A question/idea about the website reporting system

[LouiDashcam]

First off I want to say that I am posting this with permission of another user who has requested that I make this thread. I also want to say that this idea was already posted as a reply to another thread but we agreed that it needed its own. But anyway our question/idea is: Who deals with reports made to the website? IGA's? Forum mods? Because yes there are ALOT of reports for them to to deal with and sometimes it can take up to a week or more for someone to get to a report, so here is our idea: What if as well as the people who already deal with reports like IGA's etc what if we have a separate team whose one job is to deal with reports made to the site? Im thinking not only would this speed up the response time for reports but it would also take some pressure off of the people who do it now like IGA's. What do you all think, Yay or Nay?

 

Another question about the website reports is: whenever an admin says something like: "evidence added to existing ban" the report staus says declined? it makes more sense for it to say accepted, or mabey make a new response of something like: ban extended due to evidence. https://gyazo.com/eb7cd8521998d962c28bc53f75bebd74

https://gyazo.com/20dd0957fafadb43cc5cdde4d966d78f

[A Simple Cheeseburger]

11 minutes ago, Loui27 said:

First off I want to say that I am posting this with permission of another user who has requested that I make this thread. I also want to say that this idea was already posted as a reply to another thread but we agreed that it needed its own. But anyway our question/idea is: Who deals with reports made to the website? IGA's? Forum mods? Because yes there are ALOT of reports for them to to deal with and sometimes it can take up to a week or more for someone to get to a report, so here is our idea: What if as well as the people who already deal with reports like IGA's etc what if we have a separate team whose one job is to deal with reports made to the site? Im thinking not only would this speed up the response time for reports but it would also take some pressure off of the people who do it now like IGA's. What do you all think, Yay or Nay?

Thanks for posting this for me mate, I just dont have time right now to do that right now.

[LouiDashcam]

7 minutes ago, A Simple Cheeseburger w/ Fries said:

Thanks for posting this for me mate, I just dont have time right now to do that.

No problem

[Killua // Ireland ^_^]

No I don't agree with this, only IGA's should be able to ban people, they have worked hard as support or moderators and proven themselves to deserve to be admins and while something like this could lead to faster getting through the reports it would also lead to more problems. The bigger the number dealing with the reports the less manageable it would become. The current system is fine, people just need to have a bit of patience, admins will get through the reports. Not 100% sure but I think something like this has been suggested and rejected before.

[FernandoCR [ESP]]

Since only IGA are able to handle reports, this suggestion would mean that more IGA were promoted, but promoting staff from moderators or support to IGA takes time, the high ranks have to be sure that the person is reliable enough to do the job, meets the time/dedication requirements, etc. Making a lot of new IGA can help with cleaning the reports backlog, but once a person is IGA, he/she can deal with offline reports, online reports, and most importantly, they can ban people in the game. Some admins in the past became rogue, started misbehaving, banning people for no reasons (or for reasons as wrong as "I don't like the guy"). This is why it's so important that the right persons are made IGA, less work for the team, not a lot more complaints.

 

With your second point, though, I agree 100%. It doesn't make sense to tag a report as "Declined" when that report was used to increase a player punishment, so it was clearly accepted. The way I see it, they should use "Declined" for reports with not enough or wrong evidence, or for reports about things that are not bannable. "Accepted" for everything else.

 

EDIT: I added the "or wrong" as a reason for a report to be declined because I remembered that it has happened to me, I reported some guy using the wrong video as evidence. The admin was kind enough to point that out and suggest to create a new report with the correct video. It can also happen that you use a Youtube video but set that video to Private, so admins can't watch it.

[A Simple Cheeseburger]

I see what you guys mean about how we can only have people we trust handle our reports, I agree with that, that makes sense. but I feel that there are people out there willing and that are trustworthy that could also handle the reporting business.

[Prime]

A very big problem with reports is quality: personally I can say that on average 50% of the web reports I handle is being rejected for report quality reasons (wrong ID, no/insufficient evidence, blocked evidence,...). On top of that more people are reporting for the tiniest bit of potential harm that is caused to them which usually gets declined because it isn't worthy of a ban and in most cases barely worth a kick.

[Guest]

Administrators are proven patriots to the community, they have earned their place and so in doing so have earned trust from the developers to handle reports with maturity and dignity for the other party.

 

I think that your idea could be considered but only if the player count for this mod is so high that there isn't enough administrators to handle the reports in a timely fashion.

[LouiDashcam]

8 hours ago, Prime said:

A very big problem with reports is quality: personally I can say that on average 50% of the web reports I handle is being rejected for report quality reasons (wrong ID, no/insufficient evidence, blocked evidence,...). On top of that more people are reporting for the tiniest bit of potential harm that is caused to them which usually gets declined because it isn't worthy of a ban and in most cases barely worth a kick.

 

I normally report people that ram me or block the group i am in at the time. I understand it takes a few days for bans to be issued but i put a report out that was denied but it actually wasn't denied because the admin that took care of the report accepted it and added to the reason. Like the site should read "Added To Existing Ban" instead of "Declined" 

[Sysgen]

^^ We can't click Accept for those reports, it would add another ban on top of the one we just gave.

[Lollypop (SLO)]

The team processing the reports has to be trustworthy and reliable, I don't think anyone wishes to have vigilante group delivering bans haphazardly. I think the situation is acceptable as long the reports get processed eventually be in a few days or in a week, but the process would need a revision if drivers who are reported never got punished for their transgressions.

[FirestarteR93]

Topic closed due to inactivity