Suggestions

Shows how long it is since I RR'd anyone, there's already a menu for reasons in the RR prompt screen! When did that happen?

I really do think member moderators would be really useful to the site, and no, going on other forums that already do this, there is no upset or grudge caused by this. The problem with the help clinic was much more than just the fact that a few members ran it, but we won't go into that, its another subject entirely. But, with member moderators, who would of course be screened carefully, after all, anyone who has been reported and had threads/posts removed would appear in their records, and who had NOT been involved in any contentious threads, (yes I know, there are few people who haven't :-D), then these people would not be the cause of any resentment.

It DOES work on other forums, there is no resentment, mod actions are accepted by members and people just get on with it. Anyone who has ever moderated a site, and I have, will know that in most cases, the mods will only action if the thread/post is deemed to be breaching any rules. If grown up people can't accept that, then there is no hope for any of us.

We cannot be scared to post because someone might RR us because they don't like us, we can't be scared to offer an opinion on a debate which differs from the OP's own view, because we might be RR'd, and we cannot and must not tolerate consistent vindictive reporting as has gone on before. Therefore, apart from a few adjustments to the RR system itself, the only option there is, is for GR to employ more paid staff, thus throwing our subs up in price, or for member moderators who value this site, to be able to deal with the sometimes petty complaints that come in.

I have moderated a site also and it did cause problems with one of the other moderators. Not that I did anything wrong just for the fact I had not been using the site as long as others and one particular person thought she had power over me in the past had now been taken away.

It was a completly different set up to this site and really we were there to help new people and as I was online most of the day I made a good candidate for the job.

Maybe there could be somesort of voting system for anyone interested in being a moderator, rather than how many people you had in your tree?


jax

Now if I had the intelligence for the words to put it that way TeresaW that is pretty much as I would have put it... :-)

The following recommendations are my two Canadian cents worth.

Once a thread has been reported perhaps the “views” column could be changed to “Review requested” and a red X be placed beside the thread and within the thread, once reported the “report as abuse” on the post under review should change to “This post is under review” in red. This would prevent multiple complaints on the same issue.

If someone wishes to report a thread or post within a thread, (I think this happens now) they should be presented with a drop down menu with a limited number of choices e.g. “duplicate”, “ abusive”, “personal details revealed” “commercial activity” etc.

Complaints should be reviewed on a priority basis, Personal data and abuse being at the top of the hierarchy.

Once a thread or post within a thread has been reviewed the “informant” and the thread or post owner should be advised of the results of the review egg “we have reviewed the request for review on your post (insert id of post) and it has been determined that the contents meet (are in violation) of the T&C of this site. If found in violation a very brief explanation of why (personal details, duplicate etc). .

Once such a post has been subject to a review and is in compliance perhaps a header note to the effect “This post has been subject to a review, and on xx/xx/xxxx, it was found to comply with all T&C etc)” should pop up if there is a subsequent complaint lodged

If a thread has been running for more than 3 months the review flag should be displayed, but the contents should remain. As was demonstrated in the “PLEASE DONT POST” thread, which just celebrated its 1st birthday recently, members who were unfamiliar with the theme of the thread were in favour of the scarlet letter, but when advised of the theme and the contents of the first post they changed their minds.

This does not preclude the reporting of a recent post within any “old” thread and such report would be subject to same scrutiny as those I suggest for other threads/posts outlined below.

If a post is reported as a duplicate when the informant clicks on “duplicate” there should be a prompt to add the thread number of the duplicate post(s) to the complaint. The contents should remain until reviewed. Once reviewed the contents of the thread, if in violation, should be appended to the first post of the duplicate stream and the contents of the moved thread be replaced with a single post “this thread appears to be a duplicate of a previous thread and contents have been moved to XXXXXXXXXXXXXX” and the thread be locked.

If thread is flagged for abuse, personal details or email addresses I feel the post should be removed from view and those complaints be assigned a priority review status within GR. If subsequently found in violation it should be locked and the first posting should be replaced with a notice “this thread has been reviewed and found to contain xxxxxxxxxxxx and has been removed”.

The notices on threads/posts found in violation should remain for about a week or two then the thread or post completely removed

If a person within 3 months maliciously complains 5 times they should be issued a warning that subsequent malicious complaints could result in a suspension, 10 within 6 months would be an automatic suspension of posting privileges.

Only those paying for membership should be able to lodge a complaint directly on the post, if a non-paying member finds an objectionable post they can click on the “report” button, go through the process, the complaint would go to GR but not be registered on the post until a review has been completed. This would give those extra eyes to pick up any violations but hopefully prevent malicious complaints from those who just want to complain.

As to volunteer reviewers I am somewhat troubled by this concept, however if GR were to ask several long standing members who regularly participate in the boards to become volunteer advisors they could assist GR on possible contentious posts, with GR having final decision of course.


Some of this may have been covered before but these are just my thoughts

Edited to set up paragraphs .... did this on Word properly formatted with paragraphs copied and pasted directly here I guess it loses the formatting once pasted .... sorry
Robert

Hi R,

You seem to make some very valid points here but could you edit it to put a few line spaces between them please as it is VERY difficult to read and separate them?

Dea Xxx

Yes R.....paragraphs please...sheesh!

Personally I think that there are 2 slightly different issues here:

A) Posts that are reported because the reporter genuinely believes that its content in some way infringes the sites rules, recommendations or breaches someone's privacy.

B) Posts that are reported simply because the reporter either personally objects to the post's content or whose motive is simply cause annoyance to others.

At the present time once a report has been made the post is immediately removed from view and is replaced with "This post has been requested for review". That action no doubt pleases both reporters types A) and B) but I suspect probably gives greater satisfaction to reporter type B) because of their motive.

I am therefore inclined to suggest that one of the following actions needs to be taken urgently:

1) If the status quo is to remain then allow the reported post to remain on display until a GR moderator has decided (Hopefully within 24 hours) whether or not it should be removed. That at a stroke should make the act of reporting a post for reason B) less satisfying and hopefully reduce the number of posts reported for that motive thus reducing GR's wasted time and the frustration of some of its members.

Or:

2) Completely remove the procedure whereby members (Free or paying) can report a post by simply clicking the "Report as Abuse" button above the post itself. Instead GR to utilise its highly experienced customer service team to monitor and moderate all posts.

Or:

3) Only to allow a GR member to report a post that they consider a breach of GR's "House Rules" by sending a personal email to [email protected] on receipt of which GR's moderators then decide whether the post reported should be removed or not.

I would also suggest that if GR discovers that a member continually makes requests for review which GR's moderators find unsubstantiated then that member be subject to the same treatment as metered out to a poster who is found guilty of making posts which breach GR's house rules.

I.E.

Dependent on the severity of the abuse, Members will receive a first warning telling them why their abuse report has been rejected and why they are receiving a warning.

Should a Member be reported a second time for similar abuse they will receive a final warning.

Upon a third report of similar abuse Members will be permanently banned from the Genes Reunited service.

:-) Everyone who's repsonded. Many many thanks for all the opinions and suggestions. I'm almost drained just trying to catch up with all the reading (or maybe that was the 4 and half hours in Ikea!).

Personally [ notice that word is used carefully :-) ] , I like the member moderators suggestion. Giving them the ability to transfer a thread to another board, while automatically sending an email to the original poster, etc. would be perfect example of how to remove the annoyance of someone RR'ing a post, as well as the overhead of it having to go to support. (That's just one example - I know there are many)

I'm going to take everything on board, discuss all these options with the GR team and how and what to implement, and then post the plan on this board, but I want to act quickly and get moving on some of the easier to implement changes which I can gauge from opinion are essential.

Thanks again to everyone.
Cheers Phil

One more thing Phil

Software allows for certain words to be recognised ie; swear words etc. Could this be used to help?

Ikea....youre as nuts as we are!

Edit: The GR FB site auto removes web addresses, can this be done on here to remove email addresses?

"Ikea" !!! -Is that a 'swear word' Ginns ????? ;-)

It sure makes you want to swear when you escape from there !!

Dea Xxx

P.S. - The breakfast is worth going for though -'quite good' and VERY cheap !!

Dea Xxx

Well why am I not suprised you go there for breakfast!


....stay for lunch and dinner too?

I DON'T Ginns - I have just been told about it !!!!!!!!!!

My husband will not take me because he knows that I will want to stay all day :-D :-D :-D

Dea Xxx

Hi Phil


there are so many very good suggestions on here

...... and I agree with every one of them!


I would like to add re moderators


I use a member-run site where one member is an administrator and 2 others are moderators. We all know who those people are.

When a posting or thread comes up for review, the moderators are supposed to discuss it together before making a decision.

The one time that was not done, and one moderator removed a post ........ it turned out to be a wrong decision that she had to admit had been made in the heat of the moment

so


one suggestion for you .............



2 moderators are to discuss the removal of a thread reported for anything OTHER than posting on the wrong board before action is taken.

Threads on the wrong board may be moved by one moderator.


Please could we have review completed within 24 hours? Even 48 hours is too long for a malicious report to remain as "reported for abuse" ..... and gives that much more satisfaction to the reporter!



sylvia

Still occurring - http://www.genesreunited.co.za/boards.page/board/living_relatives/thread/1274077

We mustn't overlook the fact that it is within the site rules for someone to report a thread simply because they don't agree with its content. You report it on the basis that the poster has caused you distress by what they have said.

"You agree that you will not use the Genes Reunited Service in any way that may lead to the encouragement, procurement or carrying out of any criminal or unlawful activity, or cause distress, harm or inconvenience to any other person."

Could you say what distress the thread Joy posted would have caused anyone IGP

That would be down to the person who reported the thread - not for me to comment.

I was making the point that someone reporting a thread or posting on the basis that it has caused distress or inconvenience is acting within the site rules and guidlines.

I understand that....but this thread title is about vindictive reporting, which is what is happening to certain threads

Well for what it’s worth I would consider 'distress' as something such as:

Abuse/threats
Posting personal details
Foul language
Taking about news items that are sensitive
Racism or any other kind of 'ism'


What I don’t consider to be distressful:

Posts asking about family born in 1700 and such
Posts put on the wrong board
Posts duplicated
Posts that try to help others
Posts from new members that don’t know what they are doing

For these kind of posts (or some of them at least) a word in the ear would be much more civil

I dare say there are others that I have missed


But to add, posts should not be RRd just because the reader does not agree!

if it causes me distress to read criticism of the MP I voted for ............................ ???


( it was my thread on living relatives that was reported ......... and has been reinstated ........ and the only person(s) who it might have distressed were people who posted deceiving messages on that board )


but ps

the word distress has a meaning and it is like this


To cause strain, anxiety, or suffering to


it is not honest for someone to say that something they don't like or agree with causes them distress


and


if the distress can be avoided by very simply not reading the thread

then the post does not cause distress

( it would cause me distress if a thread were posted saying untrue things about my family ........ I could not avoid that distress just by not reading it ........... but anybody who is distressed by the news or discussion of the news can avoid it by not reading the thread just as they do not have to read the newspaper or watch the television )