Topic: Reports Bad&Unhandled (Read 397 times)

I can guarantee you that the forum will not delete a post just because it contains inaccurate information. The reasons for this are similar to why the forum does not moderate scams. There are many cases in which the moderators do not know with 100% certainty if something is true, including in the case of the thread referenced in the OP. There is also the potential or moderator bias.

You misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying that many people who have previously received a lot of merit are actively participating in the subject thread. A low-value topic in one in which it is not possible to make meaningful replies to the thread. If someone has received a lot of merit, it is generally unlikely for them to be making a lot of low-value posts.
The user prohibited2021 was nuked earlier today, and as such all his posts were removed. When a post is removed, generally all reports against that post will be marked as "good", even if the reason is incorrect. I am not sure why he was nuked, however, he made several posts today that were basically one-liners.

My opinion on the subject thread remains unchanged.

Most often, it is the description of "general or vague content" that categorizes most of the reports I have made.

It is undoubtedly trivial to create some thoughtless remark about the price of bitcoin, along the lines of, "the bitcoin price is volatile and [pad] no one really knows how to predict [pad]."
It is also commonplace to see any "agree and repeat" posts, merely paraphrasing the quoted response (usually of the same post quality).
And let us not forget the massive effort required to copy paste + source, or to list a couple crypto symbols as good investments in those "what's a good coin?" threads.

Can't really speculate too much why it was handled bad without knowing the exact context. Though, it was likely accidental or the reason you specified in the report field, the mod might disagree with, however ultimately decided to remove it for another reason. Generally though, I tend to mark these good, unless they're completely off the mark. This will always differ from moderator to moderator, because some users will want to know exactly when they've included a bad report message, and not just reporting a post that should be removed, therefore a moderator could prioritise the message, instead of the actual report if that makes sense.

For example, if you reported a post for plagiarism, and included "plagiarism" in the report field, upon reviewing it if the moderator disagrees that's plagiarism, they may mark it bad, even if they think it should be removed for another reason e.g low quality. 


There's no one answer for this, because it absolutely depends on the context. For example, if the post is clearly trolling, then that could be a reason for removable, however simply spreading misinformation isn't exactly a reason for removal, depending on the context. Since, the forum generally likes to keep freedom of speech. Though, absolutely the community are free to outline why a user is wrong, and let others know that they're spreading misinformation.

Therefore, often you'll find that the action taken on these types of reports will be highly dependent on the moderator who is handling it, and could potentially differ widely between moderators. This is also some of the examples I believe in setting guidelines, and not strict rule sets, since the a lot of the time they can overlap each other.

Do you know that from experience or do you just assume it should be like that? Inaccurate information that stimulates a completely illogical and unnecessary discussion is definitely something I report, but always with evidence that confirms it.
 

My value scale is set much higher than yours, and I don't think the number of merits is the only thing that defines someone as a quality member - it's much more important to recognize what a low-value topic or post is. Very few forum members have understood what is written in this sticky thread.

Do you still think "that it is not sufficiently "low-value" for it to be removed"?

Don't be lenient with spammers because forum need people like you who care to report them to moderators. If more and more people ignore the ^{[report to moderator]} button then rest assured spammers will have fun flooding the forum non-stop.

I have taken part in the mission of destroying spammers so far. I have 244 unresolved reports [for today only]. I'd really like to know how the moderators acted on my findings today. Let's do it.

The forum does not remove "inaccurate" information and does not fact-check posts. If you want to post where posts are fact-checked, you can go to Twitter, and you will find a place in which nearly everyone thinks the same.

There are a lot of people who have replied to the thread you reported. This is prima facie evidence that it is not sufficiently "low-value" for it to be removed, especially considering the amount of merit received of those who have posted in the thread.

Of course, it matters, because if the report is marked as bad, then it means that in the future I should not spend time reporting such posts.

---

The moderators are obviously having fun, because they have now moved that thread to the Bitcoin Discussion, although I still think that it is a low-value thread that also contains completely inaccurate information. People who still speculate that China or Bulgaria own billions of $ in BTC now have another thread to write nonsense posts, and the goal of my reports was to prevent that.

I don't have any reports marked as bad so far, but that's not so much because I'm worried about my accuracy when reporting as because I'm quite lenient. My general rule is that if I have to think twice, whether to report or not, I don't report. As for the moderators I think they generally do a good job and clean up the forum a lot, it is inevitable that there are cases where people do not agree if their reports are not acted upon or are marked as bad, but that these cases might be questionable should not overshadow the good work they do.

My personal opinion is that the thread you reported is one that should not be deleted. As such, it was appropriate for it to be marked as "bad".

In my experience, there is a bias of moderators to mark reports as either "good" or leave them as "unhandled" when they are "bad" as a means to help users' reporting stats, and to avoid conflict with those who are active in reporting posts. I disagree with this mantra. I want to be informed when a post I report should not have been reported so I can use that feedback in my subsequent reports. If I disagree with how a policy is being implemented, I can open a thread in meta arguing to change policy.

Is it always going to be give and take give?

Mark scams? No, because there an innocent person may be falsely marked.
Trust system? Yes, but only if you're signed in.
Any rules upon signup? No, because...
Delete ponzis? No, because we can't tell!
Report spam? No, because they might just have poor English.^_*
New forum? We're working on it...
Flags are great! Except, the ones matter can only be used after the scam happens.

You are wrong on that , if it would be like you have written its like a lottery then when more Users reporting the same post or thread !
As far i know is when more Users reporting the same post or thread and its getting marked with good , everybody gets the good report and also with the bad ones or unhandled.
Sometimes it just happend that a report gets marked bad or even unhandled when nobody of the Moderators know how to handle it.

There's also this:
(click the quote for context)

Can't find the replies now, but mods have said that multiple reports are all marked good if one of them is marked good. More often than not, more than one user would report a particular error, and it would make sense to mark all as good if it's a good report.

In the case of a report being marked bad, while the reply was deleted;.
It could be different mods acting on different reports or the post was removed (by a mod who saw it on the thread or the user themselves) before your report was seen, or that you made a duplicate report.

When I reported a post, I usually give a suggestion to the MODs why I reported that post.
It seems like this,

• It should be deleted, redundant/existing topic
• It should be moved to a local section or it's in the wrong section should be moved
• It should be merged, posting multiple posts in a row

And might MODs have an idea upon opening reports.

IMO, if MODs are still undecided of what action they do I think it will still mark unhandled and it might they need to review first the case before they will take action.  It might be good if there are MODs who will explain us here.  I have this assumption because I didn't know how MODs take action on those reports.

They could always lock it. The particular post that has been brought here doesn't really have that many replies, and had I found it on patrol when it was made, I'd most likely have reported it too for beeing a simple repetition of what has already been said thousands of times.

I however don't get why this one was marked as bad, since it could have simply gone unhandled till eternity (as not a low number of reports do). I do see that the thread is now on another section (bitcoin discussion), and we all know what goes on on that particular section concerning spam...

Agreed. I believe it also depends on the amount of pages, and as you stated, if a thread receives a large number of reports in a short period of time, the moderator is more likely to act quickly, and the quality of responses is crucial. I'm not sure, but I believe the moderator will not delete a low-quality thread if it receives a large number of high-quality responses from high-quality posters. Because every story has two sides, it's possible to have duplicate threads with distinct information.

What you maybe missed (and I think its one of the things @Lucius wanted to say) is that mods should be more strict when it comes to poorly written and redundant topics which this forum doesn't lack. And I totally agree with him, that's the only way people will spam less, both those that are opening such topics, and those answering them.



Maybe I got wrong impression, but I think that mods are more reluctant to delete topics that have more replies and that might be the case here.

Does it really matter?
I’ve got loads of Unhandled reports that I deemed shit posts or whatever, a moderator obviously didn’t agree & left it as Unhandled. It’s subjective & what one mod might see as a successful report, another might see it as not bad enough to delete.

Other than some kind of OCD about having a high successful report % does it really matter?

It even says this under your personal report score -



Try not to worry too much, there are many more important things in life.

I noticed that sometimes the report can hang unprocessed for a couple of days, especially if it falls on the weekend. But as the week begins, many reports are processed. I can also assume that if the topic has many responses from other users, and the complaint was received specifically for the post that made the topic, then such reports may remain unprocessed, and the topic itself will not be deleted.

Not sure but it sometimes seems that when more people report a same post/topic and moderator act on that report, only one get the report as good. As I said, I'm not 100% sure but in my case, I find my unhandled reports increased even when my reported post was deleted.