Reports Protocol Revision Semi-Private

[mnphysicist]

Revised report protocol

Reports will be semi-private, once we get the software re-coded.

Members will still receive a PM notifying them that their post was reported. Members will still be able to see the report graphic under their reported post.

The reported member will be allowed to read and respond in the report thread. However, the report thread will remain private, and should not be divulged to other than the RT, in accordance with the site wide rules.

In addition, harassment of staff in report threads, pm's or in the open forums is prohibited. The first violation will result in a 1 month ban, although no points will be given. Further harassment will result in infractions being issued.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Give with one hand and take away with the other.

Bit draconian, don't you think, MN?

I also refuse to assist you in maintaining the cloak of secrecy. Should anything of note be said in any thread I can access, I intend to broadcast it to my utmost ability.

 

[dignitized]

Lindon - if anything of note is said, do the right thing and take it to the proper authorities.

as for the OP - I'm glad to see this

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

We have very different ideas about who the proper authorities are.

 

[arborvita]

We have very different ideas about who the proper authorities are.

Did you call for me?

 

[TheDerek]

I like it.

 

[ravenscape]

Big step in a good direction!

 

[snoochface]

This may not go well, with warnings and infractions in play and I hate to see someone banned for a month just because they have a flux of emotions for a bit..

That's 3 for 3 announcements...I'm sad.

I agree. This is a good step in the right direction, the semi-private reports is better than having them totally closed.

But what is up with an automatic 1-month ban? Reports are volatile, they bring out emotions in people, and I can see someone having an outburst and getting banned which will just exacerbate their feelings of injustice or bias from staff.

Why does it have to be that way? Why does this feel like someone up top felt like they had to make this concession, but damned if they weren't going to get their pound of flesh for it?

 

[mnphysicist]

I would hate to think a few posts over a day or two would be considered harrassment. Folks will be upset in reports threads.... staff know and understands that. This doesn't mean folks won't get warned for flaming if they go to far.

When its an ongoing thing and personal, that is harrassment, and that has to stop. We lost too many good staff over the last few months with everything being open.

 

[Million Pieces]

Essentially Lee has given the members the site they asked for. This is what they asked for, and some of what the staff needs in order to do their best jobs most efficiently.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Hmmm...

I would hate to think a few posts over a day or two would be considered harrassment.

The first violation will result in a 1 month ban

 

[mnphysicist]

Hmmm...

Good catch

The first violation of the harrassment rule, that is not an isolated flame.

I wonder though, if we should adjust the verbiage of that. We don't want folks getting 1 month ban when a warning for flaming would do. It should be clear, but maybe not. What do you folks think?

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Essentially Lee has given the members the site they asked for. This is what they asked for, and some of what the staff needs in order to do their best jobs most efficiently.

This is in no way whatsoever the site we asked for. One example: http://foru.ms/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=6355216

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

We don't want folks getting 1 month ban when a warning for flaming would do. It should be clear, but maybe not. What do you folks think?

And therein lies the rub.

Some of the new rules are actually pretty good--on paper. But you know how they'll be enforced.

 

[snoochface]

Good catch

The first violation of the harrassment rule, that is not an isolated flame.

I wonder though, if we should adjust the verbiage of that. We don't want folks getting 1 month ban when a warning for flaming would do. It should be clear, but maybe not. What do you folks think?

Yes, I think it should be made clearer. I have the same thoughts as LT as to the meaning.

 

[Gwenyfur]

I'm not givin' up my favorite report graphic...
Don't care what y'all punish me with

 

[Tenebrae]

I think this is a really good thing at least half a step in the right direction.

Dont give a rats about being able to read other peoples reports, however the idea of being able to clarify because I've discovered what may seem as clear as day to me, could seem muddy and ambiguous to another person.

And not to mention that Text is a notorious medium for misunderstandings to occur

 

[Tonks]

What's going to happen to folks that copy and paste reports into the open forums? And don't say that it will never happen...

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

What's going to happen to folks that copy and paste reports into the open forums? And don't say that it will never happen...

Doesn't matter. Folk who've become that desperate can't really be punished--there's nothing you can do that will hurt them further.

 

[Tonks]

Doesn't matter. Folk who've become that desperate can't really be punished--there's nothing you can do that will hurt them further.

Actually, it does matter. The responsiblity goes both ways.