Poll: Why report???

[sirdanrhodes]

They are mostly not funny, childish and immature.

 

[Aedrial]

snip.

If we are talking about the thread posted on page two, that was an incredibly immature thread, yes it may have had laughs in shock value, but it was still a stupid, pointless thread.

No, it wasn't: it asked a question that a person could use to reflect on sex and gender and sexual orientation.

It's mainly got to do with social etiquette, if many people get offended by it, of course its going to be removed or censored.

Really? What if those people are just prudes or--my theory in this case--those people were made uncomfortable by the question because of their own sexual insecurities?

Would you walk up to a random person in the street and ask them that same question from aforementioned thread?

I wouldn't walk up to a random person in the street and ask them about most of the things that are topics on the forums.

Regardless of its possible merits, how many people do you think would automatically look at it and think, "Oh, this looks like a valid survey of sexual orientation and its relation with gender and sex." Not very many, I'm pretty sure the thread was intended as a joke, one in poor taste at that.

It's based on personally opinion, I saw the thread as immature, you saw it as a valid analysis, but regardless of what we both think, the majority is what counts. My point is, everyone gets a vote and from the looks of things, the majority thought it was inappropriate.

 

[Smudge91]

I press the red button if the thread is against the rules or just plain stupidity. The thread used in the Ots post is just plain what on earth are on you on?!?! oh transexuals jokes and gay jokes oh oh arn't we funny and 12. Actually when i was 12 i wouldn't have found it funny. I like this website because its where you can voice an opinion and if its coherent and not plain ignorance then it is accepted and debated with and silly threads are just burnt down. I don't really want to see this place go down like some forums i've seen so i'll pres the red button to keep it the way it is.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

It wasn't immature or childish, though--it was an interesting question that can be used to think more critically about the relationship between gender and sex and sexual orientation.

I know what you mean there, but the way it was worded was pretty silly. A little bit of clever wording and it probably wouldn't have been reported...as much.

Drat, beaten to it.

Anyway, how somebody says something can be more important than what they say, especially on Internet forums where intent can't be determined easily.

Maybe the topic was intended to stir up intelligent discussion where people were forced out of their comfort zones and confronted deep-rooted sexual issues, but it could just as easily have been a cheap laugh at the expense of others. Depravity for its own sake is extremely common on the Internet. And it shouldn't be allowed on The Escapist.

If the OP on that topic had been as detailed (and thus the intent much easier to see) as the articles you linked to, Cheese, it probably wouldn't have been locked.

As for the original topic, I report when I believe something is against the rules and also personally disgusts me. Like when I keep seeing the same list threads and religious flame wars over and over.

 

[Aedrial]

Regardless of its possible merits, how many people do you think would automatically look at it and think, "Oh, this looks like a valid survey of sexual orientation and its relation with gender and sex."

When I first got here (or rather, when we first got forums)? Plenty: me and a few other members would have been five pages into a discussion about sociobiology and 'how gender is a performance along a continuum' by now.

That's the issue here--this isn't just about the thread, it's about how the population of The Escapist has changed: it seems it's become much less intelligent and mature, and has become much more shallow and reactionary.

It's based on personally opinion, I saw the thread as immature, you saw it as a valid analysis, but regardless of what we both think, the majority is what counts. My point is, everyone gets a vote and from the looks of things, the majority thought it was inappropriate.

Really? When did that happen? When did these forums become a matter of majority rules? It certainly wasn't like that when Joe was around--when did it change?

I'm not saying thats how this forum works, it is how the report system works though. Like Labrinth said very few people report anyway, which is why they are usually taken seriously.

Yes, I've only been here a short time, but very few threads are written very well anymore. As has been said above, if it was written correctly maybe then it would have been taken seriously. It gave the impression (to me anyway) that it was there for some cheap laughs.

 

[Aedrial]

I'm not saying thats how this forum works, it is how the report system works though. Like Labrinth said very few people report anyway, which is why they are usually taken seriously.

That doesn't make any sense though: I can see that drawing the mods attention to the thread, but then once they get there, don't they make their own decision?

Otherwise people could just, I don't know: co-ordinate over Twitter to hit the report button on a poster they didn't like: do we want that? Do we want the report button to become a popularity contest?

But it's the only way it will work. The decision in the end is left up to the mod and they are handpicked to make sure they work out the situation fairly.

People do that anyway, but if their is proof of that, it could be fixed. If the thread does provoke intelligent talk and has no reason to get locked, the mods who get called up by the report button, will decide that it doesn't need locking and will just leave it be. They may (if its possible, I'm not sure) put the false reporters on probation or just warn them to not do it again.

 

[Aedrial]

I'm not saying thats how this forum works, it is how the report system works though. Like Labrinth said very few people report anyway, which is why they are usually taken seriously.

That doesn't make any sense though: I can see that drawing the mods attention to the thread, but then once they get there, don't they make their own decision?

Otherwise people could just, I don't know: co-ordinate over Twitter to hit the report button on a poster they didn't like: do we want that? Do we want the report button to become a popularity contest?

But it's the only way it will work. The decision in the end is left up to the mod and they are handpicked to make sure they work out the situation fairly.

But here's the problem--you also said:

It's based on personally opinion, I saw the thread as immature, you saw it as a valid analysis, but regardless of what we both think, the majority is what counts. My point is, everyone gets a vote and from the looks of things, the majority thought it was inappropriate.

How can it be BOTH "left up to the mod" AND "everyone gets a vote"?

People are voting to alert the mod. The mod ultimately has the end decision. If enough people petition a mod, a decision might be changed or even one well thought out reply may make the mod change his/her mind.

 

[Xvito]

I'd say that people aren't reporting enough threads/posts, it's either that or the mods aren't paying attention. Because I've seen a lot of ban-worthy posts in the past few weeks...

 

[Aedrial]

I'm not saying thats how this forum works, it is how the report system works though. Like Labrinth said very few people report anyway, which is why they are usually taken seriously.

That doesn't make any sense though: I can see that drawing the mods attention to the thread, but then once they get there, don't they make their own decision?

Otherwise people could just, I don't know: co-ordinate over Twitter to hit the report button on a poster they didn't like: do we want that? Do we want the report button to become a popularity contest?

But it's the only way it will work. The decision in the end is left up to the mod and they are handpicked to make sure they work out the situation fairly.

But here's the problem--you also said:

It's based on personally opinion, I saw the thread as immature, you saw it as a valid analysis, but regardless of what we both think, the majority is what counts. My point is, everyone gets a vote and from the looks of things, the majority thought it was inappropriate.

How can it be BOTH "left up to the mod" AND "everyone gets a vote"?

People are voting to alert the mod. The mod ultimately has the end decision. If enough people petition a mod, a decision might be changed or even one well thought out reply may make the mod change his/her mind.

Okay, but that's different than what you were saying before--or at least what your words added up to: you may have just not expressed yourself clearly.

So like I keep saying: isn't it up to the mods? So why are people talking about how the number of people who hit the report button is enough to get a thread locked? What about, like you said, the mod ultimately having the end decision?

Sorry about getting my wires crossed a bit there.
But like I said the mod does get the end decision. But if the mod is lazy and doesn't check the thread properly, then the majority will get away with it. But as I said the mods are chosen to NOT do that. Peer-pressure does effect everyone after all.

 

[Aedrial]

But if the mod is lazy and doesn't check the thread properly, then the majority will get away with it. But as I said the mods are chosen to NOT do that. Peer-pressure does effect everyone after all.

Definitely, I agree. I guess I'd say that I hope that it doesn't go from a feeling that 'mods are human and aren't immune to peer-pressure' to 'mods are there to enforce the will of the community, even when that community is in the wrong'.

That would be a sad day, because as you said much earlier, the community is slowly becoming reactionary idiots.