delete - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Blazed

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1119

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Vod on September 14, 2015, 11:29:38 PM

I have reported 408 posts with 98% accuracy.

Can't get much more accurate than that baby! Wink

That is indeed good but ckolivas had over 1000 reported post with a 99.4% accuracy rate when he was promoted to Staff!

~BCX~

You have reported 15 posts with 84% accuracy

Guessing I might not make the cut as the next Staff member? Embarrassed

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

I have reported 408 posts with 98% accuracy.

Can't get much more accurate than that baby! Wink

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

I am stuck at 86% of accuracy (You have reported 1789 posts with 86% accuracy). However I also think that the accuracy is not the unique thing to consider, maybe also the 'ken' of more languages can help.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on July 22, 2015, 09:30:05 AM

Who can be bothered to trawl through the entire forum reporting posts for being in the wrong section? It sounds like a fake ass cop like a traffic warden or something, ticketing cars for a little bit of power Grin

I've reported about 25 & most of them are that troll NotLambChop in the speculation section, mainly the wall observer thread for posting gay porn & calling bitcoiners pedophiles.

Anyone who enjoy contributing to various things, including this very forum. There are a lot of rules that tend to be broken and a lot of reasons for reporting on a daily basis. It can range from moving topics, off topic posts to bots and illegal things. I'm currently at 96% accuracy which I consider not enough for myself. However, it looks like QS has spent a lot of time contributing by reporting and by hunting down scammers. Mistakes are acceptable, since we are all human.

Quote from: shorena on July 22, 2015, 09:25:11 AM

As someone with a lot of reports thats not how it[1] works. Most reports I write are about posts that have been started in the wrong section. Hilarious told me it was very similar for them. I would also assume that this is the case of QS as well, as its the most common thing to report. Yes, there is a spambot here and there or a low quality/offtopic post etc. The big numbers though come from "sorting" threads.

[1] I dont know either how exactly mods handle a report, but thats not what Im refering to. Im refering to "1 report per account" and "1.6K reported accounts".

It depends on the circumstances. I do not want to go into the specifics since we might stray away from the original point of the thread. Here is just one example: if someone gets nuked, every reported post of his will be marked as handled (i.e. good report).

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Who can be bothered to trawl through the entire forum reporting posts for being in the wrong section? It sounds like a fake ass cop like a traffic warden or something, ticketing cars for a little bit of power Grin

I've reported about 25 & most of them are that troll NotLambChop in the speculation section, mainly the wall observer thread for posting gay porn & calling bitcoiners pedophiles.

shorena

copper member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1528

No I dont escrow anymore.

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:47:18 AM

Quote from: ndnh on July 22, 2015, 12:37:04 AM

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:26:37 AM

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

I don't know how the report system works exactly but heres how I think it works.
Mods have a chance to do action upon the report, and if any action is done (warning, delete post, ban, tempban), you get the report counted as good, but if they reject it, it doesn't count.
I don't know if the mods have the option to accept the report, however say that you were right. If you were right on the report, the mods would have to do something so I don't think thats the case.

As someone with a lot of reports thats not how it[1] works. Most reports I write are about posts that have been started in the wrong section. Hilarious told me it was very similar for them. I would also assume that this is the case of QS as well, as its the most common thing to report. Yes, there is a spambot here and there or a low quality/offtopic post etc. The big numbers though come from "sorting" threads.

[1] I dont know either how exactly mods handle a report, but thats not what Im refering to. Im refering to "1 report per account" and "1.6K reported accounts".

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: ndnh on July 22, 2015, 12:37:04 AM

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:26:37 AM

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

No. What funtrory said is not true. There is no "certain" limits for reporting posts.

What happened in your case is predictable. When you report very few posts, your accuracy % can decrease drastically if some of your reports are bad. It happened to me when I started reporting.

funtotry

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Ever wanted to run your own casino? PM me for info

Quote from: ndnh on July 22, 2015, 12:37:04 AM

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:26:37 AM

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

I don't know how the report system works exactly but heres how I think it works.
Mods have a chance to do action upon the report, and if any action is done (warning, delete post, ban, tempban), you get the report counted as good, but if they reject it, it doesn't count.
I don't know if the mods have the option to accept the report, however say that you were right. If you were right on the report, the mods would have to do something so I don't think thats the case.

ndnh

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1005

New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:26:37 AM

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

funtotry

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Ever wanted to run your own casino? PM me for info

Quote from: rapsaodan84 on July 22, 2015, 12:20:55 AM

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:14:55 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: rapsaodan84 on July 22, 2015, 12:00:00 AM

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.

~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

Maybe but still nobody could know which posts were reported by whom so they couldn't get negative attention from the people they reported

ckolivas is the mod -ck?

Still, with quickseller thats 1.6k reports, thats around 1.6k accounts (Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?). Also, its pretty obvious that he reported you, if he makes a scam accusation about you or makes a reply to you or something like that.
Still, having the information public would make you look like a snitch to the community.

rapsaodan84

full member

Activity: 218

Merit: 102

Quote from: funtotry on July 22, 2015, 12:14:55 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: rapsaodan84 on July 22, 2015, 12:00:00 AM

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.

~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

Maybe but still nobody could know which posts were reported by whom so they couldn't get negative attention from the people they reported

ckolivas is the mod -ck?

funtotry

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Ever wanted to run your own casino? PM me for info

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: rapsaodan84 on July 22, 2015, 12:00:00 AM

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.

~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

rapsaodan84

full member

Activity: 218

Merit: 102

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

hikedoon

full member

Activity: 143

Merit: 100

As long as he/she is selling account's then i see a potential for "conflict of interest's" problem's arising.
p.s.
I don't actually care who the moderator's are and have nothing against Quickseller either.
I'm just stating the obvious. Grin

Brewins

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1000

Quote from: --Encrypted-- on July 21, 2015, 06:17:47 PM

Quote from: Brewins on July 21, 2015, 06:11:39 PM

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

or, he is really good on spotting bad posts that people normally wouldn't catch.

also I think only global mods can ban newbies. patrollers can delete any post by newbies even if they're outside their moderated boards. normal mods can't do jack outside of their moderated boards.

Usually newbie bots and spams are nuked or banned way quicker than high ranked members if they decide to go mad, so I think the patrollers have some ban hammer.

Yamato no Orochi

full member

Activity: 120

Merit: 100

HYPOCRISY!

Quote from: xetsr on July 21, 2015, 06:16:19 PM

Quote from: Yamato no Orochi on July 21, 2015, 06:07:05 PM

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator Roll Eyes

Some people didn't see QS's reported post count and accuracy Wink

Don't forget scams are not moderated here so if QS were to start doing that, he would probably be removed pretty quick.

if you're implying that I didn't see that, you're wrong. Tongue

it's just that some users actually added being on DT and outing scams to the "why should QS be a moderator" checklist.

and don't get me wrong. I'm actually in the pro QS group.

--Encrypted--

copper member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1007

hee-ho.

Quote from: Brewins on July 21, 2015, 06:11:39 PM

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

or, he is really good on spotting bad posts that people normally wouldn't catch.

also I think only global mods can ban newbies. patrollers can delete any post by newbies even if they're outside their moderated boards. normal mods can't do jack outside of their moderated boards.

EDIT:
I was wrong, all of them can nuke newbies.

xetsr

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Yamato no Orochi on July 21, 2015, 06:07:05 PM

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator Roll Eyes

Some people didn't see QS's reported post count and accuracy Wink

Don't forget scams are not moderated here so if QS were to start doing that, he would probably be removed pretty quick.

Brewins

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1000

Quote from: funtotry on July 21, 2015, 05:57:08 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on July 21, 2015, 05:23:29 PM

Why does a high % in report accuracy make you a candidate to be a mod?
I just checked mine & it's 87% accuracy yet I have no interest in ever becoming a mod of this or any other forum.
I think we should just let theymos decide if any other mods are needed. It's not a reality tv show where people phone in to vote for their favourite person. This thread is a little embarrassing. Let Quickseller get on with what he does & let the mods moderate.

A high % in accuracy mean, that as you become a mod, most of your decisions would be correct.
Quickseller seems to be doing just fine with his default trust and his reporting. The reporting gets confirmed 95% of the time, and default trust leaves a big red mark, making it very hard for the scammer to trade with that big red trust mark.

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

Yamato no Orochi

full member

Activity: 120

Merit: 100

HYPOCRISY!

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator Roll Eyes

Topic: delete - page 2. (Read 7287 times)