Flag Post

http://www.corshamref.org.uk/images/corner.gif

***** Flag Post *****

What's the new policy on problem posters?

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pixies/2010/9/24/1285362564564/United-Nations-flag-006.jpg

stet it took you a few years but i thank you for finally listening to me and doing away with the suggest ban.

is this the new thing?

yes just happened about 20 minutes ago.

stet-

has any policy changed? is 51 still the arbitrary magic number?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_7C0gSvTcf58/R3kSJ6AyswI/AAAAAAAAAjs/OV5_4-cWUMs/s320/penalty.jpg

I am of the opinion that nothing about this new policy should be explained

like every week it should do something different when you click flag post

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-ash2/50413_74516700069_8486_n.jpg

This the way Suggest Ban should've worked in the first place (as me and many others tried to say back then): bringing potentially offensice posts to the mods' attention, not as a "vote to get banned" based on some arbitrary number.

Can we please see an automated list of the top posts that received the most FPs in a given month?

I have no problem waiting until March 1 to see February results, thank you.

No, definitely against that. Make any sort of leaderboard and you p. soon get someone who wants on the top of it

I was half-kidding. I would expect the top result to be "I support doing away with 'Flag Posts'."

Is it possible for sub-board mods to see flagged posts on their particular boards? It'd make modding them easier.

I think I like this a LOT better than the SB process, because this can really get the mods to understand exactly where an issue stems from.

"flagged posts" are good posts that i want to save to read again later, right?

On the policy q, as we talked about on sandbox this doesn't change it so much as reflect how it has been working for a good while -- we disabled the automatic banning of users after a certain number of SBs a long time ago.

What has been happening is that mods have been monitoring users getting SBs, reviewing posts that were getting SBd etc, and taking action when they get past a certain level.

This change reflects that -- you click it on a post and you're no longer saying "machine, ban this person if enough people agree with me", you're saying "mods, look at this post and take action if you agree it's required".

Which is, I think, a slightly different message, especially if you're banned as a consequence, even if the literal actions of "a load of ilxors clicked a link, a mod stepped in and the user got the hammer" don't change.

http://forums.zeroin.co.uk/images/smilies/bs.gif

Man I lucked out living in the Central Time Zone today.

Is it possible for sub-board mods to see flagged posts on their particular boards? It'd make modding them easier.
That's probably not a bad idea at all, actually

thanks stet. personally i think the term is a little less clear than "suggest ban" (like i was joking above obv but i think someone could actually think "flag post" means something like "save this to read later" like when you flag an email in outlook) but if it works the same way then it's cool.

yeah, but does it matter which post we SB/flag, when it's really about wanting the poster banned?

Confirming this will flag the post for the attention of the moderators.

Posters whose posts are repeatedly flagged may be limited from posting or banned.

Flag this post for moderation.

xp

Maybe we should call it "Flog Post".

whats the policy on 'flag post' being abused (not by me of course http://wow.incgamers.com/forums/images/smilies/large/smiley_smug.gif)

I think it does, I mean if some random googler shows up says some odious, racist shit in one thread but otherwise harmless talk in a couple other threads, it should be easy for the mods to figure out where the issue stems from.

(xpost)

It does insofar as it would be better to want somebody gone for something specifically objectionable they've posted, rather than just for being who they are.

xp to sarahell

Yeah, WmC otm.

This is loads better. Thanks stet.

yeah, but does it matter which post we SB/flag, when it's really about wanting the poster banned?

I don't think you should suggest anyone to be banned if you can't even point out a single post of them that'd justify the ban.

how charitable of you, jon, to pose it as the action of a random googler

flagg post

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2338/2285301605_8023a69f4e_z.jpg?zz=1

hahaha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DsToYffGBY

how charitable of you, jon, to pose it as the action of a random googler

It wasn't just trying to be charitable, I thought it was an applicable example. If a new poster shows up and seems fine in most threads, but is being really questionable in another, we can point to the problem so its not just like a "we don't like this new guy" thing.

it seems like that issue mostly revolves around regulars iirc

Alright, yeah, it can cover a wide variety of uses!

but hey - this system seems more civil and mature than SB, and here's hoping that it can also provide us some good LOLs along the way

this is the greatest day of my life

flag post sitta

I didn't Sb Whiney this time, so it came as a surprise to me that he got 51ed because I hadn't seen anything uncool written by him.

I'm not a moderator, but I could see where it would be confusing.

I'm still ready to hear what the new policies are. Do you have to have the same post KerPowed 51 times? 51 posts once each? Is 51 even a number anymore? Are the 30 day temp bans still the same?

and, as sincerely as possible, thanks stet for the great work.

^^^ this

I had no idea Whiney was gone again until I noticed he was absent from the poll threads. What happened now?

thumbs up!

flagged a bunch of posts itt. let me know how that works out exactly, policy seems pretty vague so far

"FPed you for that btw" just doesn't have that je ne sais quoi.

flapped

ran you up the pole

saluted your shorts

thanks, i guess, how's life.

FP is a dick move and always has been, but insufficient worship of Democratic presidents won't be a capital offense for awhile.

fuck you

this is not about worshipping Democratic Presidents and never has been, you self-involved ball of impotent vanity

didnt have you in mind, Dan :(

I can tell.

please, i dont wanna fight anymore. we're all in pain.

been experimenting with flagging posts for the first time today

― F♯ A♯ (∞), Wednesday, November 9, 2016 2:20 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yea i've been a little reckless w/ it lately

bump, now more than ever

ha, I was just about to post:

As having less active posters mean this no longer works the way it used to, I humbly suggest that either the threshold is lowered to 30, or the mechanism is removed altogether and we can all kvetch & work out another system

I say this bc there are a couple of posters who should have been gone a long time ago whose continued presence is even more immiserating now that it infects a proportionately higher amount of ilx content

FP: Should 31 be the new 51 y/n

I voted Y

I missed that. looks like nothing is going to happen!

If 31 does become the new threshold, I propose we still call it being 51'ed, for the sake of tradition, much as being bounced from a bar is called being 86'ed for reasons I've never understood.

it's very easy to make the system work, literally do not respond to any shitty poster and FP when necessary, don't even acknowledge that they posted. if you see someone responding bc they're pissed off and it's just making things worse, just contact them via ILX mail off board and recommend this 1 simple trick.

I never talk to the people who are making me not want to read ilx but they have been shitting the place up for a long time

oh i know...it doesn't make me not want to check in here but it sucks.

killfile + block poster work better when others are using them too bc yeah replying to bad posters rather than ignoring them just keeps things sucking. even posting that they sucks, sucks.

Thank you Sleeve for acknowledging my effort. Dis fucking guy is the exact reason why iirc.

If 31 does become the new threshold, I propose we still call it being 51'ed, for the sake of tradition, much as being bounced from a bar is called being 86'ed for reasons I've never understood.

― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, April 3, 2018 6:58 PM (forty-five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I like the way you think :)

I've said this before I think but imo you have to acknowledge that they posted b/c otherwise it's letting the standards of the community slide, like oh huh nobody's saying anything, I guess this is the kind of place where that kind of shitposting is okay... etc

yknow for all those lurkers and potential awesome new posters

bring it down to 21 imo

^ Flagged

*salutes*

Salty!

possible misread of a pun

story of my life obv

In North America when you “do the salute” you pull down your pants and stick your dick straight up in the air

Be amazed if urs could stick up without rope

American Things.

canadian things, iirc

Bit cold for that sort of behaviour surely.

As american as apple pie

fuck the NRA (Neanderthal)
Posted: September 6, 2018 at 6:20:58 PM
Be amazed if urs could stick up without rope
I’m a healthy fit fux0r that can go on all night

Don’t be jelly

ah, the sweet smell of digital testosterone

Nice work turning 'permalink' into the smaller 'link', thus making accidental flag posting more likely

place can do with some more drama tbf

thats for fuckin sure

bookmarked you for that

lol

hahaha

boom

ROFLMBO

A+

Permalinking this thread for future reference

Damn.

BM is the new FP
to be used so: "Yeah, he wouldn't stop talking about men's rights so I hit him with a BM"

Can I get a status update on everyone’s BMs please?

Don’t hold back, just describe the BMs as they are

pretty corny tbh

https://media.pitchfork.com/photos/5d14dd8e227be70008c58645/2:1/w_790/Elvis-Presley.jpeg