all?This violates threat CoCThen tell to me why they can and apparently 'should' allow goldtop and zeichen who are sole-bullies
-->
@Goldtop
thanks for proving me spot on.
-->
@drafterman
Calm your knickers.
The mods can see the users who are reporting I am more amazed that the didn’t already. They’re not revealing your social security details. If you want your bullsh*t to be tagged against your username, go to 4chan.
-->
@Ramshutu
to not be tagged*
-->
@RationalMadman
. I can't call people sociopaths but you can call me insane
Your username is literally "madman"
-->
@Wylted
Okay I've had about enough of you. Acting like my buddy one minute and a taunter the next. Enjoy the block experience.
coward, blocking because you're scared to face me. I'm on no sides but my own. Sometimes that means I'll agree with you and sometimes that means we'll disagree.
-->
@Wylted
That's fine. Enjoy the solitude.
did you literally unblock me for one second to ping me in a post because you're craving attention? This is like when you blocked the real Tyrone because you was scared of his response to you?
-->
@Wylted
No idea what you mean? You need to block me to stop me being able to do that.
-->
@DebateArt.com
Well, first of all, there is a difference between good workload and bad workload. One thing is to moderate actually problematic objects and the other is wasting hours just handling the things that were reported simply outta anger at the mods.Answering your questions:1) Well, as I pointed out before, we need to discuss it, I try not to go against the users if there is a way to avoid that. But I haven't given it much thought and at the moment, I am not sure how to handle the problem with abusing the reports, if somebody provides some good ideas how to keep the anonymity and prevent the mods from wasting their life on handling empty reports, then we'll go that way.
Sorry, but your initial, response gave me the impression that you don't think this is an issue. That the problem was lack of announcement rather than the fact that users don't have anonymity in reporting. Surely you have to realize that this is a crazy-backwards way to implement a reporting feature.
As far as how to deal with frivolous reports? Easy. Ignore them. The issue here is no the volume of reports, but the fact that the mods are so insane about voting moderation, that they've decided that every voting report, valid or not, requires personalized artisanal, hand-crafted response. I am a firm believer that the voting moderation is completely bonker-balls and the fact that reports are handled the way they are is evidence of that. If they took a step back and handled votes with the same magnanimous nature they handle comments, I think they'd see their "workload" lighten fairly significantly.
2) People abuse the reports creating unneeded work for the mods, that's just disrespect and the fact that they actually contacted the person and asked him or her to stop, or whatever it was, I have no idea, that's just showing how diligent they are, I wouldn't bother with this. Also it's important to understand that it's probably impossible to write some CoC or anything of the kind that people wouldn't be able to find loopholes in. And again, we don't have a dedicated department for that.
You haven't asked for help in this regard and haven't taken anyone up on any offers to help in this regard so I don't know what to tell you. Like, if you're voluntarily decided to keep things the way they are and that's insufficient, then, I don't know man. And the "unneeded work" is the fastidious and arcane manner in which votes are handled in the first place (See the underlined above)
I have never used reddit so can't be sure but it sounds like they have mod teams per subreddit, whatever that is, which they may have what, thousands? So they have thousands of free volunteer mod teams, we have 2 GLOBAL mods, they moderate everything.
Ugh. I'm beginning to regret even making this analogy. Treating all of reddit as some monolithic community is fallacious. Each subreddit is like an individual forum dedicated to a specific subject. Like the individual forums here, but with individual mod teams and individual users bases. The point is the ratio of mods-to-users is much less there and, per mod, they have to deal with much more work. They have no tool to deal with abuse of the reporting function yet they deal with this problem just fine: by ignoring such reports and moving on.
We could and we should get more mods at some point, but we need to build and improve the moderation system first. We'd need to implement layers of mods responsibilities, create different contexts and scopes, like those subreddits things, build a proper admin panel, which now loos like it's 1995 outside the window. But it's going to take time. If we simply add more mods now, they will create lots of confusion, since they'd have different moderation styles, different interpretation of the rules and lots of unnecessary communication to coordinate their efforts.
You've consistently said you're fine with the job they're doing. Problem is, they've unnecessarily deleted threads, they've necessary deleted comments. They approach uses - in their capacity as a moderator - for things that aren't violations. They have decidedly lied in order to file reports against users. I've brought this to your attention and you seemed concerned and sounded like you were going to look into it, but there seems to be no evidence of that and you continue to spout how you have no issues at all.
Yes, yes, I get it: they're not perfect. But there is clearly room for improvement and you should have issues with some of the things you are doing.
Are you seriously Ok with absolutely every single thing they've done?
-->
@Logical-Master
Massively disagree. Not sure what your intentions were in reporting every vote, but having mods assess every vote on every debate consumes a lot of time and resources and IMO leads them to them making absurd modding decisions like the ones I've pointed out to them in the past. Being able to see who is reporting is a fine means of weeding out frivolous reports and allowing them to narrow down on the stuff that actually needs to get addressed.Or less rule enforcement. For the most part, I think users here can police themselves in the current forum climate. They shouldn't even waste time moderating a fully forfeited debate. And unless a user is flooding/spamming the forums, posting pictures/links to obscene images or doing anything else that seriously and reasonable interferes with most of the other members' ability to enjoy the site, they shouldn't get involved.
I agree it is an issue with overmoderation. And that's why I was doing it. This system they've set up is absurd. The idea that they have to make a public notice for every single reported vote is crazy.
This isn't just spite, either. The problem is: most people don't give a shit. Usually the only time people report a vote is when it's against them on their own debates. I'm doing this to raise awareness of the absurdity that is going on here.
if they simply ignored reports on votes that are fine and - gasp - loosened their sphincters about voting standards a tad, there wouldn't be any issues.
-->
@drafterman
If you want transparency, then simply ignoring reported votes that are sufficient is not the way to do it. That being said, I do strongly agree that we need to loosen up a bit with votes that we removed...and once we have that finalised, we will have an announcement.
RM, you are a coward. When you know you will lose an exchange you run and block people so they can't respond. That is called being a pussy
-->
@David
Firstly, there is a spectrum. We could have a page that lists every act a moderator takes on the site, and a chat room where moderators discuss moderation decisions that everyone has visibility in to. At the other end, we can have no feedback on moderation actions, including refusal to even discuss hypothetical actions, and ruling based on arcane documents tucked away on niche corners of the internet.
We are much closer to the latter end than the former (generally speaking), so suggesting we fix that isn't a call to move completely to the other end.
Secondly, we have to recognize the dichotomy here with how vote moderation is handled versus comment moderation. It's basically night and day with absolutely no reason for that to be the case. It in fact undermines any argument you have for any kind of moderation because you are literally doing opposite forms of moderation in different areas of the website and claiming that they're both the best way to do it.
@Wylted
If I were a coward I wouldn't be engaging you or drafterman here. I'd be sitting in a corner sucking my thumb whispering 'if only I didn't have the stigma attached to my name' 'if only I could post without Tyrone calling me insane, wylted saying i'm this or that and other joining in and laughing as goldtop kicks me in the emotional ribs' but instead I say 'no, RM, you're done being a pussy, get out there and speak your fucking mind or get banned trying.'
You just blocked me, am I gonna call you a coward? No, you're entitled to fear me.
Is this referring to reporting posts and behavior in the forums, or reporting votes on debates? Because I am 100% okay with non-anonymous reporting of debate votes. I've had several great votes on the handful of debates Ive done get reported for literally no reason, even though some of the votes were literally 8 pages long on a google doc.
-->
@Imabench
drafterman, in the OP here, admitted my theory was true. It was him who was spamming those.
-->
@Imabench
Is this referring to reporting posts and behavior in the forums, or reporting votes on debates? Because I am 100% okay with non-anonymous reporting of debate votes. I've had several great votes on the handful of debates Ive done get reported for literally no reason, even though some of the votes were literally 8 pages long on a google doc.
To be clear: All reports are no longer anonymous. That includes forum posts and debate reports.
-->
@Imabench
Presumably there is no distinction. The mods can see who files a report of any kind. As far as votes reports. if your vote is fine and the mods let it be, why does it matter if it was reported? If it was removed and you have a problem, then the problem is the voting standards. In either case, there is no reason to remove user anonymity.
-->
@drafterman
Mostly just a personal preference where I want to see what kind of cuck reports a vote that is 8 pages long that analyzes an entire debate and allocates points accordingly. Would also be interesting to me in seeing which debaters report a vote I make against them in a debate compared to who lets it slide or just wants to discuss my reasons for voting the way I did.if your vote is fine and the mods let it be, why does it matter if it was reported?
-->
@Imabench
The voting report is no longer anonymous to mods. That information isn't being made publicly available to all users.
-->
@DebateArt.com
@bsh1
I strongly object to not being notified that reports are no longer anonymous. Am I to understand that Mike simply didn't know we were all under the impression they were anonymous before? How did that happen?