PDA

View Full Version : Jailing Posts - A theory



Old Pink
October 16th, 2006, 11:47 PM
Hi,

Whilst reporting some spam posts this morning (1 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=278278),2 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=278279)) this morning, I noticed there where others replying and complaining of the spam, I also noticed there are currently 284 threads in the jail. Such a large forum is open to alot of spam, and although there is a large moderating team, not everyone can be online at once, and with posts coming through thick and fast, things can easily slip past.

Anyway, my idea was that if a certain number of people (say 3/5/10) were to click a special button on a post (or this could replace the report system) then the post goes to jail automatically. Kind of like a vote-to-jail.

Another method is these posts go to another sub forum (perhaps staff only?), such as lockup or something similar to the jail. This way, moderators can view what posts that particular system removed, and then if the system is being abused (highly unlikely - ubuntu spirit), punish the nessecary people.

That way, moderators can work harder on other aspects of the forum, and people can help clear up more easily. :-D

Could be very hard to implement, but where there's a will there's a way, right? :D

PriceChild
October 16th, 2006, 11:51 PM
There is normally one or two moderators online at all times. Moderators come from around the world which should help this.

My advice is to just be patient, don't bump the thread up by replying with anything, and one of the team will notice it as soon as they have the time.

The problem with the automatic jailing comes from the possible abuse it may cause. Someone could register several accounts and click the button on each enough for it to be jailed... something which definately shouldn't happen without a member of staff's consent.

At the end of the day, mods are just normal people who can manipulate other members' threads... they ARE the special group you describe.

Old Pink
October 16th, 2006, 11:53 PM
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the current system is a bad one, I'm just trying to cut down on spam in general and it could help reduce staff workload.


The problem with the automatic jailing comes from the possible abuse it may cause. Someone could register several accounts and click the button on each enough for it to be jailed... something which definately shouldn't happen without a member of staff's consent.

Please read:


Another method is these posts go to another sub forum (perhaps staff only?), such as lockup or something similar to the jail. This way, moderators can view what posts that particular system removed, and then if the system is being abused (highly unlikely - ubuntu spirit), punish the nessecary people.

aysiu
October 17th, 2006, 03:14 AM
I believe Craigslist has a system similar to this, wherein the Craiglist staff will review (and possibly remove) posts if enough people (number uncertain) flag the post.

I think we would need substantially more traffic to warrant this sort of system. First of all, the moderators are busy, but you have to admit the posts get Jailed usually within two hours (if not one). That's a pretty fast response time. Secondly, if there were more traffic, we could raise the threshold number to something like 30 flags. It wouldn't be worth someone's trouble to log into 30 separate accounts to report one post unless there was seriously something wrong with that post.

Old Pink
October 17th, 2006, 08:04 AM
I think we would need substantially more traffic to warrant this sort of system. First of all, the moderators are busy, but you have to admit the posts get Jailed usually within two hours (if not one). That's a pretty fast response time.

As I said before, the current system works good, I agree. :)

I'm not trying to fix something that's broken here. I'm just trying to improve/add to something that's already great. :)


Secondly, if there were more traffic, we could raise the threshold number to something like 30 flags. It wouldn't be worth someone's trouble to log into 30 separate accounts to report one post unless there was seriously something wrong with that post.

That does sound more sensible in theory. :)

BWF89
October 17th, 2006, 11:28 PM
I don't like the idea of regular forum members being able to move posts to the jail. When moderaters move your threads/posts to the jail atleast when you go to repeal it in Resolution Center theres a group of people taht can be held accountable for it. If regular people were allowed to do it what's to stop a group of people in the backyard that disagrees with one of my political opinions from deciding they just don't like what I have to say and jailing it?

Lord Illidan
October 17th, 2006, 11:31 PM
I don't like the idea of regular forum members being able to move posts to the jail. When moderaters move your threads/posts to the jail atleast when you go to repeal it in Resolution Center theres a group of people taht can be held accountable for it. If regular people were allowed to do it what's to stop a group of people in the backyard that disagrees with one of my political opinions from deciding they just don't like what I have to say and jailing it?

if mods find out you have been jailed incorrectly, they can get your post back and punish the jailer, so to speak..

I kinda like the idea. spam is increasing steadily on the forum.

justin whitaker
October 18th, 2006, 12:21 AM
I do not want regular users having jail capability. There are alot of people lately that are either 1. whiny, or 2. free software zealots, or 3. both.

Unless mods come down hard on people that jail something incorrectly, then only mods should have that capability.

aysiu
October 18th, 2006, 12:23 AM
I don't know if you're misunderstanding the original proposal or if I am, but my understanding is that it would take a certain threshold (say, 10 users or 5 users or 30 users) flagging a post in order for it to be jailed.

One ordinary user would not be able to jail another post.

az
October 18th, 2006, 12:50 AM
I don't know if you're misunderstanding the original proposal or if I am, but my understanding is that it would take a certain threshold (say, 10 users or 5 users or 30 users) flagging a post in order for it to be jailed.

One ordinary user would not be able to jail another post.

I think that's a great idea.

It makes the forums better while getting more people involved. The more you get involved, the more you take ownership and the better you make the forums.

Edit: I wonder if there is a mechanism for measuring how "hot" a reported post is. For example, if five out of two hundred people who view a certain post report it, it may be a bad post. In comparison, if a post gets five reports out of ten views, it may be really bad....

aysiu
October 18th, 2006, 02:55 AM
I think that's a great idea.

It makes the forums better while getting more people involved. The more you get involved, the more you take ownership and the better you make the forums. I think this is bound to happen at some point. It's not needed now, as the current moderators can handle most of the spam that comes our way, but as the forums grow more and more popular--exceeding the limits of the moderator staff--a user-based flagging system will be a necessity.

This is what Craigslist does, and I believe it's the only feasible way to handle a site with that kind of traffic.



Edit: I wonder if there is a mechanism for measuring how "hot" a reported post is. For example, if five out of two hundred people who view a certain post report it, it may be a bad post. In comparison, if a post gets five reports out of ten views, it may be really bad.... That's interesting, of course, but that would be a stage 2 thing, if it ever got implemented.

maniacmusician
October 18th, 2006, 03:14 AM
i also voted good idea. i always report spam as soon as I see it, and i'm sure others on here do as well. True, we don't need it right now, but it'd be interesting to see how much it could cut down response time. 5 minutes would be cool :D

PriceChild
October 18th, 2006, 05:34 PM
Yeah i think for the time being things are working... http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=279698 54 minutes... ;)

Although i did reply to one in a positive way before i noticed identical copies :P

Despite my negativeness at the start of the thread aysiu's comments especially are growing on me.... its definately something ubuntu-geek could look into for the future ;)

I've worked with Drupal's matrix voting system which is kind of the same idea, better threads getting pushed forwards and worse ones back... but never really liked it :)

Pricey

dvarsam
October 18th, 2006, 11:28 PM
Anyway, my idea was that if a certain number of people (say 3/5/10) were to click a special button on a post (or this could replace the report system) then the post goes to jail automatically. Kind of like a vote-to-jail.

Another method is these posts go to another sub forum (perhaps staff only?), such as lockup or something similar to the jail. This way, moderators can view what posts that particular system removed, and then if the system is being abused (highly unlikely - ubuntu spirit), punish the nessecary people.

That way, moderators can work harder on other aspects of the forum, and people can help clear up more easily. :-D

Could be very hard to implement, but where there's a will there's a way, right? :D

Dear Matt,

This is a very good idea!

On many occasions I have felt that Moderators are taking wrong decisions & close threads they should not...

So, in my opinion, You are right!!!

However, on many occasions, and specifically where politics is involved, outside parties will definately want to close threads for their own interests...

This could lead on lots of threads closing!!!

So, it is better after 10 members vote that "this thread should be closed", that the thread gets a moderator's attention...

At the same time, NO Moderator can close a Thread, if the thread has not accrued the 10 votes needed from members requesting for the "Thread to close".

If the Moderator can not close a Thread by himself, at least, he could vote for the "Thread to close"... hoping that 10 votes will accrue & finally have the ability to close a thread...

Thanks.

PriceChild
October 18th, 2006, 11:39 PM
At the same time, NO Moderator can close a Thread, if the thread has not accrued the 10 votes needed from members requesting for the "Thread to close".

If the Moderator can not close a Thread by himself, at least, he could vote for the "Thread to close"... hoping that 10 votes will accrue & finally have the ability to close a thread...I've got little problem with the voting system flagging threads for the staff team... but taking away our abilities to lock threads?

Not everyone reads the Ubuntu CoC (http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct) or Forums Policy (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy), nevermind the rules for the backyard (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=121). Even if they do, many don't follow these "rules".

The staff team have been appointed to among other things, help the admins manage the content of the forums, ensuring it follows these rules and guidelines.

We will NOT close a thread without good reason, and will always post why in that thread, or in a private message explaining our actions.

If you think that a thread has been unfairly closed, feel free to post in the Resolution Centre (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=123), where an admin (not mod ;) ) will investigate the situation.

Pricey

Old Pink
October 19th, 2006, 08:04 AM
At the same time, NO Moderator can close a Thread, if the thread has not accrued the 10 votes needed from members requesting for the "Thread to close".

If the Moderator can not close a Thread by himself, at least, he could vote for the "Thread to close"... hoping that 10 votes will accrue & finally have the ability to close a thread...

That is not what I meant and I do not support this proposal. Moderators must always have locking/jailing powers.

Everyone Else: Thanks for all the encouraging posts! :D

KiwiNZ
October 19th, 2006, 09:08 AM
dvarsam I do not support your proposal at all.

I totally back the Moderator Team and their ability to manage this Forum.

K.Mandla
October 20th, 2006, 06:39 AM
I'd also have to vote against it, for many of the reasons already suggested.

For what I've seen in my short time as a moderator, reported posts rarely go more than a few minutes before being inspected and jailed, if necessary. More than once I've tried to jail a thread, only to find that someone had jailed it only moments before.

Either way, from my perspective, the system seems to be working.

maniacmusician
October 20th, 2006, 06:48 AM
dvarsam I do not support your proposal at all.

I totally back the Moderator Team and their ability to manage this Forum.
To be fair, dvarsam was misunderstanding matt's post and warping it into his own opinion. i understand that you do not agree with what he posted and I do not either, but what about what matt posted? that was the issue at hand here.

Old Pink
October 20th, 2006, 10:17 PM
To be fair, dvarsam was misunderstanding matt's post and warping it into his own opinion. i understand that you do not agree with what he posted and I do not either, but what about what matt posted? that was the issue at hand here.

Thanks for getting us back on topic, I was about the say the same thing.

Yes, let me make it clear that if this system was to be used, moderators would still have complete control, maybe even extra control (stop people who abuse the system from using it, etc.)