[Suggestion] A fair and official Appeals system for Warnings

[AlTech]

Currently the appeals system for Warnings on the forum is "laisez faire" and puts all of the burden and responsibility onto the person making the appeal.

 

The response(s) to appeal requests can be underwhelming, the responses back can be very subjective, and not at all objective or fair.

 

I'd like to propose a solution to fix this problem. An official appeals system where a user can input some details on a page, the details are sent to A) the admin team and B) a random selection of active users to serve as a judgement from our peers.

 

The admin team and the randomly selected peers would be asked to objectively look at the case in front of them ignoring any preconceived notions or ideas about this person, their warning history, to make a determination as to whether or not the mod team was correct in their determination that the person had in fact violated the Community Standards and if the level of punishment applied was correct and did not overly or unfairly punish the individual.

 

If either the Admin team or the randomly selected peers finds that the person was unfairly punished the person would have their punishment reduced (in case the punishment was too harsh) or the punishment would be removed (in case the punishment was not warranted.

 

This system would give the forum a fair and objective appeals system and prevent rampant over punishment. The same system could then be adapted to work for ban appeals.

 

If the mod or admin team have any issues with this or have an idea on modifying this proposal then please leave your thoughts below.

 

If having members randomly assigned to act as a jury of the person's peers is technically challenging of impossible to implement, the community could vote for a bunch of individuals to be made part of a dedicated Appeals team. The mod team and admin team would not be allowed to vote for people and would not be allowed to be voted on.

The appeals team could then be given the same roles and responsibilities as the randomly selected peers would have.

 

 

Thanks for reading through this wall of text. I hope this is implemented in some way.

[r2724r16]

4 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

<snip>

While the idea is pretty good in theory, this would be difficult to implement in practice.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, r2724r16 said:

While the idea is pretty good in theory, this would be difficult to implement in practice.

How so?

[aisle9]

Having moderated a couple of large-ish forums back in the day, I can tell you first-hand that letting members be involved in the process of disciplining other members never ends well. Beyond that, I can't really comment on the appeals system as it exists now. The warnings I've gotten on here are ones I have very fairly earned.

[r2724r16]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

How so?

The bold part is hard to implement:

Spoiler

An official appeals system where a user can input some details on a page, the details are sent to A) the admin team and B) a random selection of active users to serve as a judgement from our peers.

The selection process can never be truly random, and bias towards certain forum members could come into play.

 

Also, how do you determine which users are "active"?

[AlTech]

Just now, aisle9 said:

Having moderated a couple of large-ish forums back in the day, I can tell you first-hand that letting members be involved in the process of disciplining other members never ends well. Beyond that, I can't really comment on the appeals system as it exists now. The warnings I've gotten on here are ones I have very fairly earned.

The appeals system right now is highly discretionary and is as subjective as the moderation style. Meaning that it ultimately is decided by how the admin(s) is feeling on that particular day.

 

Just now, r2724r16 said:

The bold part is hard to implement:

  Hide contents

An official appeals system where a user can input some details on a page, the details are sent to A) the admin team and B) a random selection of active users to serve as a judgement from our peers.

The selection process can never be truly random, and bias towards certain forum members could come into play.

A random number generator/random generation system could be used to randomly choose the amount of people desired.

Just now, r2724r16 said:

Also, how do you determine which users are "active"?

Someone who's been on the forum in the last 7 days and doesn't have anything like exams coming up could be considered active.

[aisle9]

8 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

The appeals system right now is highly discretionary and is as subjective as the moderation style. Meaning that it ultimately is decided by how the admin(s) is feeling on that particular day.

I looked back at my own warnings, and I do see one thing that might help. My own warnings were just accompanied by a message saying "such and such is not allowed". Since there is a list of community standards, it might not hurt to include something like this (emphasis mine to differentiate it from the rest of this post):

 

Your post in [thread] has been removed because of a violation of the following Community Standard:

• Any discussion on how to engage in piracy is not allowed, including the discussion of hacking or cracking.

[X] warning point(s) have been added to your account. If you have any questions or wish to appeal this decision, you may PM any member of the moderation or administration team.

 

Otherwise, really, it's just like any other system of moderation I've ever seen. You're always going to have subjectivity, and the best you can do is be transparent about it.

[AlTech]

4 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

I looked back at my own warnings, and I do see one thing that might help. My own warnings were just accompanied by a message saying "such and such is not allowed". Since there is a list of community standards, it might not hurt to include something like this (emphasis mine to differentiate it from the rest of this post):

 

Your post in [thread] has been removed because of a violation of the following Community Standard:

• Any discussion on how to engage in piracy is not allowed, including the discussion of hacking or cracking.

[X] warning point(s) have been added to your account. If you have any questions or wish to appeal this decision, you may PM any member of the moderation or administration team.

 

Otherwise, really, it's just like any other system of moderation I've ever seen. You're always going to have subjectivity, and the best you can do is be transparent about it.

Those are fairly straightforward kind of warning cases and I don't expect those to be appealed much unless the person feels they were over punished for what they did

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

It's easy to solve though.  If the mods stop handing out unjust warnings we don't have to appeal them anymore. 

[AlTech]

4 minutes ago, Captain Chaos said:

It's easy to solve though.  If the mods stop handing out unjust warnings we don't have to appeal them anymore. 

I'm not confident that a major overhaul to the mod system on the forum will come out anytime soon.

[wANKER]

This would just complicate something that doesn't really need to be complicated, and not really work at all.... 

Quote

The appeals system right now is highly discretionary and is as subjective as the moderation style. Meaning that it ultimately is decided by how the admin(s) is feeling on that particular day.

You will have exactly the same problem. 

Quote

the community could vote for a bunch of individuals to be made part of a dedicated Appeals team.

This is almost as bad as your tech-news poster team..... 

Quote

ignoring any preconceived notions or ideas about this person, their warning history,

Is a laughable concept.... You're on a forum.... On the Internet.... 

 

Ultimately, the mod team is selected on a basis that they can be trusted to enforce the CoC, from my past time on here, warning points aren't exactly handed out like parking tickets.... I'm an absolute cunt online and yet in my entire history of LTT I've only ever had one

 

If you were paying for the service, then maybe a formalised appeals process would be beneficial. But it's not. It's a forum. Get over it...

[dalekphalm]

I have no problem if they were to introduce an official "Appeals submission" page - but the idea that we can select random users on the forum to act as some kind of jury is actually insane, and given what I see on this forum, simply would not work in any capacity. It would turn into a shit-storm at best. At worst, it would create massive grudges (Imagine you get an appeal because you think your punishment was wrong, and then these users - not even mods - decide you are guilty).

 

Jury in real life is a pretty comprehensive process, in which all candidates are screened by both the defense and prosecution.

 

@AluminiumTech if you feel that the mod team is biased or not doing their jobs correctly, PM the Admin team and report those mods to them, with specific and exact details (Date and time of offense, screenshots of communication between you and the mod in question, etc).

 

This won't solve your problems, all it will do is change the decision making power from mods to random forum members.

[Bouzoo]

You are really still trying to push the idea that random, non mod members should help with moderation. This reminds me of the idea that the community should nominate potential mod members (your thread long time ago).

Here is the short version. If admins/super mods (if there are any) think someone can help with moderation (as in handing out warning), he/she is gonna probably be made a mod and do it officially. Once again, as I said in the prior mentioned, your thread, same outcome, there is bound to be drama, calling out admins on how they pick people, etc., pick your poison.

 

4 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

A random number generator/random generation system could be used to randomly choose the amount of people desired.

Really? That's the idea? RNG-ing number of members?

 

4 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

and doesn't have anything like exams coming up

I'm not sure how to even comment on this part.

 

All of this is a lot of work for something that will not end well and can't be properly implemented. You think mod members are/can be biased so you think non mod members won't be? It's not gonna work, as we say it in my country, "never and not even then".

[Guest]

This reads more like taking warning points entirely too personally. If you feel like a warning is coming across like a personal attack, as others have said, PM a mod w/ the evidence suggesting so. Expecting panels and appeals systems on a free forum is a little on the unreasonable side.

[SenKa]

12 hours ago, Captain Chaos said:

It's easy to solve though.  If the mods stop handing out unjust warnings we don't have to appeal them anymore. 

I have none, and have stretched some rules (notably, the no political talk rule) thinner than water, soooo.... I would say the mods are actually pretty lenient about warnings.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

Actually I have a better idea. 

 

Whenever a user appeals a warning, give them the moderator's home address and (if necessary) a plane ticket to get there.  Make sure there's a camera crew present when they arrive and put the footage on a new channel called "Linus Fight Tips".  Perhaps have it analyzed by some martial arts and/or weapon trainers so we can all learn how to properly appeal stuff. 

That'll stop the unjust warnings AND provide good material.

 

Youtube may have a problem with it once we have a few lethal encounters, but that's what Floatplane is for. 

 

(it's just a joke, okay?)

[LogicalDrm]

18 hours ago, Captain Chaos said:

It's easy to solve though.  If the mods stop handing out unjust warnings we don't have to appeal them anymore. 

If you don't like our mods, you don't need to be here...

 

Anyway. I don't understand why you think the appeals are hard. The way to do things is outlined in CS. Only thing I could see as improvement, would be having "Appeal" button in warning itself. Which would send them to admins like reports. As, if I understand things correctly, it's only done by PMs and relys bit much on user to report PM or to add admin to the PM.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

1 minute ago, LogicalDrm said:

If you don't like our mods, you don't need to be here...

Oh come on, isn't the smiley obvious enough? 

[Guest]

I've always felt the warnings are pretty fair, and usually handed out in more severe cases. Always had the notion you get to PM a mod about your warning and have a little talk, that's the way it was with my warning, and they seem to go after a year. Honestly a personalized touch like this goes a much longer way than more people being involved, I feel it makes the mods appear more caring and you have their full attention.