-->
@drafterman
Yes i disagree.
POLL: Should Reporting Be Anonymous?
Posts
Total:
312
-->
@drafterman
I believe it is important for the mods to know if a single user is making a ridiculous number of reports, or spamming reporting of a single user's posts.
However, if it is possible for each user to be assigned a randomized code (only showing for report flags), which the mods will not be able to use to identify any specific user, I believe this would solve both problems.
I am in favor of setting a code to allow mods to identify how many reports are being generated by a single person.
I am not in favor of attaching a specific username to each flag.
If I had to choose between "anonymous flagging" and "identified flagging", I would choose "anonymous flagging" as the lesser of two evils.
However I am also very much in favor of setting an anonymous code to allow mods to identify duplicate reports (flags) and spamming.
-->
@janesix
Can I ask why? You don't think that requiring people to put in effort to make a report and limiting their reports to 10/day won't cap the ability of people to spam reports?
Also, I can personally attest to the fact that the loss of anonymity didn't actually stop the report spamming that was going on. It provably isn't a solution to report spamming.
-->
@3RU7AL
I like this idea and it's sensible, but I don't know what level of coding it would require for Mike.
Thanks for the vote.
No opinion.
(11 out of 71 pinged users reporting)
For - 6
Abstain - 1
-->
@3RU7AL
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/740 vote here: he is only putting his argument here as the OP spamming to silence opposition
Eurgh. Summoned by mass invite. I feel so un-special. I may just not vote now. Out of spite. Petty, petty spite. < That should be the title of all my family reunions.
-->
@Castin
it looks like you already voted?
-->
@bsh1
It also seems like there should be an official board/forum/pinned for these types of votes or maybe a button under "latest activities" or some general PM that all members could opt-in/opt-out to make sure they don't miss these types of votes.
I never would have seen this if I hadn't been tagged.
-->
@3RU7AL
This will enable DDOS attack via multi account report spam and can't hold account IP-holders accountable for it or anything.
-->
@janesix
Not in this thread. Looks like he's counting carryovers or something.
You've been blocked by RationalMadman
If it was a pinned topic or something, we could just "favorite" the topic and then we'd be notified - problem solved.
-->
@3RU7AL
But why no debating prior to the vote? Why only his side gets to say their piece?
-->
@drafterman
What thread are you pulling that vote of mine from?
You've been blocked by RationalMadman
I was tagged and I voted.
Start a debate if you want to debate.
Not debating is not the same as refusing to debate.
The answer is no. No site has anonymous reporting that is reputable to the highest mod level. It is important that mods know who is reporting for the wrong reasons and also who is reporting well so as to then contact the reporter(s) about the issue if the mod feels the reporter needs assurance the issue is being dealt with of if the reporter themselves is in the wrong somehow (or just to elaborate on context).
IF IT'S ANONYMOUS, IT WILL ENABLE DDOS ATTACKS TO GO UNANSWERED OR NO ONE HELD ACCOUNTABLE EVEN THEIR IP OR ANYTHING!
-->
@blamonkey
@whiteflame
@Logical-Master
@3RU7AL
@Jboy3r
The answer is no. No site has anonymous reporting that is reputable to the highest mod level. It is important that mods know who is reporting for the wrong reasons and also who is reporting well so as to then contact the reporter(s) about the issue if the mod feels the reporter needs assurance the issue is being dealt with of if the reporter themselves is in the wrong somehow (or just to elaborate on context).
IF IT'S ANONYMOUS, IT WILL ENABLE DDOS ATTACKS TO GO UNANSWERED OR NO ONE HELD ACCOUNTABLE EVEN THEIR IP OR ANYTHING!
Abstain for obvious reasons
Abstain
-->
@Buddamoose
@Castin
@Vader
The answer is no. No site has anonymous reporting that is reputable to the highest mod level. It is important that mods know who is reporting for the wrong reasons and also who is reporting well so as to then contact the reporter(s) about the issue if the mod feels the reporter needs assurance the issue is being dealt with of if the reporter themselves is in the wrong somehow (or just to elaborate on context).
IF IT'S ANONYMOUS, IT WILL ENABLE DDOS ATTACKS TO GO UNANSWERED OR NO ONE HELD ACCOUNTABLE EVEN THEIR IP OR ANYTHING!
-->
@keithprosser
The answer is no. No site has anonymous reporting that is reputable to the highest mod level. It is important that mods know who is reporting for the wrong reasons and also who is reporting well so as to then contact the reporter(s) about the issue if the mod feels the reporter needs assurance the issue is being dealt with of if the reporter themselves is in the wrong somehow (or just to elaborate on context).
IF IT'S ANONYMOUS, IT WILL ENABLE DDOS ATTACKS TO GO UNANSWERED OR NO ONE HELD ACCOUNTABLE EVEN THEIR IP OR ANYTHING!
fight fire with fire then let's go. Utter bullshit spam war
-->
@RationalMadman
Uh. Why did you @ that to me?
It's easy enough to adjust the server to ignore/temporarily disable flagging if reports exceed 100 flags per hour.
-->
@Castin
You are voting For
I have made an unanonomous report, and I have reason to believe bias was introduced. The wording I received read with such explicit contradiction with the wording in the thread that I was discouraged from further communication, (no pressing need really) and elected not to question the matter, so I have no way of knowing what rationale was actually used. It's possible for example that moderation dismissed the reported material with haste and the words were just chosen poorly for the topic of communication. Unless someone has a reason for reports not to be anonymous I think they should be anonomous. Disagreements could color appeals to moderation policy as well. Moderators might perceive social implications with an individual that effect their judgement. Morale is another consideration.
I'm going to vote against this.
As I believe I may have mentioned elsewhere, there is a certain user who has a grudge against me because I voted against him on one of his debates. The moderators upheld that vote, but as retaliation he went around and reported a bunch of random votes in the hope that a few would get taken down, as round about way of punishing me for voting against him. (Oh and does this sound similar to my concern about voter harassment?)
I also know of one other situation where a moderator knowing who was submitting reports was handy, but I don't think I should elaborate here on that.
Suffice to say, I believe that moderators should know who submitted a report and take that into consideration. Even if the reported incident ends up being a valid item to report, there could still be other motives and larger issues why a specific person submitted that report.
-->
@drafterman
I vote in favor. The character of a vote should be judged thoroughly by its content and relevance to the matter at hand, not off of the identity of the sender. If it is spam, it can evaluated as such without the association of a name.
-->
@Castin
I'm sorry you feel that way. The goal here was to try and get as much feedback as possible so that bsh1 couldn't simply hand wave it away as not enough people weighing in. I got your existing vote from the previous discussion here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/644/post_links/28186
But if you'd like to change it, please let me know.