Allow all staff to approve scam reports or remove the approval process

[Sparko]

Aight, so there’s quite some backlog right now with scam reports and I just saw a thread of some dude who got scammed and made a report, but it hasn’t been approved so the scammer was able to scam another user. I know that approval is used to filter out the possible troll posts, but right now I think it’s more important that people know as soon as a report is filed.

Maybe make it so that other staff members are able to approve the initial posts or are able to remove the obvious troll posts. I’m sure they’re capable and trusted enough, they won’t need to handle the dispute itself. Having it made public ASAP is enough so users are well aware of who they should be cautious with.

This can be a temporary solution to the disproportionate amount of reports to scam resolvers.

Maybe replies can also be not filtered for now if that’s aight, since it would be unfair if the accused couldn’t defend themselves/theirself (idk lol)

 

[AlanLorder354562]

Maybe replies can also be not filtered for now if that’s aight, since it would be unfair if the accused couldn’t defend themselves/theirself (idk lol)

I think that the replies get filtered for the possibility of containing sensitive information, for example, personal emails, phone numbers etc that may be involved in the report.

 

[Harry]

Aight, so there’s quite some backlog right now with scam reports and I just saw a thread of some dude who got scammed and made a report, but it hasn’t been approved so the scammer was able to scam another user. I know that approval is used to filter out the possible troll posts, but right now I think it’s more important that people know as soon as a report is filed.

Any scam reports in moderation will display in the user's profile under the Scam Reports tab; so if this is checked before you deal with a user, you'll know if there's a scam report pending against them.

Having the report approved shouldn't affect the decision to deal with the user, as the evidence could be against an impersonator, or could've been craftily forged - you'll only know the true story when the outcome of that scam report is determined.

Maybe make it so that other staff members are able to approve the initial posts or are able to remove the obvious troll posts. I’m sure they’re capable and trusted enough, they won’t need to handle the dispute itself. Having it made public ASAP is enough so users are well aware of who they should be cautious with.

As mentioned above, you can see when there's a pending scam report against a user, so rushing to approve reports ASAP is certainly not a priority over carrying out the appropriate steps to approve one normally.

I distinctly remember this being suggested before, and I don't believe it's one we're too fond of.

 

[Sparko]

Any scam reports in moderation will display in the user's profile under the Scam Reports tab; so if this is checked before you deal with a user, you'll know if there's a scam report pending against them.

Having the report approved shouldn't affect the decision to deal with the user, as the evidence could be against an impersonator, or could've been craftily forged - you'll only know the true story when the outcome of that scam report is determined.


As mentioned above, you can see when there's a pending scam report against a user, so rushing to approve reports ASAP is certainly not a priority over carrying out the appropriate steps to approve one normally.

I distinctly remember this being suggested before, and I don't believe it's one we're too fond of.

Hmm, wouldn’t not having it public be possibly more damaging to a user if someone actually checks? Because they cannot asses if the evidence and claim provided are actually valid or not.

^ and that’s if they actually check, some people don’t really bother checking and a more common thing to do is to look up someone’s username in search bar to see what’s “going on”.

 

[Sparko]

I am personally against this because having other staff members approve comments may lead to a back and forth thing with those directly involved. If I had other staff members accepting the comments, it may lead to the scam reports taking even longer because who knows how many comments would be accepted in the time that we haven't gotten back to the scam report, much less how long the responses would be.

While yes, that is already a thing we do as a scam resolver, we can ask questions when we accept the comments rather than possibly reading x comments that are long.

For that reason, I have to disagree with your suggestion as it is much better if the assign scam resolver accepts the comments rather than letting the whole staff team have the ability to accept comments.

Fair point, how about for the initial report? I think staff could probably tell the difference between genuine and troll posts.

 

[Sparko]

That seems really redundant.
There is no point in that as it would be different staff approving the reports then asking the accused to respond and posting on their wall.
It would become unorganized.

My point in having it done is so that those who want to deal w/ people who currently have “pending” scam reports against them can personally assess weather or not they want to deal with the said person.

As an example I would be willing to deal with a member who has a report against them for an optifine cape that “stopped working” but I wouldn’t deal with someone who has a scam report against them due to an unpaid loan.

 

[Lotus]

My point in having it done is so that those who want to deal w/ people who currently have “pending” scam reports against them can personally assess weather or not they want to deal with the said person.

As an example I would be willing to deal with a member who has a report against them for an optifine cape that “stopped working” but I wouldn’t deal with someone who has a scam report against them due to an unpaid loan.

I think the issue is more about other staff members butting into the way scam resolvers do things, which could be a bit annoying. Too much of a mixture of responsibilities could lead to conflict and confusion down the line.

 

[DarkKnights22]

I think the issue is more about other staff members butting into the way scam resolvers do things, which could be a bit annoying. Too much of a mixture of responsibilities could lead to conflict and confusion down the line.

Exactly, it could end up elongating the process instead of actually making it quicker. Also, Kuchy just got promoted and the scam reports are really quick now, mine got accepted in a few hours.

 

[Mick]

In the future we plan to introduce a system that allows both parties in a scam report to see each others responses without going through moderation to hopefully foster communication between them rather than relying on a scam resolver to mediate the whole process to speed it up and reduce the workload on our scam resolvers.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion