@Shandyr 5 spam or 5 abuse flags send the message to the queue immediatly. If a moderator flags a post it goes straight to the queue. The moment it is sent to moderation the post is no longer visible.
The disagree action was active for a time around June last year but the potential for problems was too high so it was turned off again.
It's very complicated to remove the flags so the system is open to abuse. We had a a problem with this in the beggining of the year. The user normally is just warned but it may result in banishment if it's too serious.
I almost forgot to answer your question about the difference between spam and abuse If someone is posting the same thing to multiple threads, a BG quote for instance, and it clearly has no relation to the topic, it's spam. If someone is offensive it's abuse.
Disagree was an old button turned off in reason of many problems, spam became the new disagree atm (not true, just what some people that like to disagree does), until now i didn't saw any punishment for abuse of flag system.
Er, thank you @Shandyr for volunteering me for that...
But yes, if you think a post has been flagged unjustly, send me or one of the other moderators a PM.
This is NOT a guarantee that the flag will be removed. We will look into the matter and decide whether the post warrants the flag. Please respect our decisions on this.
I kinda of start to agree with @Shandyr more and more. I hade an issue on a previous discussion were people flagged me for an harsh reaction, the matter was discussed, @Dee entered on the discussion and put down the agressive feelings, then after 1 week of that discussion, someone passing there just resolved to flag again my post.
Not a person active on that discussion, a problem that was already solved, an guy with an extremly new account... but roll over this last issue will be presume too much. I feel an urge of abuse attack the guy for it's act, but then it goes over and i just realise that the issue is with the system itself.
people would abuse disagree button worse. Being not a punishment and being the right to individually evaluate if you like or not, disagree could be spammed by making a search in the opponent posts in the forum. I know this cos i had a problem in june with someone that made just that, researched my posts and droppend about 40 disagrees on me and i had to resort to the moderators of the forum to get a solution.
The good news is that it is now much simpler for Moderation to remove the flags, so if you feel a post was wrongly flagged for spam/abuse, PM a moderator and the problem will be analyzed.
Of course if Moderation decides the flag was deserved, it stays.
I was actually just about to post an announcement about this. Yes, they've been disabled. If you see someone spamming your thread or being abusive, send a PM to me or one of the other moderators; not only is that a more reliable way to get our attention, but it's a less aggressive form of communication in the thread itself.
If your posts have been flagged in the past, those values will no longer show up on your account.
Somebody 'abuse'-d me, but it vanished. I think Dee looks for unfair use of those. I did take the time to re-read what I wrote, just in case I needed to re-educate myself on appropriateness, but had a clear conscience afterward. I figure we can disagree without being evil to one another. Unless we are evil, in which case we play nicely so that we earn trust to then do evil later.
The warning system is something new I'm testing out, and it seems to be working pretty well. The way it works is this:
When you get a warning, it adds to your existing "warning level". The points expire after a set amount of time, which means that for smaller offenses the warning might last for only a day or two, while others might last several months.
This is in addition to our existing powers; if you truly are being a nuisance, flaming people and causing disruptions for no acceptable reason, we still have the ability to issue permanent bans. But this system should make it a little easier for us to enforce some of the rules, and should make it a lot easier for anyone receiving such a warning to see what exactly they did wrong and how it affects their account.
I'll post something a bit more formal later this week, to explain how the system operates here and why we're using it. What I'd say for the moment is this:
If you see that someone has a warning on their account, it doesn't mean they're a bad person or that they're someone to be shunned. Sometimes people just need a reminder every now and then. So for the most part, just try to ignore it.
Comments
The disagree action was active for a time around June last year but the potential for problems was too high so it was turned off again.
It's very complicated to remove the flags so the system is open to abuse. We had a a problem with this in the beggining of the year. The user normally is just warned but it may result in banishment if it's too serious.
I almost forgot to answer your question about the difference between spam and abuse
(These eyes don't miss a beat)
But yes, if you think a post has been flagged unjustly, send me or one of the other moderators a PM.
This is NOT a guarantee that the flag will be removed. We will look into the matter and decide whether the post warrants the flag. Please respect our decisions on this.
Not a person active on that discussion, a problem that was already solved, an guy with an extremly new account... but roll over this last issue will be presume too much. I feel an urge of abuse attack the guy for it's act, but then it goes over and i just realise that the issue is with the system itself.
Of course if Moderation decides the flag was deserved, it stays.
If your posts have been flagged in the past, those values will no longer show up on your account.
Now activating ironic mode for special use to insightful when applicable
Ps: most of my insightful are legit, just to let it clear.
Im' would say: "...Mutton-mongering riff-raff..."
When you get a warning, it adds to your existing "warning level". The points expire after a set amount of time, which means that for smaller offenses the warning might last for only a day or two, while others might last several months.
This is in addition to our existing powers; if you truly are being a nuisance, flaming people and causing disruptions for no acceptable reason, we still have the ability to issue permanent bans. But this system should make it a little easier for us to enforce some of the rules, and should make it a lot easier for anyone receiving such a warning to see what exactly they did wrong and how it affects their account.
I'll post something a bit more formal later this week, to explain how the system operates here and why we're using it. What I'd say for the moment is this:
If you see that someone has a warning on their account, it doesn't mean they're a bad person or that they're someone to be shunned. Sometimes people just need a reminder every now and then. So for the most part, just try to ignore it.