Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    1) The moderation clearly has a problem because your success rate is too high. That can't be argued, though I'm sure you'll try.
    So what is the "right" proportion of warnings to be reversed? More cards being reversed means the mods are getting more things wrong in the first place. Maybe they are, I don't particularly care, just wondering what you think the figure should be.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Potally_Tissed)
    So what is the "right" proportion of warnings to be reversed? More cards being reversed means the mods are getting more things wrong in the first place.
    Obviously not 0% - when AAM questions die down to nothing, then the system is working.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    Read the first post I made maybe?
    I could repeat myself endlessly as well, doesn't mean I'd actually be answering the question.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    Until the changeover in mods some months back, my card rate was somewhere around 50% of cards/reversals. At one point I had more reversals than cards. This was clearly an unaccceptable situation for the forum at large. By extension, does this mean that half of all cards are wrongly issued?

    I agree, though that a lot of cards are down to a moderator misunderstanding, or a highly subjective mod opinion, and are almost impossible to reverse.
    The issue I have is most of my cards are issued on the grounds of subjectivity which works on unwritten rules formed from the opinion of the moderators.

    (Original post by Drewski)
    I could repeat myself endlessly as well, doesn't mean I'd actually be answering the question.
    So then how about you read what I posted after that remark? :facepalm:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    Obviously not 0% - when AAM questions die down to nothing, then the system is working.
    No challenges or objections to any warnings, ever? I think what you've described is the total absence of a warning system.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by geoking)
    1) The moderation clearly has a problem because your success rate is too high. That can't be argued, though I'm sure you'll try.

    2) Make the stats as complex as you feel is needed. If it makes the moderation more transparent and accountable, which tends to make services better, then how on earth is this a bad thing?

    It's quite woeful that you lot can't see the benefit of being able to monitor the moderation service. As I said it would allow you to see trends and where the site could be improved e.g. captcha for spam. Here's a question - would those statistics make the moderation worse? If the answer is 'no' then why are you lot all so vehemently against it? :holmes:
    The success rate being high is a bad thing? :erm:

    How do you propose the stats be meaningful then, taking into account the privacy of people's warning history, and that you can't access binned threads to see what was warned/why?

    For instance, if you were told that 95% of card given weren't overturned (I don't know the actual figures) that's in no way indicative of whether the modding was good or bad, without you having more insight into the reasoning.

    I'm not against the notion, but unless you can provide an example of tangible benefits to it, I'm not in support of it either. It just seems unnecessary at this point.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by geoking)
    Obviously not 0% - when AAM questions die down to nothing, then the system is working.
    This is a fairly flawed notion - there will always be people who complain, regardless of the validity of their card.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    Obviously not 0% - when AAM questions die down to nothing, then the system is working.
    But that's clearly never going to happen. On a forum full of children and know-it-all gob****** with anonymity, people will always kick up a fuss even if they were blatantly at fault.

    I was briefly a mod here years ago. I deleted a thread from someone that was replete with swearing, abuse, bullying and adult content. Any one of which is enough to warrant deletion. The OP then started an AAM questioning the deletion. What would the stats on that show?

    If you say to people "that thread contained x, that was why it was deleted" then you'll get people - the same people who always complain about the mods - saying that the mods are lying, that that's not why it was deleted. You can't leave the thread up, because of what it contained. So what next?

    People aren't going to believe it even if it is reported.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    But that's clearly never going to happen. On a forum full of children and know-it-all gob****** with anonymity, people will always kick up a fuss even if they were blatantly at fault.

    I was briefly a mod here years ago. I deleted a thread from someone that was replete with swearing, abuse, bullying and adult content. Any one of which is enough to warrant deletion. The OP then started an AAM questioning the deletion. What would the stats on that show?

    If you say to people "that thread contained x, that was why it was deleted" then you'll get people - the same people who always complain about the mods - saying that the mods are lying, that that's not why it was deleted. You can't leave the thread up, because of what it contained. So what next?

    People aren't going to believe it even if it is reported.
    Equally, you can't deny that some cards are utterly absurd on their face, and when contested it's just ridiculous that the moderator doesn't immediately reverse. I notice this when a mod doesn't understand a post and thinks it's offensive/OT etc. When it goes to AAM, some of them still have an attitude on them as though it's your fault for their mistake.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    how do you get a card over turned
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guy Secretan)
    how do you get a card over turned
    just make a thread in ask a moderator and explain why you think it should be overturned, ive had cards overturned before because it was just a misunderstanding


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    This is a fairly flawed notion - there will always be people who complain, regardless of the validity of their card.
    Well ignoring the trolls obviously...

    (Original post by Drewski)
    But that's clearly never going to happen. On a forum full of children and know-it-all gob****** with anonymity, people will always kick up a fuss even if they were blatantly at fault.

    I was briefly a mod here years ago. I deleted a thread from someone that was replete with swearing, abuse, bullying and adult content. Any one of which is enough to warrant deletion. The OP then started an AAM questioning the deletion. What would the stats on that show?

    If you say to people "that thread contained x, that was why it was deleted" then you'll get people - the same people who always complain about the mods - saying that the mods are lying, that that's not why it was deleted. You can't leave the thread up, because of what it contained. So what next?

    People aren't going to believe it even if it is reported.
    See the above. You're always going to get prats on forums, but for a lot of my cards, the ruling has ended being down to not breaking rules per se, but to subjective interpretation of the rules. As there is no way of other users seeing this, then it's a problem.

    If people believe something or not, who cares? What matters is reporting the raw facts, and these facts can show areas that can be improved.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by geoking)
    Please explain how on earth that is possible. Free to give examples, but I can't because if I say "I was warned for X, this would be beneficial for other users to see" *bam* blue card. :facepalm:

    To summarise there have been two incidents in which I was moderated yet there was nothing in the rules against what I said, and it came down heavily on moderator subjectivity. Incidents like that need to be minimised, and one way to do that would be to have a monthly summary on cards issued and reasons why. Plus by showing the hilariously impossible success rate of cards, this would highlight how when challenged, the moderators need to be more open minded.

    CT needs to read this thread. The fact that the moderation is arguing against transparency and accountability is nothing short of laughable.
    I'm not sure how those particular examples are relevant to a topic. "I got a card for calling someone X name, which I didn't know was considered offensive" et al. is something that can't be shown through statistics. For that kind of detail and transparency, you'd need a detailed log of the cards given (either showing the carded post, which obviously isn't an option, or having the mod team going to the extra effort of documenting the exact reason for the card, for public consumption, which again obviously isn't an option). It's not possible to show quantitatively. Also, it's very easy to say "I used a controversial word that I thought was innocuous; the mod team considered the word unacceptable, and I'm willing to bet a large number of the userbase would also be equally unaware of the word's offence. We need more clear rules on offensive language [which is the obvious solution, rather than a monthly database report], or transparent statistics showing precisely why the card was given." Example given; rules not broken.

    Sure, number of cards given, reversed, and bans given is easy to collate via a database query. But those stats themselves tell the users nothing. To be actually useful, you need more data. AAM threads created; card frequency within the userbase or by [anonymised] user; frequency of cards by reason; frequency of ban reason; reason for reversal (sometimes we make clerical errors; sometimes it's misjudgement; sometimes it's a new mod getting used to the job); mod recruitment; mod retirement; contextual data and descriptions. Suddenly this is no longer an easy query, and is suddenly a monthly audit, requiring hundreds of hours of dev, moderator and CT time per year. You can understand why TSRG may not be particularly keen on this.

    Rest assured the thread will be read when the CT are back in the office. I think you can tell by the reception of the thread that it's not just the mod team that have problems with the idea.

    (Original post by Guy Secretan)
    how do you get a card over turned
    If you think a card was given in error, you can make a thread in AAM querying it. If another mod looks at it, and thinks the card was a mistake, it'll be reversed. If not, it'll stand.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah I have already asked in aam but they weren't having it so now I am permanently banned from H and R
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guy Secretan)
    Yeah I have already asked in aam but they weren't having it so now I am permanently banned from H and R
    if you appealed in AAM and didn't get anywhere, and it was bad enough to get banned from H&R then it's possible you deserved it?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hype en Ecosse)
    Rest assured the thread will be read when the CT are back in the office. I think you can tell by the reception of the thread that it's not just the mod team that have problems with the idea.
    Would love to see a detailed report by the CT on this issue, with marks out of ten given for sarcasm, facetiousness and all-round hilarity, whilst still somehow remaining on-topic. :cookie:

    I'd say the mods have won hands-down personally. 10/10.

    I think if we're going to have this thing done, with added juicy details, it can be done with a touch of humour. Awards for 'keeping a straight face when presented with unbelievably spurious carding complaints.' 'Most surreal use of the ban hammer.' 'Tenacity award for the most long-standing troll.'
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Odd socks)
    if you appealed in AAM and didn't get anywhere, and it was bad enough to get banned from H&R then it's possible you deserved it?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    no my of my posts was a joke also I got two strikes on one day which I thought was unfair because I didn't realise I would be banned until it was too late
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guy Secretan)
    no my of my posts was a joke also I got two strikes on one day which I thought was unfair because I didn't realise I would be banned until it was too late
    you're not supposed to joke or make off-topic posts in H&R, did you read the rules before posting?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    This thread has been an interesting read. I think there is definitely an interest from normal users in moderation transparency, that much is clear, but the actual function of the mods is to keep the site functional not be PR specialists. I think that confusion over function of the mod team is where this misguided desire to gather stats comes from.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Odd socks)
    you're not supposed to joke or make off-topic posts in H&R, did you read the rules before posting?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    oh I'm sorry for making a joke please take me out and shoot me
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.