Question What happens when a member reports a post?

[PoetJC]

I'm curious to know what happens when I report a post? I've just reported a post in which I think celebrates an ideology contrary to the whole entire mission/purpose of TAZ. I do not see the report listed in the Account Help Desk and would like to know if there's a way to involve the actual person (in this instance = me!) reporting a post in the actual conversation as concerns the reported post and it's moderation or lack-thereof...

J.

 

[MarkFL]

XF has a "report center" for reported posts, and it is designed only to involved staff in the discussion. When a post is reported, an icon at the upper left of the page alerts staff that a report has been made. Clicking that icon leads one to a page where comments on the report can be made, and the report can be resolved, or designated, usually to an admin, to handle.

I can see merit in the idea that the person making the report be involved in the discussion, but I can also see merit in the argument that staff should discuss the item only among themselves.

 

[PoetJC]

XF has a "report center" for reported posts, and it is designed only to involved staff in the discussion. When a post is reported, an icon at the upper left of the page alerts staff that a report has been made. Clicking that icon leads one to a page where comments on the report can be made, and the report can be resolved, or designated, usually to an admin, to handle.

I can see merit in the idea that the person making the report be involved in the discussion, but I can also see merit in the argument that staff should discuss the item only among themselves.

Thanks so much for your reply. And obviously you know I'm quite aware of how XF works.

I'd wish for an enhanced functionality where the person who has reported a post can partake of the conversation. As it is now ... The functionality sorta "ghosts" the member who's reported the post. I can definitely understand the merit of private conversation among staff - but there needs to be a bit more interactivity if you understand my meaning. Or at very minimum - acknowledge via a courtesy PM to the member that the reported post - that the report is being investigated/discussed. This way the member can be sorta in the loop as concerns their report.

Having no way to even see the original report or any staff commentary within the report ... I just wonder = what's the point?

J.

 

[MarkFL]

I thought you admin/mod one or more XF sites, but I didn't want to make any assumptions, so as you know, XF offers the ability to send reports to a forum as well, so I was really making sure you knew the report center option is used here.

At the vB site I admin, we use a product I coded that lets people who reported posts know whether the report is resolved or not, and allows them to review what they posted for the report. I do generally follow up there on reports by PMing the reporting user when it is beneficial for them to know the outcome of the staff discussion or to get further feedback from them, which can be taken to the discussion.

I know that kind of thing is done here as well.

 

[PoetJC]

XF offers the ability to send reports to a forum as well, so I was really making sure you knew the report center option is used here.

Thanks for that. I was sorta alluding to the fact than another option could be used.

An option with transparency and privilege would be sweet as concerns reporting posts; You want your userbase in-the-know as opposed to being complete shut out as TAZ's current system is. And ha. Kinda having a similar discussion (as an Administrator) with a forum owner who has opted to not use the forum post option. IDK... It seems like a helpdesk sorta situation where the person asking for help is not even part of the discussion. I would suggest now - that the powers at TAZ reconsider and use the option of creating a 'report thread' where the member posting the report has access to discuss.

At very minimum - there should be an acknowledgement made to the post reporter. Otherwise .... Eh...
I've felt ignored all my life. But never ever ever ever want to be 'virtually' ignored. The current TAZ report system virtually ignores the reporting user.
And if anyone should be involved in the report conversation - IMO anyway - it should be the one who reported the post. At least then there's some transparency.

J.

 

[djbaxter]

Would you feel the same if someone reported one of your posts maliciously, or out of spite, PoetJC?

And if the system included the person reporting, would it not in fairness have to include the author of the post being reported? Seems to me that many post reports would then run to a several page debate (like the silly "dirty tricks" thread still apparently alive and thrashing about).

That's why forums have admins and moderators - to make the process expedient. Transparency isn't needed. A swift decision and swift action is. Forums, as you know, are not democracies and they do not work well when you try to make them into democracies.

 

[doubt]

I'd wish for an enhanced functionality where the person who has reported a post can partake of the conversation.

Used to be that way but for some reason that function disappeared from here.
Report: That post is spam.
Acknowledged by a moderator: Thanks, that post(and poster) disappeared!

 

[Steve]

You want your userbase in-the-know as opposed to being complete shut out as TAZ's current system is.

The report function is a way to alert staff to a problem post, at which point it is up to staff to decide what is the best action. Involving the user reporting the issue does nothing but prolong the decision making process. Voice your opinion or need in the report, no further action required. Also TAZ's current system is pretty much XF default but a couple add-ons to make it a bit nicer.

When a report is being resolved/rejected the moderator performing the action can send a resolution alert to the user that reported.

Used to be that way but for some reason that function disappeared from here.

Not that I am aware of unless it was years ago...

 

[doubt]

Not that I am aware of unless it was years ago...

Yes it was years ago.
Maybe someone will remember that it's existed.
I remember a reply from one of the moderators for the spam report: " "Nuked!"

 

[zappaDPJ]

I'm curious to know what happens when I report a post?

Anything and everything from a single click to deal with reported spam to days spent discussing the best way forward.

It wouldn't be appropriate to include the member in the discussion no matter what the nature of the report. The same applies when the report is resolved. The resolution may contain privacy, site security or legal implications. There may be no implications at all but it would be wrong to have to pick and choose. It would also be unnecessarily time consuming on an active forum.

 

[we_are_borg]

The only thing i do not like in the report system is that there is no feedback to the person reporting. As reporter you do not know if action was taken and if it was necessary to report. So when we close a report or reject the reporter should get a warning that report is closed or rejected.

 

[doubt]

The only thing i do not like in the report system is that there is no feedback to the person reporting. As reporter you do not know if action was taken and if it was necessary to report.

Missing badly.

 

[zappaDPJ]

The only thing i do not like in the report system is that there is no feedback to the person reporting. As reporter you do not know if action was taken and if it was necessary to report. So when we close a report or reject the reporter should get a warning that report is closed or rejected.

If you reported a post only to be told your report had been rejected, wouldn't you want to know why? The problem with keeping a member informed is it will give them an escalating sense of entitlement proportional to their involvement.

 

[we_are_borg]

If you reported a post only to be told your report had been rejected, wouldn't you want to know why? The problem with keeping a member informed is it will give them an escalating sense of entitlement proportional to their involvement.

Well its to let people know yes report is handled and thank you. But you do not want normal users let in the discussion. So it needs to be minimal information.

 

[bucket]

Yes it was years ago.
Maybe someone will remember that it's existed.

I remember!

 

[zappaDPJ]

Well its to let people know yes report is handled and thank you.

I understand that part but an automated system that thanks the user and tells them their report will be handled could just be a dump box giving the impression that something will be done. Give a more personalised response and you are back to the same issue of creating a sense of inclusion that you may well not be able to fulfil.

It may be something that's forum dependant but I've found it best to just make sure that all reports are dealt with. It's very rare that a member will come back to me asking for an update and if they do I don't give them any information about how the report was handled.

 

[Steve]

The only thing i do not like in the report system is that there is no feedback to the person reporting. As reporter you do not know if action was taken and if it was necessary to report. So when we close a report or reject the reporter should get a warning that report is closed or rejected.

Missing badly.

When a report is being resolved/rejected the moderator performing the action can send a resolution alert to the user that reported.

 

[darnoldy]

The problem with keeping a member informed is it will give them an escalating sense of entitlement proportional to their involvement.

If a person reports a post, then there is the presumption that they believe it violates some community standard. Even if there is malicious intent, there is some "they broke a rule" element to the report.

If the staff agree with the report, there is no harm in letting the reporter know that "we agree with you, and have taken what we feel is the appropriate action." Depending on the circumstances, I also may or may not tell the reporter what action was taken. I can certainly understand why some admins would not want to do that.

If you disagree with the report, then the reporter has misunderstood (even if intentionally) the standard. This then becomes a "teaching moment," where you can (an, I believe, should) clarify for the reporter why the standard does not apply in this case.

--don

 

[zappaDPJ]

If a person reports a post, then there is the presumption that they believe it violates some community standard. Even if there is malicious intent, there is some "they broke a rule" element to the report.

If the staff agree with the report, there is no harm in letting the reporter know that "we agree with you, and have taken what we feel is the appropriate action." Depending on the circumstances, I also may or may not tell the reporter what action was taken. I can certainly understand why some admins would not want to do that.

If you disagree with the report, then the reporter has misunderstood (even if intentionally) the standard. This then becomes a "teaching moment," where you can (an, I believe, should) clarify for the reporter why the standard does not apply in this case.

--don

That approach is not at all unreasonable, it could be viewed as ideal but I'd find it almost impossible to administer in a consistent manner for a number of reasons.

As an example, the bulk of reports I have to deal with here and elsewhere are spam reports. While the majority require a simple one click solution, others might take a fairly significant amount of time to determine if the user has joined the forum for genuine reasons. The numbers involved make it impractical to communicate further with the reporter.

There have been rare occasions where the report is related to a direct attack on the reporter. I have on some occasions informed the reporter of the action taken, especially if I think the nature of the reported post might cause harm but that is very rare.

If nothing else this thread has made me consider what expectations I'd have after using a report function. It hasn't changed my mind but I do have a better appreciation of the alternative options.

 

[Anton Chigurh]

I mean... If you're really curious as to what happened with your report, you could bookmark the offending post, then keep checking back to see if it disappears. If it does, then you know what decision was made. If it doesn't? Then you know what decision was made and can enjoy a teachable moment from that in future urges to report a post.