How come we don't have a "Reason" field whenever a post is reported? I would personally want to write out in specific detail why someone should be banned.
>>553357
I think mainly because people will just start reporting petty problems, not saying im agaisnt but it will start to clog up the already lazy mods notifcations
>>553357
because people would just use it to leave insults for the janitors and mods
on the other hand though I'll report blatant spoilers in /tv/ or people who are spamming their chosen topic of autism and it'll stay up. The janitor will either not realize it's a spoiler or they aren't around enough to know something is spam until they see it in their report queue for the hundredth time. Like it took forever for the /tv/ janitors to start deleting the threads of the guy who would always start his OP with a pic of boy Bruce Wayne from Gotham when all the /tv/ posters already knew it was spam.
>>553357
>I would personally want to write out in specific detail why someone should be banned.
Most likely because of that reason. I know I would write a fucking essay citing rules and prior archived mod posts every time I reported something.
how about a drop-down list for selecting the rule you'd like to report the post for
i've noticed that reporting posts that look off-topic when taken out of context usually gets them deleted, but for reporting avatarfags this becomes a problem
there's no way for the janitor to read your mind and know what obscure rule you might be reporting the post for
on reddit, there's a 100 character limit for report reasons
the worst I get as a mod is "do your jobs". With the character limit there's not much room for autism to express itself, just a quick expression of your complaint or a citation of the relevant rule.
>>553372
That would be a good compromise. It would be harder for posters to abuse and tell the janitor what rule a post is breaking.
>>553377
If you were a mod on 4chan and got that kind of shit, you could ban them for abusing the report function.
It's a win-win situation for mods and users.
>>553372
That would be absolutely perfect.
>>553489
oh yeah on reddit I can't see who reports what and punish for report misuse, 4chan mods have it better in that regard
>>553357
Because the mods are enormous spammers who don't want their own shitposts deleted. They game the system using their inside knowledge, and the key is that the report queue doesn't show the context of posts.
>>553357
I fucking hate that comic series
>>553369
>on the other hand though I'll report blatant spoilers in /tv/ or people who are spamming their chosen topic of autism and it'll stay up. The janitor will either not realize it's a spoiler or they aren't around enough to know something is spam until they see it in their report queue for the hundredth time.
This is really the only actual problem.
It'd be nice for the smaller boards where the mod who shows up to look at reports might not be too familiar with the subject matter.
I've seen some shitposting bait that might not be immediately recognizable as shitposting to an outsider because it looks like it could be a legitimate discussion prompt.
>>553357
A reason field would work, but only if it were to select the specific rule(s) being violated.
If it's full text responses, you'll just get "FUCK MODS" or a butthurt rant in most reports' text boxes.
>>553489
This. The "report reasons" should be optional, and under the space should be a warning that "misusing the report system or using it to complain about 4chan are bannable offenses. Be polite and concise."
>>553372
It seems like mods never take action on avatarfags anymore. I painstakingly report every one of their posts and then I still have to sit idly by and watch them continue to spam the thread.
>>553372
This. At the very least let us be able to do this.
>>554192
Having written responses rather than a checklist of rules the post violates adds nothing but the ability to file reports unrelated to the rules of the site.
>>554216
Are you really that fucking retarded to not process that quoted post?
What's actually the point of the report button having two options?
You have rule violation, and illegal content. Since you cannot write the reason why a post might have something that is breaking the rules (and all illegal content break the rule anyway), the staff has to guess why you reported the post.
Why not simply remove the "illegal content" option?
>>554254
illegal content is given priority over rule violations.
>>554254
One's for not-urgent shit and only requires a ban/warn, one's for urgent shit and requires a call to the feds.
>>554256
How would the FBI be of any help if some Russian in Russia were to post pedo-porn pics on 4chan?
>>554259
The FBI operates outside US borders.
>>554260
No, seriously, how?
>>554254
They sort it
>>554259
4chan servers are hosted in America
>>554268
How would calling the feds in case illegal content is being hosted on the 4chan-site help if the perpetrators aren't on American soil in the first place?
>>554269
They need to explain to the feds how that material came to exist on their server in order to avoid being held directly liable for it. Failure to do so may be seen as complicity.
>>554233
Are you really of the impression that your proposition is better than one that provides the same benefit without the potential to waste the time of users who would abuse the function or the mods who'd have to comb through it?
>>554330
Oh, so you are retarded. Nevermind.
Read the quoted post and see why the abuse of function would be prevented, you stupid cunt.
>>554333
It's just going to be Barneyfag and similarly autistic fucks flooding the report queue with dozens of reports calling the mods fags for not "enforcing the rules", where the rules are whatever they want them to be at the time.
>>554335
>the faggot trying to remove GR15 is here
oh boy
>>554333
Abuse of function would be countered by banning the offender, yes. However, if it is entirely impossible to abuse the system in a meaningful way, users are only able to make use of the report for actual violations, and reports are concise and clear without "BAN THIS CUNT", "FUCK MODS", or any meaningless fluff attached attached.
>>554198
Can we quote you directly on this? That line hit the nail right on the head.
I feel right now people often end up reporting posts, and then replying to them in order to point out why specifically they should be removed.
Also, the reason field should be limited to 256 characters. That's more than enough for 99% of problems, and if you really feel the need to go full-on autist and do a whole legal briefing on the subject, then you can put it up on pastebin, link to it in the report, and hope that the mod gives a sufficient number of shits to read it.
Yeah it's hard to report avatarfagging
>>553372
Second.
The current report system is absolute shit and encourages abuse.
Giving users a way to give context to the report would be nice.
Then again. If we were able to provide a reason for ban/deletion, the mods would actually have to do their jobs.
>>554450
a way to directly contact the mods wouldn't encourage abuse?
As much as I like the idea personally, I get the feeling that it would be intentionally abused more often than not. It could easily end up being an anchor on the mods/janitors.
Not even hard to implement desu
>>554785
I got a good laugh out of that. really though, how many drop down options would there be? Every global rule and every board rule for the board the report is submitted from?
>>554790
Probably, not sure how big it would be though.
>>554785
http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_optgroup.asp
it should have optgroups for global/board specific rules
- Global
--- 1. Illegal Content
--- 2. Underage User
--- 3. Garbage Outside of /b/
--- ...
- /v/
--- 1. Off-Topic, Not Vidya
--- 2. Fanboyism
--- ...
abbreviated rules are from https://www.4chan.org/bans
>>554798
This one does look like a cleaner option desu
>>553357
>implying mods didn't remove it on purpose
The report function might as well be 'lol press this for nothing to happen', anyway.
>>553357
We used to be able to specify our reports but removing this feature it made it harder to provide accurate feedback for moderation and thus easier to disregard.
>>553489
>It's a win-win situation for mods and users.
You don't really understand where the mods are coming from, anon. The move involvement they potentially face, the worse their experience is. From day one the site was set up in a way to remove any real accountability for the moderation team and they have taken steps over time to increase this distance between the userbase and the moderation team.
They don't want transparency, they don't want to hear our reasoning, they don't want to have to actually look at posts in context. They just want the power and the feeling of being valuable in their otherwise meaningless lives. m00t and his goon mates put the site together and he wanted to draw in a lot of traffic. At the same time they also developed and continually strengthened a culture of us vs. them, anon vs. mod.
GRs 3, 6 and in particular 8 are safeguards which allow mods to moderate however the fuck they want and more or less handle their pet boards like a petting zoo.
>>554174
Mods only go and look at posts in their actual context if it involves something they are personally involved with and then the ban hammer becomes a weapon for a hotpocket on a personal crusade.
Here is a general overview of the types of people who ended up becoming mods:
- original goons who ended up in moderation simply due to being part of the creation of 4chan
- hand picked faggots who spent far to fucking much time kissing arse in the IRC channels
- handpicked tripfags who were selected to be jannies due to personal preference from existing mods
- handpicked personal faggot friends of m00t
These are not the sorts of individuals who a. care about objectivity or rules and b. who care about anyone outside their little circlejerk groups.
>>554271
>They need to explain to the feds how that material came to exist
They don't really need to explain when they have server access to the board which has the most pizza posting out of any other board.
>>554330
>or the mods who'd have to comb through it?
That shouldn't even be part of the equation. If jannies have to spend hours reading through reports and passing them onto mods, with the related context, then that's just how it is.
If they don't like it, they can get a fucking paid job.
>>554797
Fuck off back to IRC you piece of shit.
Everyone if fully fucking aware that the feedback is nothing but a means to distract people into thinking that that is where issues are to be posted so staff can safely ignore them and the anon who submitted the thing can feel as though their submission is going to be taken into consideration eventually before forgetting about it.
It's a black hole. Everyone knows this.
>>554269
It's US law. If they don't call the feds, they get fined.
I'm not letting these dipshits slide this thread.
>>554800
>>554798
Just use radio buttons to choose which type of report it is so the menu isn't clogged with 30 rules.
Also a checkbox so users can leave no rule if they don't want to
>>555958
Here's the problem though.
Mods and janitors DO NOT enforce rules objectively. They say they do, but the opposite is true.
If they were to implement this system, they wouldn't have an excuse to allow shitposters to run rampant.
Not letting it slide.
>>555996
?
I've already used the feedback page.
not letting it slide
>>555958
>add 3 new inputs because the dropdown was "cluttered"
ur a funny guy
>>554908
no need to be rude
reminder
>>553372
>>557107
unreminder
Now anyone who sees my unreminder will forget your post.
>>557153
who are you replying too?
>>554907
>"this thing could be more effective and convenient for everyone involved and it would take less than an hour to implement"
>"If they don't like [the way it is], they can get a fucking paid job."
If they don't like it, they can. Then you have less janitors and mods who are still dealing with a sub-optimal system, making the reporting system even less efficient and lowering the morale of the site's moderation even further, all of which furthers discontent in the userbase and worsens the site.
If you're this allergic to objective debate, keep in mind that it's identical to what >>553372 is proposing.
>>553372
Reminder that this is a good idea and should be implemented.
There is no reason not to.
>>553357
I'm pretty sure we had something like that years ago. I remember previously we had a few more options on what we could report something for as well.
