Reputation Resolvers

[pace]

Reputation resolvers instead of having Moderators deal with unreasonable neg reps or revenge reps these people come in and do it instead
it is helpful for mcm as moderators have to deal with other things not only the reputation system

kthxbye

too lazy to write a whole 1000lines like what most people do

 

[pace]

I do like the suggestion and honestly, I don't really have anything against it.
The only thing is, would it be better to just put 1 Moderator specifically on the task of resolving reputation reports?
Like this way, a whole new rank doesn't have to be created. And I know it's not difficult to create a new rank itself but a rank for a person that does the job that other moderators can do seems slightly repetitive if you get what I mean.
If 1, and maybe 2, moderators were set to mainly just focus on reputation, they can make sure those reports are resolved before possibly helping out with general moderation but still have moderators who do post/thread moderation mainly.
I believe Justis (or maybe someone else) mentioned something similar earlier in the thread but I'm not sure as I only skimmed through the replies.

the whole reputation resolver idea is different of what moderators do they instantly deny the report without even asking for proof or anything instead reputation resolvers open conversations between the person and the other guy and provide proof of the conversation, deal then he decides if the rep should be removed or not.

 

[CheekyMonkey]

Like this Idea as People sometimes get Negative rep for no reason for when they got scammed and then the person who scammed them put Bad rep on Buyer

 

[pace]

Like this Idea as People sometimes get Negative rep for no reason for when they got scammed and then the person who scammed them put Bad rep on Buyer

the problem is that those people you are speaking about the scammers but neg rep but then the guy who did nothing wrong and got scammed reports it and wow guess what happens of course it is denied which is why the system is trash the only person around who is doing a proper job which i myself call a reputation resolver is Justis as conversations are opened we provide proof of the chat and why did it happen then he decides if it should be removed or not rather than getting instant denial without any discussion nor anything

 

[pace]

Good idea But it wouldn't help people like me where Mick has left rep

u showin off

 

[Mick]

The moderation team making instant decisions on false rep reports without a dispute is indeed currently the case, and extremely frustrating. Which is why I've suggested making a dispute process staff policy, which it is not right now.
However, making a dispute process for false rep reports staff policy cannot be reasonably done until the reputation system actually has moderation tools available to the team moderating it.

What I want are:
- Consistency
- A dispute for every false rep report
- Timely responses to reports

And I believe that providing the global moderation team with the moderation tools to support disputes, and making the provision of a dispute for false rep reports an expected and enforced staff policy is a better way to provide those three things in the long run.
I want to give the moderation team these tools and this policies to enforce with first, before deciding that they are incapable and creating potentially unnecessary separate branch and adding unqualified members who could potentially become unavailable.

I want to be sure that the best possible action is being taken before taking action.
Many members are frustrated by the reputation system right now, as they are justified in being, however, often they will quickly jump on the bandwagon of any suggestion to change the system, simply because it's a change, and they don't like what it is currently, without being adequately aware of the potentially worse consequences of that change, or any better solutions to the problems that bother them.
My first priority is the long term success and happiness of the entire site, and I have had many years of experience as a staff member to develop an understanding of what that will ultimately entail.
Sometimes that leads to disagreements between myself and other members. Unfortunately that isn't something that I can prevent.

I've explained this a few times, but essentially it's more useful to have a team of generalist moderators who can do anything than several teams of specialist moderators.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.