Wiki Copy - Open Report Threads?

[ravenscape]

This is a copy of the Archived " Open Reports Threads? (http://foru.ms/t6355216-open-report-threads.html) Poll now in the Archived W/RD forum. The article portion should summarize the main points brought out in the attached discussion.

Poll shows overwhelming support for keeping reports open in some fashion

Open http://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar2.gifhttp://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar2-r.gif 73 (http://foru.ms/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=17332) 85.88%
Closed http://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar3.gifhttp://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar3-r.gif 12 (http://foru.ms/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=17332) 14.12%
Voters: 85.

Options discussed

Only the reportee and staff can comment, but anyone is free to read, similar to how public appeals currently are set up (NOTE: this one had a LOT of support when it was suggested, and continues to be the front-runner in the options discussed)

In open reports, staff be encouraged to be more strict about deleting non-staff report comments that do not specifically clarify the report. Further discussion, debate, and flaming, has NO place in report threads, and is a major part in the push to close them

if Lee does decide to keep them open to posting by all, the anonymity thing has to go... The anonymity thing iritates me, people ought to have the right to face their accusers

the person that has been reported should be given an option to have someone aid him/her in arguing his/her case

Selected comments specifically FOR having some sort of open reports:

They need to be open to the public for reasons of accountability and consistency

some member input is valuable, as mods are not omniscient and may misunderstand a post, particularly if it relates to something outside their experience

don't think report threads need to descend into a free-for-all, but allowing the reportee to have their say decreases the misakes and need for appeals

to allow to reported poster a place to respond before a final decision is made

Open reports allow members to see directly and understand better how the rules are applied by the moderators. This can lead to better conformance with the rules, and more peaceful threads, since members know where the lines are drawn for what is and is not a "flame".

no-one can complain about the process not being open and transparent... given past abuses there needs to be tranparency in the system.

Democracies do not follow that reasoning by closing trials from the public. All the issues are dealt with and the openness and thus accountability to the public is considered of vital importance.

They should remain open. This allows for accountability, and keeps accusations of favoritism from occuring. In addition, much like court cases that are published, these reports can act as establishments of precedence.

Reading them is also a good way one who aspires to moderator can learn and get the feel of what are and aren't violations.

The transparency has actually helped the members see how hard we work, how hard most of us try to be fair, and alerted us to any problems in our teams that we need to rectify. Many members have posted helpful, thoughtful remarks in the reports that furthered the moderating process.

Open reports allow people to clarify what they meant in a post, in cases where it is unclear (which happens fairly often). Interpretation of the poster's meaning is a difficult thing. Having their input can be very helpful.

scary things happen in report threads when they are hidden

Honest Mods will not have a problem letting people watch them work through reports, and it's nice to be able to offer your own point of view for sonsideration before they make a decision

Open reports allow for a transparency of process that can cut down a great deal on appeals, which may be a strong impact if we are going back to formal warnings/infractions. If someone doesn't know why they got a warning or infraction, they may be more likely to appeal it. If it's out there for them to see and participate in, they may disagree with the outcome but they know if the process has been followed or not.

Selected comments specifically AGAINST having some sort of open reports:

open report threads turn into little debate threads and sometimes flame wars in their own right

eliminate harassing comments from people that just don't like the person that has been reported

lot of concerns with abuses in the past

it would eliminate harassment in the threads

it should be nobody elses business who gets reported and for what

confidential information has to be shared with other mods

[WalksWithChrist]

Just getting the discussion started!

Do you feel report threads should be open or closed? Why or why not?

Freely exchange ideas, but please keep this civil!
:thumbsup:

I'll start.

Keep report threads open.

I'll add more later I'm sure.
:P

[The Princess Bride]

OPEN!!!

[The Princess Bride]

Do I need to do the cha-cha so we have some entertainment to get peoples attention? :D

http://www.33smiley.com/smiley5/hip/6.gif

[woobadooba]

I think they should be open; but only the person that has been reported and the ruling moderators should be able to comment in them.

However, I think the person that has been reported should be given an option to have someone aid him/her in arguing his/her case.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

They need to be open to the public for reasons of accountability and consistency.

[The Princess Bride]

I think they should be open; but only the person that has been reported and the ruling moderators should be able to comment in them.

However, I think the person that has been reported should be given an option to have someone aid him/her in arguing his/her case.
Reports on PM's work this way...and I think it's a good system to go by, because it would elimate the member debate in report threads.

They need to be open to the public for reasons of accountability and consistency.
Not just that, but to allow to reported poster a place to respond before a final decision is made.

[woobadooba]

Reports on PM's work this way...and I think it's a good system to go by, because it would elimate the member debate in report threads.

It would also eliminate harassing comments from people that just don't like the person that has been reported.

[Letalis]

I know there are a lot of concerns with abuses in the past, but I worry about a lot of the conflict that has resulted from having reports open.

I suggested open to viewing/staff posting only, but I'm not stuck on any one suggestion.

[Angel4Truth]

I think closed is better due to confidentiality issues

[pjw]

i say keep it the way it is, that way no-one can complain about the process not being open and transparent.

[*Starlight*]

Definitely open... scary things happen in report threads when they are hidden.

[nyj]

Close them.

[GreenMunchkin]

Whichever'll will make stuff more peaceful.

[MikeK]

Please keep them open. Honest Mods will not have a problem letting people watch them work through reports, and it's nice to be able to offer your own point of view for sonsideration before they make a decision.

[nyj]

Whichever'll will make stuff more peaceful.
That would be closing them.

[*Starlight*]

Whichever'll will make stuff more peaceful.
In that case, let's just permanently ban everyone... nothing's more peaceful than an empty forum. ;) :P

[GreenMunchkin]

That would be closing them.You're probably right. Except then you have people claiming staff are evil and somehow planning something in seekrit... ugh.

The ideal would be somewhere in the middle. Only the reportee and staff can comment, but anyone is free to read. Actually, I guess the stakes are somewhat higher now the warning/infraction system is coming back.

But, if Lee does decide to keep them open to posting by all, the anonymity thing has to go. Bloody nightmare.

[MikeK]

But, if Lee does decide to keep them open to posting by all, the anonymity thing has to go. Bloody nightmare.


Agree. The anonymity thing iritates me, people ought to have the right to face their accusers. I'm all for making things more transparent, not less.

[GreenMunchkin]

Agree. The anonymity thing iritates me, people ought to have the right to face their accusers. I'm all for making things more transparent, not less.You're just [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]ed cos you always forget to sign your name :P

[Rochir]

O
P
E
N

:)

[Nadiine]

OPEN.

And I'm in the middle about making them anonymous - it has benefits and drawbacks.
I do notice that alot of people are adding their own names on their report posts and not being anonymous by choice.

So maybe for fairness or tact purposes, just 'sign' your report post & be open unless you really want to be anonymous. But people have to stop using those threads as debates and attack areas to carry over the argument.
Abuse of the open report system doesn't make the system itself a bad idea - (like so many other things).

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

i prefer them open, but NOT anonymous

[~BlessingsDreamFund~]

I think they should be open; but only the person that has been reported and the ruling moderators should be able to comment in them.

However, I think the person that has been reported should be given an option to have someone aid him/her in arguing his/her case.

I agree...

I also think there should be NO MORE anonamous Reports... And the person *reporting* should also be allowed to comment...

Ty

[Rep Daddy]

Open but only the staff and one reported can post. Avoids campaigns and allows accused an opportunity to counter charges before a decision is rendered.

[MikeK]

You're just [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]ed cos you always forget to sign your name

True that. I hate hitting "post", and then having to post again to sign. I would much prefer it were automatic.

[WalksWithChrist]

I know there are a lot of concerns with abuses in the past, but I worry about a lot of the conflict that has resulted from having reports open.

I suggested open to viewing/staff posting only, but I'm not stuck on any one suggestion.Just speaking for myself, I'm ok wading thru a little (and sometimes a lot of...) conflict to ensure accountability for the members whom we serve.

I think closed is better due to confidentiality issuesCould you give a specific example? Confidentiality for members or staff? This is one aspect we really need to be clear about as there are indeed circumstances that call for some measure of confidentiality. Such as health issues or personal data.

I know some staff disagree, but I have no problem saying what I need to say out in the open in a report. Maybe I'll change my mind on that at some point, but as a principle I stand for things being more open than more closed.

[Cosmic Charlie]

They need to be open and the reporter needs to be identified.

[Snowbunny]

Just getting the discussion started!

Do you feel report threads should be open or closed? Why or why not?

Freely exchange ideas, but please keep this civil!
:thumbsup:

I'll start.

Keep report threads open.

I'll add more later I'm sure.
:P

hola,

i think we should keep them closed. the open report threads turn into little debate threads and sometimes flame wars in their own right, this is just a nuisance to the moderators. mods usually make their decisions regardless of what is posted in the report threads so it doesn't make a difference anyway.

the best solution would be to keep the open so that people could see the decision process, but prevent anyone who is not a moderator to post anything.

que Dios te bendiga

[Nadiine]

They need to be open and the reporter needs to be identified.
if so, then we should be able to create a sock to do the report under... sometimes people do need to remain anonymous.

[MikeK]

if so, then we should be able to create a sock to do the report under... sometimes people do need to remain anonymous.

For example? We aren't reporting mob murders here...

[Rep Daddy]

Sock = CF Witness Protection Program

[ChristianCenturion]

There isn't an "other" option.

My opinion is that it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

Both options have positive and negative aspects and both systems can function well if all is in good order... or be a problem if circumstances are wrong.

[Rep Daddy]

Let Chris Bot handle reports

[snoochface]

They should be open and non-anonymous. If a sock makes a report, the IP check should be included in the thread. Keep accountability and cut down on spite reports and unnecessary vitriol at the same time.

[synger]

I think that reports should remain open.


Clarifies the Rules: Open reports allow members to see directly and understand better how the rules are applied by the moderators. This can lead to better conformance with the rules, and more peaceful threads, since members know where the lines are drawn for what is and is not a "flame".
Clarifies the Alleged Violation: Open reports allow people to clarify what they meant in a post, in cases where it is unclear (which happens fairly often). Interpretation of the poster's meaning is a difficult thing. Having their input can be very helpful.
Allows for Process Transparency: Open reports allow for a transparency of process that can cut down a great deal on appeals, which may be a strong impact if we are going back to formal warnings/infractions. If someone doesn't know why they got a warning or infraction, they may be more likely to appeal it. If it's out there for them to see and participate in, they may disagree with the outcome but they know if the process has been followed or not.
Caveat:

However, I strongly suggest that if reports remain open, staff be encouraged to be more strict about deleting non-staff report comments that do not specifically clarify the report. Further discussion, debate, and flaming, has NO place in report threads, and is a major part in the push to close them. In areas where staff feel empowered to delete inappropriate posts in report threads (like Theology), you just do not see the report wars you see in other areas where staff try not to delete flaming posts in report threads (like Congregations).

[3girls2dogs]

Other. I have no problem with report thread being open for viewing, but I feel they should be closed to posting for all but those who are involved in the report (reporter/reportee) and the Mods.

[~BlessingsDreamFund~]

Other. I have no problem with report thread being open for viewing, but I feel they should be closed to posting for all but those who are involved in the report (reporter/reportee) and the Mods.


:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I think that's the way it should be...

[Saucy]

I'm up in the air on this...I could find both reasons for open and closed. But if I were to choose, I would say closed. One, it would eliminate harassment in the threads. Two, it should be nobody elses business who gets reported and for what. Sometimes people make mistakes and it needs to be between staff and that member. Three, it takes sooo much longer to close a report than it used to because many different people like to get involved when it doesn't concern them and argue about it.

[Robinsegg]

Other. I have no problem with report thread being open for viewing, but I feel they should be closed to posting for all but those who are involved in the report (reporter/reportee) and the Mods.
If we do things this way, it would allow members to PM a staff member with their information and permission to post that information in the report.
No bickering back and forth, the mod who is contacted decides if the information is passed on (no requirement will keep vicarious bickering from happening), and allow the members to still see the process.

Rachel

[Nadiine]

I'm up in the air on this...I could find both reasons for open and closed. But if I were to choose, I would say closed. One, it would eliminate harassment in the threads. Two, it should be nobody elses business who gets reported and for what. Sometimes people make mistakes and it needs to be between staff and that member. Three, it takes sooo much longer to close a report than it used to because many different people like to get involved when it doesn't concern them and argue about it.
If action was allowed to be taken by a mod on 'debate' inside the report thread, the problem is solved.
Just tack on some "penalty" (or give the mod power to REMOVE someone's post if it argues or goes to debate or is simple "fluff support" to a buddy of yours)...

I hate to see the abuse of something make something GO AWAY when it is a very good & helpful system.
Otherwise, we wouldn't even have an internet; it's a good tool, but it's often abused and harms people....

I call that throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Find a simple workable solution (rule) to silence the abusers of the open report system (ie. just remove bad posts or warn them, or dissallow anonymity to outside posters) and keep a good system. :thumbsup:

*a ps. I've browsed thru many of the open reports the past few days, and very few of them have major abuses going on... a few here & there have a few posts that could be removed.

[WalksWithChrist]

They need to be open and the reporter needs to be identified.I have given that a lot of thought. I honestly can't decide if I'd rather reporters be anon or not.
:scratch:

hola,

i think we should keep them closed. the open report threads turn into little debate threads and sometimes flame wars in their own right, this is just a nuisance to the moderators. mods usually make their decisions regardless of what is posted in the report threads so it doesn't make a difference anyway.

the best solution would be to keep the open so that people could see the decision process, but prevent anyone who is not a moderator to post anything.

que Dios te bendigaThat would certainly be better than closing the report completely.

There isn't an "other" option.

My opinion is that it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

Both options have positive and negative aspects and both systems can function well if all is in good order... or be a problem if circumstances are wrong.I was trying to think of a good "other" option.

I think that reports should remain open.

Clarifies the Rules: Open reports allow members to see directly and understand better how the rules are applied by the moderators. This can lead to better conformance with the rules, and more peaceful threads, since members know where the lines are drawn for what is and is not a "flame".
Clarifies the Alleged Violation: Open reports allow people to clarify what they meant in a post, in cases where it is unclear (which happens fairly often). Interpretation of the poster's meaning is a difficult thing. Having their input can be very helpful.
Allows for Process Transparency: Open reports allow for a transparency of process that can cut down a great deal on appeals, which may be a strong impact if we are going back to formal warnings/infractions. If someone doesn't know why they got a warning or infraction, they may be more likely to appeal it. If it's out there for them to see and participate in, they may disagree with the outcome but they know if the process has been followed or not.Caveat:

However, I strongly suggest that if reports remain open, staff be encouraged to be more strict about deleting non-staff report comments that do not specifically clarify the report. Further discussion, debate, and flaming, has NO place in report threads, and is a major part in the push to close them. In areas where staff feel empowered to delete inappropriate posts in report threads (like Theology), you just do not see the report wars you see in other areas where staff try not to delete flaming posts in report threads (like Congregations).Couldn't have said it better myself!
:thumbsup:

[Rep Daddy]

I have given that a lot of thought. I honestly can't decide if I'd rather reporters be anon or not.
:scratch:



You're a sock for LeeD ???
Did he appoint you as the third advisor?

Everybody thinks they bought this place.

WIKI-go-BOOM!

[Joykins]

Other. I have no problem with report thread being open for viewing, but I feel they should be closed to posting for all but those who are involved in the report (reporter/reportee) and the Mods.


I can get behind this position. I don't think report threads need to descend into a free-for-all, but allowing the reportee to have their say decreases the misakes and need for appeals. By being able to view reports on my posts (only a few :P ) I have been able to resolve any problem quickly without any contentiousness or getting a form letter in my in-box ;)

[HisLilyWhitePrincess]

Ok, I agree with having them open, but I'm not sure I get why the anonymity is such a big deal. To me it seems to prevent problems and accusations of someone reporting out of spite.

[Nadiine]

Ok, I agree with having them open, but I'm not sure I get why the anonymity is such a big deal. To me it seems to prevent problems and accusations of someone reporting out of spite.
well,... just in my view, I like it anonymous to some extent. I think the initial report should remain anonymous for the sake of the one reporting.

But if there's such a problem with the other outsiders who are hopping into the report to post (and they're the ones bringing more debate in or abusing the system), make only the additional parties posting known. Leave the original reporter anonymous.
Just a thought to solve problems of people flaming, carrying a fight into the report, or just 'giving support to your good buddy' which shouldn't be there.

Putting a name to a post makes it easier to see who's trying to roast you or who's abusing the system (and hinders it greatly).

Just my 2 cents.

[KarrieTex]

I think they need to stay open to be read but only those directly involved in the report...the reporter and the person reported on should have posting rights. (Thanks Sojo)

[Nadiine]

I think they need to stay open to be read but only those directly involved in the report...the reporter and the person reported on should have posting rights. (Thanks Sojo)
well, being as I was recently on the recieving end of a report, I have to admit that I did appreciate others who contributed facts to the issue, how they read my post and why they didn't think it was flaming...

so as a person on the recieving end, I appreciated their input and think it can help - and it can even go against you more depending on what they add.

[WalksWithChrist]

You're a sock for LeeD ???
Did he appoint you as the third advisor?

Everybody thinks they bought this place.

WIKI-go-BOOM!The wiki may be gone (and I shed no tears for it!) but this is still the Discuss Rules forum.

I'm discussing.

Now, go pollinate some crops or something. Your friends the bees have been dropping the ball on that lately...
:P

well,... just in my view, I like it anonymous to some extent. I think the initial report should remain anonymous for the sake of the one reporting.

But if there's such a problem with the other outsiders who are hopping into the report to post (and they're the ones bringing more debate in or abusing the system), make only the additional parties posting known. Leave the original reporter anonymous.
Just a thought to solve problems of people flaming, carrying a fight into the report, or just 'giving support to your good buddy' which shouldn't be there.

Putting a name to a post makes it easier to see who's trying to roast you or who's abusing the system (and hinders it greatly).

Just my 2 cents.As for the trouble makers butting in on reports, I really don't feel commenters on reports should have any expectation of privacy.

Letting them post as "themselves" would probably alleviate a lot of the monkey business.
:thumbsup:

And THUS allowing for open reports to flow more smoothly. (hopefully!!)
:cool:

[praying]

Open definitely and not sure about read only or anonymous.


I also think that when a poster clicks the report button the report screen should have a list of the forum rules under the message box so we get less reports for things that are just not covered (violations) under the rules. Of course there will always be exceptions but some of the report reasons can really be out in left field.

[WordofGod]

i say keep it the way it is, that way no-one can complain about the process not being open and transparent.
I agree!:crossrc:

[WarriorAngel]

I prefer them closed because confidential information has to be shared with other mods...

But if they are allowed to remain open, then only the person reported should be involved in the discussion.

It would save some time in pm's.

Although it's preferred closed for most staff. So they are not unindated with a variety of opinions and arguments.

It has caused a lot of contention leaving them open.

[Quantos]

Sock = CF Witness Protection Program
Someone call ?

[pgp_protector]

They should be open and non-anonymous. If a sock makes a report, the IP check should be included in the thread. Keep accountability and cut down on spite reports and unnecessary vitriol at the same time.
IP Checks won't do any good if they use a proxy server on the sock account.

[praying]

I prefer them closed because confidential information has to be shared with other mods...



What confidential information? A poster makes a post in a public forum on the internet and now all of sudden their are confidentiality issues because the post was reported. I don't get it. Of course there are always exceptions but they are indeed that, the exception.

[nyj]

I think I change my mind. I'd like to see EXACTLY what some staff are doing in these reports. Maybe I don't need to be posting in them, but seeing them would be a good idea.

[Tenebrae]

Reports on PM's work this way...and I think it's a good system to go by, because it would elimate the member debate in report threads.


Not just that, but to allow to reported poster a place to respond before a final decision is made.
I dunno if lee has made his mind up yet, however I would like to see the reports remain open but perhaps in this sort of format

It has quelled much paranoia with this little black duck having open reports

[justanobserver]

Just getting the discussion started!

Do you feel report threads should be open or closed? Why or why not?

Freely exchange ideas, but please keep this civil!
:thumbsup:

I'll start.

Keep report threads open.

I'll add more later I'm sure.
:P
open for both viewing and posting or just viewing? closed to both viewing and posting or just posting?

[Tenebrae]

open for both viewing and posting or just viewing? closed to both viewing and posting or just posting?
One only has to poke their nose into places such as ET, to see the bickering that goes on in reports, ministry has also been kind of gross as well.

I think have the reports open for viewing, I dont know if it could be coded to allow only the reported and staff to respond to a thread

[Windmill]

Keep it open. Through it, it makes the mods accountable. People should have their say when they feel the mods are not sufficiently dealing with say harassment.

[Windmill]

What confidential information? A poster makes a post in a public forum on the internet and now all of sudden their are confidentiality issues because the post was reported. I don't get it. Of course there are always exceptions but they are indeed that, the exception.AGREED!!!!!

[Speculative]

I think they should be open; but only the person that has been reported and the ruling moderators should be able to comment in them.

However, I think the person that has been reported should be given an option to have someone aid him/her in arguing his/her case.concur

[Valentine]

Reports should be open and I believe they should be open for member comment as well. Mods have no reason to say things about members under a cloak of secrecy imho. Mods are only here to enforce established rules, not to secretly voice personal opinions about posters. An atmosphere of openness and honesty is preferable to me. What is there to hide?

[Bombila]

Open, and reporting member identified. If you are that offended by a post, you should be able to say so without hiding. In fact, no anonymity.

I'd go along with mods being able to instantly delete member posts in report threads that are inappropriate.

However, some member input is valuable, as mods are not omniscient and may misunderstand a post, particularly if it relates to something outside their experience (I have seen this happen).

Having only the poster and mods allowed to participate isn't entirely fair, as some people are naturally less articulate than others. And I've seen some very young people reported for using syntax and language common to their everyday interactions with other young people, where they meant no harm but don't have the skills to defend themselves against a group of adults who aren't even familiar with their manner of speaking to each other.

[Robinsegg]

The main issue in having reports open to all comments is the bickering (and sometimes the outright flaming of members and mods) by the members. Imo, simply deleting the offending posts is not always enough. However, if a system could be implemented under which a member could receive an FSB (Forum Specific Ban) for the Reports areas when consistently causing problems . . . I could go for it remaining open.
Rachel

[WalksWithChrist]

open for both viewing and posting or just viewing? closed to both viewing and posting or just posting?When I posted this poll, I only had just open for viewing in mind. But the posting issue I feel is almost as important.

Maybe I should do another poll??

Or if someone else wants to!
:P

The main issue in having reports open to all comments is the bickering (and sometimes the outright flaming of members and mods) by the members. Imo, simply deleting the offending posts is not always enough. However, if a system could be implemented under which a member could receive an FSB (Forum Specific Ban) for the Reports areas when consistently causing problems . . . I could go for it remaining open.
RachelTrue. That is a pain.

I say making those posts non-anon would help...but not completely.

[Amoranemix]

The ideal would be somewhere in the middle. Only the reportee and staff can comment, but anyone is free to read. Actually, I guess the stakes are somewhat higher now the warning/infraction system is coming back.Considering how the tap has been closed to members in other areas, they can use as much protection as they can get in reports.

They need to be open and the reporter needs to be identified.I am not convinced the reporter should be identifiable, otherwise someone may be afraid to report. For example, one may be afraid of retaliation from a staff member (for whom reports are not anonymous). Ravenscape once reported for someone who feared to otherwise be identified.

Two reasons to make at least the non-OP posts in reports non-anonymous that I haven’t seen mentioned yet, are :
- discussions with anonymous posts are harder to follow, especially after a cleanup (when post #nm refers to a different post than originally intended).
- it is hard for ordinary members to get an idea of the opinion of the report participants as one does not know which posts belong to a single member.
- I do think there are honest interested parties that can have a valuable contribution to reports, for example by pointing out protocol violations. I have wanted to post a few times in appeal threads, but I couldn’t and my contributions wouldn’t have been worse than those of some staff members.

As for making reports viewable by members and only postable by staff and the reportee :
- motivation from members to oversee reports will be lower if they are not allowed to post there
- the reportee would have free reign to accuse others (like the reporter) who can’t defend themselves and can’t challenge some false defenses. Perhaps allowing the reporter to post as well would sufficiently mitigate this problem

However, I strongly suggest that if reports remain open, staff be encouraged to be more strict about deleting non-staff report comments that do not specifically clarify the report. Further discussion, debate, and flaming, has NO place in report threads, and is a major part in the push to close them. In areas where staff feel empowered to delete inappropriate posts in report threads (like Theology), you just do not see the report wars you see in other areas where staff try not to delete flaming posts in report threads (like Congregations).I wonder whether reports are a useful venting area. If you prevent people from quarreling in reports, then maybe they will do it somewhere else, or perhaps misbehave in more subtle but as much damaging ways.
A tool that could be useful against quarrels in reports (and threads in general) is the thread specific ban, meaning to prohibit someone from posting in a thread, similarly to a forum specific ban. A TSB would be easier (and quicker) to issue than a FSB.

I'm up in the air on this...I could find both reasons for open and closed. But if I were to choose, I would say closed. One, it would eliminate harassment in the threads. Two, it should be nobody elses business who gets reported and for what. Sometimes people make mistakes and it needs to be between staff and that member. Three, it takes sooo much longer to close a report than it used to because many different people like to get involved when it doesn't concern them and argue about it.Democracies do not follow that reasoning by closing trials from the public. All the issues are dealt with and the openness and thus accountability to the public is considered of vital importance.

No bickering back and forth, the mod who is contacted decides if the information is passed on (no requirement will keep vicarious bickering from happening), and allow the members to still see the process.So the staff member can check first whether the post suits his/her agenda. No thank you.

I hate to see the abuse of something make something GO AWAY when it is a very good & helpful system.
Otherwise, we wouldn't even have an internet; it's a good tool, but it's often abused and harms people....True. Imagine that we would destroy the wiki process because there are people who are using wikis as a battlefield or to push their agendas. That would be foolish.

I'd go along with mods being able to instantly delete member posts in report threads that are inappropriate.That is open to abuse as well. I have made many posts in reports that did not contribute to establishing whether the post was a violation or not, but I think were useful nonetheless (and they weren’t deleted).

[Bombila]

I generally agree, Amoranemix, with leaving all posts in the report threads. I've only actually examined the Discussion and Debate area report threads (and contributed), and it seems to me that with a few exceptions, the process (barring the anonymity aspect, which I would like to see changed) seems to work pretty well - certainly better than the old closed reports.

[JimfromOhio]

Looks like they REMOVED all "reports" from the open.

[synger]

Yes, they just moved them a few minutes ago. Reports are now private.

[JimfromOhio]

Yes, they just moved them a few minutes ago. Reports are now private.

I am disappointed. This is one of the areas I want to keep open.

Something for me to ponder now.

[Glaz]

Leave them open. If you want to limit who can actually post to staff and the reported member, fine, but given past abuses there needs to be tranparency in the system.

[Tenebrae]

Yes, they just moved them a few minutes ago. Reports are now private.
Its set in stone?

No chance of Lee reconsidering? I think it was one area that would have been good to be left open?

[ParsonJefferson]

Leave them open. If you want to limit who can actually post to staff and the reported member, fine, but given past abuses there needs to be tranparency in the system.

Absolutely correct!

There are a few moderators here who are clearly abusing their privilege and power. And they want to do it in secret.

Given the overwhelming problems this forum is facing, this will just lead to more problems.


Bad, bad move on the part of the staff.

[Bombila]

Why blame staff? Isn't this LeeD, site owner's deccision?

[synger]

Absolutely correct!

There are a few moderators here who are clearly abusing their privilege and power. And they want to do it in secret.

Given the overwhelming problems this forum is facing, this will just lead to more problems.


Bad, bad move on the part of the staff.
From what I've seen, the majority of staff as well as members want them to remain open in some fashion, even if limited to input. Many of the suggestions here have been echoed in other threads. I'm getting a sense, though, that this is a directive from Lee himself, and that he was pretty set on it.

But then, I'm not anywhere near In The Know, so I could be blowing smoke for all I know.

[Tenebrae]

From what I've seen, the majority of staff as well as members want them to remain open in some fashion, even if limited to input. Many of the suggestions here have been echoed in other threads. I'm getting a sense, though, that this is a directive from Lee himself, and that he was pretty set on it.

But then, I'm not anywhere near In The Know, so I could be blowing smoke for all I know.
Who would be the person to suggest this too?

[JimfromOhio]

At least, Lee is helping me deciding my future here. :)

[The Princess Bride]

Please dont blame the report becoming private on all staff, many of us wanted them to be left open. :wave:

[Glaz]

I got 2 dollars and 92 cents on me, how about it Lee, keep them report threads open, eh?

[praying]

I got 2 dollars and 92 cents on me, how about it Lee, keep them report threads open, eh?

That and a nickel will get you exactly nowhere. :(

[SilentTraveler]

I can say with certainty that most if not all of my Support Team wanted them open, with no anon status.

We, Support Team, are not to blame for this action.

[SilentTraveler]

And for the record, I was around before 777 happened, and there were abuses in the reports back then so I don't agree with having them closed period, with the exception of the PM reports.

[snoochface]

Is Lee reading this thread at all? The poll is 85% in favor of leaving reports open. I know it's his final decision, but I thought he was all about making these forums the way the members wanted them to be. This decision does not seem in line with that philosophy.

Anyone on staff know if he is aware of the poll/thread?

[CaDan]

I rather like the open reports. It has taken a little time, but I think people have learned how to conform their behavior to that expectation.

[Tenebrae]

Is Lee reading this thread at all? The poll is 85% in favor of leaving reports open. I know it's his final decision, but I thought he was all about making these forums the way the members wanted them to be. This decision does not seem in line with that philosophy.

Anyone on staff know if he is aware of the poll/thread?
I sent him a PM with the link to this thread

[TheBear]

We just learned a little something about Lee, didn't we? It looks like he is going to do what he wants, regardless of what the overwhelming majority wants for this community, (including mods, supervisors and admins).

Erwin,

All your hard work on the 777 changes, and all the stress you went through during that transition, was all for nothing.

[Annabel Lee]

Agreed Bear.

This is just going to turn into an ordinary Christian messageboard.
Nothing special.
It's a shame.

[Auntie]

.....
The poll is 85% in favor of leaving reports open.
.......




Currently 86.15%.

[No Swansong]

Erwin,

All your hard work on the 777 changes, and all the stress you went through during that transition, was all for nothing.

I'm sure the check didn't bounce.

[No Swansong]

For the record I voted completely open with the original reporter anonymous unless she/he reports more than 5 posts per week.

The opening of report threads was the only good thing that came from the 777 debacle.

[dragoniatiegre]

They should remain open. This allows for accountability, and keeps accusations of favoritism from occuring. In addition, much like court cases that are published, these reports can act as establishments of precedence.

[HowardDean]

Reading them is also a good way one who aspires to moderator can learn and get the feel of what are and aren't violations.

[dragoniatiegre]

Reading them is also a good way one who aspires to moderator can learn and get the feel of what are and aren't violations.
That's something I hadn't thought of, but you are very right.

[Apex]

Keep them open!

[MikeK]

Nice to see the new owner cares what the members of this board think about this matter...

[JimfromOhio]

As I said earlier, keep this open with a note of coming up with a protocol of someone who appears to be abusing the system.

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

to be fair..this poll onlt consists of 74 people which is a tiny percentage of the members here

[~BlessingsDreamFund~]

to be fair..this poll onlt consists of 74 people which is a tiny percentage of the members here

True, but based on the responses it is made up of people who *care* about this specific issue... have given good reasons for their position and the result is pretty overwhelming in favor of keeping reports *open* that reporters should NOT be anonamous (except in extreme circumstances) and only the reporter/reportee and Mods should be allowed to post in report threads with perhaps an advocate for each side in a dispute...

I think that could and should be doable...

My .02

God Bless,

Ty

[JimfromOhio]

I believe 77 have voted are "active" members. We do have many inactive members.

[snoochface]

The people who vote for president of the country are a small percentage of the entire US population. It's a representative sample that can be extrapolated to the community as a whole.

The ones who care about the issue are the ones who voted for it. I just wonder if Lee cares about that.

[ChristianCenturion]

to be fair..this poll onlt consists of 74 people which is a tiny percentage of the members here

There is also the little detail that 'some' (ahem) members have entered that it doesn't matter either way and are not showing up on the yes or no selections.

And what are we seeing as the results here?
The owner didn't create this poll.
I don't see where he said this was to be decided by the membership (see wiki being done away with).
And members continue to post opinions implying that the owner doesn't care.

Just an FYI where it applies ~ having an owner of a site throw away his rights so that opinions of the more vocal can have the forum run the way they think does not equate caring.

[Robinsegg]

So the staff member can check first whether the post suits his/her agenda. No thank you.
One would always have the option of finding someone on the report thread who does agree with them to PM . . . or get to know the mods!

I won't try to say that no moderator has his/her own agenda, nor that no moderator plays favorites. However, most have seen (via reading the reports) that we endeavor to be as fair and balanced as possible.

BTW, I don't know of many mods who want the reports hidden. The transparency has actually helped the members see how hard we work, how hard most of us try to be fair, and alerted us to any problems in our teams that we need to rectify. Many members have posted helpful, thoughtful remarks in the reports that furthered the moderating process.

However, it's really very annoying when members start bickering in the reports. It makes it much more difficult to follow where we are on decisions and how to proceed.
Rachel

[JimfromOhio]

I got reported out of spite and I would love to be in there defending myself.

This is why I want to keep this open.

[nyj]

Keep viewable, maybe.

[pgp_protector]

Semi Open.
Viewable by all
Allow posting by Mods / Admins, Reported, Reporter only

[~BlessingsDreamFund~]

Semi Open.
Viewable by all
Allow posting by Mods / Admins, Reported, Reporter only


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

That's where I am at...

[HowardDean]

Semi Open.
Viewable by all
Allow posting by Mods / Admins, Reported, Reporter only
You make sense.

[JimfromOhio]

Semi Open.
Viewable by all
Allow posting by Mods / Admins, Reported, Reporter only

:thumbsup: Reps for you.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Sure, it's his site to do with as he wishes. That doesn't mean that our voices won't be heard.

My personal recommendation is to ensure that the new owner make no money.

Withdraw Site Supporter funds and block whatever ads show up on the site.

[I'ddie4him2]

I know there are a lot of concerns with abuses in the past, but I worry about a lot of the conflict that has resulted from having reports open.

I suggested open to viewing/staff posting only, but I'm not stuck on any one suggestion.

I can agree with that Letalis.
Open to read but closed to member posting.

[I'ddie4him2]

i say keep it the way it is, that way no-one can complain about the process not being open and transparent.

What did we actually accomplish with open reports ??
Most cases showed more abuses that were never addressed properly.
Not being argumentative, just pointing out facts.

[SoulFrost]

What are you trying to do? Eliminate conflict?

I think you know that's never gonna happen. There is going to be conflict, so at least let it be *honest* conflict--not cloaks and daggers in the dark.

[TheBear]

I'm sure the check didn't bounce.Yeah. And I forgot to mention the rest of the members and staff, who also spent a lot of time and energy on the 777 changes....all for nothing.

Thanks, Lee.

[nyj]

And I forgot to mention the rest of the members and staff, who also spent a lot of time and energy on the 777 changes....all for nothing. Well, to be fair ... there were never any assurances, that anything we'd ever do would leave a legacy. It was like that pre-7/7/7 and I'm not surprised it could turn out this way post-7/7/7.

[TheBear]

Well, to be fair ... there were never any assurances, that anything we'd ever do would leave a legacy. It was like that pre-7/7/7 and I'm not surprised it could turn out this way post-7/7/7.Thanks.

To really be fair, there was a lot of heated discussions, emotionally charged debates, and much stress along the way to the 777 changes. And shortly after it all got hammered out, it was all for nothing.


Thanks, Lee.

[Rep Daddy]

Wiki giveth, wiki taketh
But the CEO ruleth.

[TheBear]

I love watching all these Lee kiss-ups. :D

[MrJim]

Semi Open.
Viewable by all
Allow posting by Mods / Admins, Reported, Reporter only

:thumbsup:

[No Swansong]

Yeah. And I forgot to mention the rest of the members and staff, who also spent a lot of time and energy on the 777 changes....all for nothing.

Thanks, Lee.
Now that I can agree with.

[TheBear]

That's nice.

[Annabel Lee]

I love watching all these Lee kiss-ups. :D

LOL

[Rep Daddy]

Transparent reports
optimistic pollsters poll
Yet Wiki go Boom!

[Glaz]

wiki go boom cause alot of you folks weren't mature enough to handle the idea of actually cooperating with others to make some rules.

[Rep Daddy]

Some of us were wiki virgins by conviction.

[No Swansong]

wiki go boom cause alot of you folks weren't mature enough to handle the idea of actually cooperating with others to make some rules.
Or perhaps some of us weren't willing to make some compromises that we were being told we must make. By the way is it a compromise if we are told we must make it?

[Angel4Truth]

Thought this was about report threads not wikidum

[TheBear]

Thought this was about report threads not wikidumThank you.


Although, we're all just flapping our gums for nothing. The open reports are gone. So, you might as well close this thread. It serves no purpose now....never did.

[No Swansong]

In my opinion they never really did anyway.

[ravenscape]

This thread is a copy of the original thread now in the Archived Wiki/Rules Discussion forum.

It was copied to the new W/DR forum forum on request. Someone will need to update the article with a summary of the discussion points if you would like for LeeD to have an at-a-glance review of the thread discussion.

Thanks,

Raven
Support Team

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Who's responsible for writing up the summary? The person who requested the move? Somebody should probably call dibs on it here before writing it up so that 10 different people aren't working on different versions.

[ravenscape]

Who's responsible for writing up the summary? The person who requested the move? Somebody should probably call dibs on it here before writing it up so that 10 different people aren't working on different versions.
Members are responsible to update the summary. Calling dibs on the moved ones is a good idea, to prevent doubled or tripled efforts.

[Glass*Soul]

Members are responsible to update the summary. Calling dibs on the moved ones is a good idea, to prevent doubled or tripled efforts.

I wonder if anyone will call dibs. It seems like quite a task to take on.

I went ahead and posted a copy of the OP in the wiki. I was going to post the results of the poll as well, but it's still actually open and working. I thought the archived posts would be locked but most of them are not. We're liable to get two divergent discussions going attached to the same OP.

Anyway, here are the poll results as of about five minutes ago:

Open http://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar2.gifhttp://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar2-r.gif 73 (http://foru.ms/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=17332) 85.88%
Closed http://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar3.gifhttp://www3.foru.ms/images/polls/bar3-r.gif 12 (http://foru.ms/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=17332) 14.12%
Voters: 85.

[synger]

Oh, was I supposed to call dibs? I wrote up a summary. Take a look.

Change it if I missed anything.

[Glass*Soul]

Excellent job!

[Windmill]

[Note: there is already a thread on this topic (http://foru.ms/t6371218-wiki-copy-open-report-threads.html), with a summary of all the arguments for and against open reports, and including the poll results. Please go there for further discussion.]

This just is NOT ACCEPTABLE. This was the best thing about the reforms. Almost everyone voted for them to be open.

BRING THEM BACK. It stops corruption. Lets you talk to mods. What are you achieving but not even letting us view them?

[Amoranemix]

Please dont blame the report becoming private on all staff, many of us wanted them to be left open. file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Frank/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.gifStaff can exert pressure on LeeD. After all, the pay is lousy and the site won’t work without you.

Is Lee reading this thread at all? The poll is 85% in favor of leaving reports open. I know it's his final decision, but I thought he was all about making these forums the way the members wanted them to be. This decision does not seem in line with that philosophy.I too thought that the forum was about being the way the members wanted it. The reason LeeD may have closed reports is so that he can then open them again to prove he does listen to the members and quench protest. If you take from someone away three things and then give back one, they will be less hostile than if you just take two things away from someone.

Reading them is also a good way one who aspires to moderator can learn and get the feel of what are and aren't violations.Reading them is also a good way for one who wonders to see whether (s)he wants to be a moderator.

to be fair..this poll onlt consists of 74 people which is a tiny percentage of the members hereTo be fair, the part that voted for reports to be secret was even tinier than the part that voted to have them open.

Me : So the staff member can check first whether the post suits his/her agenda. No thank you.
Robinsegg : One would always have the option of finding someone on the report thread who does agree with them to PM . . . or get to know the mods!
So one has to boot-lick a few staff members to be able to post in reports. Posting indirectly would slow down reports.

My personal recommendation is to ensure that the new owner make no money.
Withdraw Site Supporter funds and block whatever ads show up on the site.That’s an idea, but I’ll wait and see how my secret moderator application goes once I have filed it.

What did we actually accomplish with open reports ??
Most cases showed more abuses that were never addressed properly.
Not being argumentative, just pointing out facts.I don’t think open reports solved abuses, but reduced the number of them. Of course I can’t see how many abuses there were because they were done in secret.
The open reports accomplished that attention could be drawn of staff and members to a potential violation, which could then be acted upon if required.

Yeah. And I forgot to mention the rest of the members and staff, who also spent a lot of time and energy on the 777 changes....all for nothing.The wikis and guidelines the members can now work on are no true member participation as LeeD has shown that he has no qualms with completely disregarding all of the work members put in them without giving them any recognition whatsoever.

Members are responsible to update the summary. Calling dibs on the moved ones is a good idea, to prevent doubled or tripled efforts.Member pay for working on wikis is lousy. I was paid $0 an hour for working on the wikis.

Oh, was I supposed to call dibs? I wrote up a summary. Take a look.
Change it if I missed anything.Well done, but these summaries cannot capture all the relevant opinions of the thread without putting an inordinate amount of work in them. I think LeeD should take into accounts all relevant opinions, especially the good ones (supported with reason).

[Crazy Liz]

I'd like to add one more reason for report threads being open: Public appeals.

This morning I have seen comments posted in appeals, without any factual backup, to the effect that a report was handled properly or well. Now that appeals are hidden, we have only the staff's opinions to go on?

There needs to be a more objective basis for discussing the issues in appeals. Without being able to see the report thread, only one side has access to the facts.

[ravenscape]

Just a note for the thread participants:

Post #135 was merged into this wiki, since it's on the same topic.

[Amoranemix]

There needs to be a more objective basis for discussing the issues in appeals. Without being able to see the report thread, only one side has access to the facts.Appeals are now secret as well. That way they longer have to be fair as the members can’t see the injustice anymore. So there is no reason to give members access to the same information as staff.

Despite an overwhelming majority of the voters against hiding reports, they are still secret.

The All Staff Teams Conference Room and all of its subforums have been hidden.

Staff positions have secretly been shuffled.

Many threads from foru.ms/f741-support-team-discussion.html have mysteriously disappeared.

Staff have begun secretly moving (and deleting ?) posts.

Staff have begun censoring mentions of staff activity.

Advertising seems to have gotten worse.

There is one positive thing though. I made a nasty comment about God (foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40828064 (http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40828064)) and to my knowledge it hasn’t even been reported.

At least we don’t have too much freedom left.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Advertising seems to have gotten worse.

That, at least, is easily remedied (http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40689162&postcount=78).