The Report function

[Sarkus]

(hope this is in the right area?... Please move if not!)
Right, never having opted to use the function, I am curious as to how it works...

If a post of mine is reported, do I get a notification that it has been reported, even if not who has reported it?
Do reported posts need an explanation by the one reporting it?
Do the Mods respond to the person who raised it, or even to the person whose post has been reported?
How does anyone know whether a reported posted has been reviewed and/or actioned (even if no further action is warranted)?

In an ideal world, I would see the person reporting the post having to explain why it is reported. No explanation and the report is ignored.
The author of the reported post should then get a notification that the post has been reported and the explanation, although not the identity of the person reporting them.
Both parties should then get notification that the report has been reviewed and who by, along with the Mod's comments and details of any further actions.


Is this unreasonable?
Would it help, without putting additional work on the Mods?
Or is this the way it works anyway?

 

[Stryder]

(hope this is in the right area?... Please move if not!)

It's the right area since it's a query about the site and it's function.

If a post of mine is reported, do I get a notification that it has been reported, even if not who has reported it?

No. If you've been reported about then you will be blissfully unaware that it ever happened.

Do reported posts need an explanation by the one reporting it?

The report does ask for a quick description of what the problem actually is and what particular rule has been violated.

Do the Mods respond to the person who raised it, or even to the person whose post has been reported?

Not always, sometimes reports can be acted on without acknowledging they were read. Sometimes reports might even slip by with inaction.

How does anyone know whether a reported posted has been reviewed and/or actioned (even if no further action is warranted)?

There is no centralised tracking method, in fact it means the moderators from the subforum, supermoderators or administrators could act without knowledge that somebody else has already acted. In fact this might have caused some hiccups with the current infraction system where people get multiple infractions from multiple moderators at the same time.

In an ideal world, I would see the person reporting the post having to explain why it is reported. No explanation and the report is ignored.
The author of the reported post should then get a notification that the post has been reported and the explanation, although not the identity of the person reporting them.
Both parties should then get notification that the report has been reviewed and who by, along with the Mod's comments and details of any further actions.


Is this unreasonable?
Would it help, without putting additional work on the Mods?
Or is this the way it works anyway?

Well you have to consider we are currently working with the forum software and how it's been implemented, it's not necessarily as ideal a method as we would like, however we've been making do. This is in fact one of the reasons I was looking at the ticket system since it keeps a better track of if moderators are actually acting on the problem and reduces some of the toe stepping that would otherwise occur, however currently we still have some teething problems with the additional method that we can iron out as it develops