[Discussion] RWDT Alleged Threadjacking

[Frisbeeteria]

Some kind of minimum post threshold for making reports might solve that specific issue while opening up a fairly massive can of worms

Not gonna happen. Never gonna happen. We judge rulebreaking on the content of the post, not the posting history of the reporter.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I suppose the key question then is, what do you want them to do about it? Your summary of the salient issues is good, but how do we fix it?

Some kind of minimum post threshold for making reports might solve that specific issue while opening up a fairly massive can of worms

I think we're probably over-complicating this. If we acknowledge that there are perhaps some problem players here primarily to try to get people banned rather than participating constructively themselves, it just needs to be part of looking at the context of the report and there needs to be an emphasis on trying to spot this and record the suspicions.

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

It's a bit more work in the short term perhaps, but if just a couple of bad faith people disappear or find themselves restricted in their scheming then both bad behaviour and the number of reports will decrease and the general forum culture will be improved.

[Drop Your Pants]

I think we're probably over-complicating this.

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

I think the mods do most of that of it since they mention posters history in a lot of warnings

Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts

Or they usually spend their time in F7 where they don't get post numbers. They could be more of a lurker than a poster. Big post counts doesn't exactly mean much. If anything, those with bigger post counts have more of a bad history with moderation.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I think we're probably over-complicating this.

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

I think the mods do most of that of it since they mention posters history in a lot of warnings

They look at warning and ban history, for sure, but there are posters with relatively few warnings who have never contributed anything and are constantly to be found stirring things up a page or two before something explodes and often are the ones who then make the report.

Are their files full of suspicion marks and are they teetering on the edge of DEAT? Maybe, but I doubt. There's no outward sign, all we players can go from is what we can see.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Some kind of minimum post threshold for making reports might solve that specific issue while opening up a fairly massive can of worms

Not gonna happen. Never gonna happen. We judge rulebreaking on the content of the post, not the posting history of the reporter.

Good. Thanks Fris.

[Twilight Imperium]

Some kind of minimum post threshold for making reports might solve that specific issue while opening up a fairly massive can of worms

Not gonna happen. Never gonna happen. We judge rulebreaking on the content of the post, not the posting history of the reporter.

For what it's worth, I was posting this as a "it's one of the only actual solutions to this issue I see and it's obviously ridiculous, so let's keep thinking please"

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

This also seems like a bad idea though. Do we want to crack down on what are essentially ill-motivated but legitimate reports?

[The Reformed American Republic]

Not gonna happen. Never gonna happen. We judge rulebreaking on the content of the post, not the posting history of the reporter.

For what it's worth, I was posting this as a "it's one of the only actual solutions to this issue I see and it's obviously ridiculous, so let's keep thinking please"

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

This also seems like a bad idea though. Do we want to crack down on what are essentially ill-motivated but legitimate reports?

Btw, Sorry that my reply accused that idea of being a sneaky attempt to stifle reporting. I misread your post.

[Twilight Imperium]

Btw, Sorry that my reply accused that idea of being a sneaky attempt to stifle reporting. I misread your post.

All good I knew as I was posting it that it was eminently mis-readable.

[The New California Republic]

I think we're probably over-complicating this. If we acknowledge that there are perhaps some problem players here primarily to try to get people banned rather than participating constructively themselves, it just needs to be part of looking at the context of the report and there needs to be an emphasis on trying to spot this and record the suspicions.

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

Don't they do that already? There have already been a number of instances where the Mods have told people to put each other on the ignore list because of repeated tit-for-tat reports.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Check the posts by a reporter, and if they themselves have been posting in that thread in a way that seems at all baity put a note on their file even if it doesn't go quite over the line. Be suspicious of reports from people with very small numbers of posts. Check the reporter's file before a decision and if you see a pattern of notes, then that starts to look like a bad faith actor that maybe you don't want here.

This also seems like a bad idea though. Do we want to crack down on what are essentially ill-motivated but legitimate reports?

Is...is this a trick question? If the person making the report had a hand in creating the problem then making a note so you can see if it's a regular occurrence and then cracking down when it becomes clear it's a pattern is sensible to create possibilities of addressing that issue at root rather than pretending each new event is a fresh start, giving them what they want and letting them permanently get away with it.

[Nilrahrarfan]

I think the way the riots are going, we should see more frequent trawling. Kyrusia made a mistake by leaving the moderation team.