it is fair yeah. personally to make it more consistent i think only keeping public mod log of perma bans and current temp bans and delete past temp bans is good, i think this minimizes the amount of potential shame / awkwardness, but people can do whatever they think is best
Honestly if someone shamed me for getting banned for being toxic about two years ago, I’d argue that implicates more on them than myself.
3 Likes
what’s with the attiude man, not everyone is against you
by default mods are uninformed, occasionally there’ll be a spoiled mod because theyre a host or in spec chat already and also occasionally situations might call for some level of needing spoils (this is pretty rare? the last time i can remember was when i had to handle a SoD during wild west 2 cause the hosts were MIA… maybe something more recent but idr it if so)
3 Likes
not all action goes on the public modlog, so id assume the argument where you could shame/be dramatic about official/unofficial warnings is plausible
(this isnt an answer to your question, ftr)
1 Like
I’d argue this is a separate thing that honestly might need to be discussed such as there always being at least an informed moderator in each game to help aid out with report situations or instead potentially a way for the host account to be informed that a report has been made in the game they’re hosting which will allow the host to also react appropriately such as informing the mods of gamethrowing or anything necessary that may break the rules, allowing the host to also action before the moderators potentially do, it might be a nice thing to have more host ability and information for their own game without them having to read every individual post.
It’s hard to say though what could be best because moderators also are people and also do have lives, and I’m sure moderators don’t want to have to sit there reading every single FM game they’re in.
1 Like
Spreading misinfo is very bad
2 Likes
What if my issue is that I want to be shamed more?
3 Likes
Of course tutuu liked this post why am I not surprised
4 Likes
sure but i dont think tutuu was deliberately spreading misinfo, it’s kind of inevitable for there to be some misconceptions/confusions
3 Likes
2 Likes
sure
- Theoretically if we’re doing it after the game there’s a good chance we just … forget to do this. this is obviously on us, but it’s the sort of thing that’s reasonably likely to happen.
- This can of course be solved by telling people during the game, at the cost of introducing game integrity tradeoffs.
- Even on MU, which is being held up as the standard here, there have been times when action was taken on my report but they forgot to tell me either way.
- Some people would likely get really upset about action not being taken, even if their report didn’t have very much merit (e.g. they reported someone for toxicity because that person was loudly advocating for their execution).
- This can sometimes be an issue regardless, since it is publicly determinable whether we banned someone, but I expect this would make it worse.
- People who file frivolous reports (which to be clear is not most users) sometimes file a lot of frivolous reports. I’m unconvinced that sending a dozen individual “we reviewed this report and did not take action!” messages would really make them feel better.
- This can arguably be solved by just telling them anyway and letting them be mad about it. I expect that doing so would lead to a lot of drama + a lot of extra mod time spent dealing with people yelling at us, but that’s a choice we could make.
- In borderline cases, if a player disagrees about how severe an offense was, it might lead them not to report other posts in the future that do break the rules, but that they think aren’t as bad.
- Not sure how much of an issue this would be in practice – this one does seem like it goes both ways, where if we give report feedback some people would be more likely to submit reports
- “Action was taken” is very vague and might not actually satisfy users. Discounting bans and blacklists, which are public, there’s a meaningful difference between “sent a ‘hey jsyk this is what the rules are’ warning,” “sent a ‘hey, knock this off or we’ll probably ban you’ sort of warning,” “silenced the user for a while,” “had the user force-subbed out of a game,” etc.
- Some people could use it as a metaphorical cudgel to be dicks to other users and feel “justified” because mods took action and so therefore they must be right.
- This can also happen with bans and blacklists, but in general those are much rarer. Also, the nature of a ban means you’re going to automatically have some time to cool down before needing to interact with the other user on FoL again.
4 Likes
I might suggest this sort of thing by the way because I honestly feel like having more transparency for hosts is a much more important thing rather than the person doing the reporting themself. Plus, having specific accounts that can have hosting permissions might help out with this substantially and allow it to actually be a thing.
1 Like
we generally try to inform the hosts when relevant but not for every single report – if hosts would find it helpful rather than annoying to be informed of every single report (sometimes on a delay, depending on when mods see it) we can discuss it
i’m not sure i can really put together what i want to say but not telling people whether action was taken so they don’t get more upset feels like some Blue's Clues-esque solution
if i were new to the community i personally would be content with being told if action wasn’t taken if it was justified and explained how rules weren’t infracted than feeling like i’ve been ignored
i was speaking to tutuu about this earlier but i’m trying to look at this from the point of view of someone who is new and/or not particularly involved in the community. and ultimately both of us are just having different interpretations of how a player would prefer their report to be handled i.e. receiving feedback or not. but my assumption is that people would prefer the former because that way they can know that they are being listened to and can trust the mods. and in the event that they want to dispute something being told what exactly happened with their report allows them to do that
this does not matter for me personally because i trust the mods to make the right decisions (for the most part) but i’m not sure a new player could necessarily have that implicit trust. the stuff like cliques/the fact we basically all know each other is something that new players might feel is biasing moderation and the only way they can know it doesn’t is if they are told if action was taken and if not then why. i think maybe atlas mentioned this earlier
2 Likes
I feel like this might be a further problem, because it’s having to take from a report to a human to another human, which if I’m honest, can be quite tedious and take some time, especially in differing timezones. Ultimately from the initial report, it could take up to 12-24 hours before a host is able to know, not to mention if a moderator is in the game, they may not want to report on anything occurring in the game, of course this is a mod mentality but it shows the differing ability for the moderators being people.
The difference between having to wait for a moderator to see the report and then give the host can cut down time from having to wait for the moderator. If no moderators are online at the time of a report because they all went to sleep at the same time for example or working or anything, it could take an expected 8 hours before a moderator even sees it, and by that point, it’s entirely possible the hosts are now asleep about an hour prior, which could take another 8 hours which can lead to an approximate 15 hours from the initial report before a host can act on it, that isn’t even including the other factors for human ability that aren’t sleep or work.
On the contrary, the host being informed similar to the moderators about a report in their game would be able to cut this out massively, of course there’s still factors of human error regardless and the amount of ability the host has, but on the extreme, that can easily cut down the 15 hours to 8 hours plus as a host, I’d like some amounts of transparency regarding my own game and I feel it would be a nice addition to have.
it seems like i’m saying “people would prefer to know if action was taken”
and the counterargument is “people might not prefer to know if action was taken”
so… if that’s the only issue then maybe just let people ask if action was taken and then tell them?
how is that handled currently? what happens if i ask if action was taken after reporting someone
1 Like
ok wait i iddnt read new replies because i started making the first post before i had to go afk one sec
me when i get shamed for being warned
that’s literally the only punishment that’s not on the mod log right? so like if we’re not being silly then i still don’t understand how the drama argument applies when the mod log makes it a thing regardless sans warnings which like… 
I could be wrong, but as far as I know there’s no way to give hosts the ability to see reports in their game without also giving them the ability to (a) see all reports and (b) resolve reports, including by e.g. issuing forum bans – while of course hosts can feel free to take in-game moderation actions against their players, such as forcibly subbing out a player for breaking the rules, I don’t think we’re comfortable giving all hosts the blanket ability to ban anyone on the site who gets flagged, even if we tell them not to take it
2 Likes