Reputation Resolvers..

[Joshua C]

So you think the bot dispute thing is workable when there's no person to actually check what's going and deciding on its own?

Get either one or two reputation resolvers who can actually solve reputation.
I'm so pissed with my neg rep.

Whenever I get a neg rep, the first option is to dispute or report.
Dispute gets to nothing, and report never gets read out.

Spoiler: REPUTATION THAT SUCKS.

The Flash is banned which makes it completely useless.

Other people's example
- LegoMiner.

Don't even bother to deny or reject this because its exactly what the community wants, and if you want the community to keep generating you profit, you need to fix it.

 

[Maddy]

Agree, my report is over three months old against maxi over me calling him a bitch
Also you can open a support request and say that the user who repped you got banned and they’ll take it off, that’s what I did

 

[pace]

pity it got rejected after many agree's long time ago https://www.mc-market.org/threads/325121/

 

[Maddy]

pity it got rejected after many agree's long time ago https://www.mc-market.org/threads/325121/

I mean that was back in October when they didn’t have the new report system

 

[pace]

I mean that was back in October when they didn’t have the new report system

well the new report system is what they rejected it for they said it was going to be better lmao i still remember

 

[Joshua C]

pity it got rejected after many agree's long time ago https://www.mc-market.org/threads/325121/

This is should be done, as its because this is what the community needs.

 

[Maddy]

pity it got rejected after many agree's long time ago https://www.mc-market.org/threads/325121/

That thread is probably the best ratio of ratings I’ve ever seen on a suggestion thread
Yet they denied it

 

[Justis]

This was already planned and is close to being released.
Jayson has finished developing all of the permissions we need for it as well.

We could not have possibly done this prior to the new dispute system, which was designed and implemented with the idea of eventually introducing reputation dispute resolvers to the team.

 

[pace]

This was already planned and is close to being released.
Jayson has finished developing all of the permissions we need for it as well.

We could not have possibly done this prior to the new dispute system, which was designed and implemented with the idea of eventually introducing reputation dispute resolvers to the team.

i hate u u made me type alot in the past thread and now u simply going to abide it bad boi

 

[Joshua C]

i hate u u made me type alot in the past thread and now u simply going to abide it bad boi

"Where's my winner reaction"

 

[pace]

"Where's my winner reaction"

boi i deserve one for the 10000 lines i wrote not u

 

[Choo]

This was already planned and is close to being released.
Jayson has finished developing all of the permissions we need for it as well.

We could not have possibly done this prior to the new dispute system, which was designed and implemented with the idea of eventually introducing reputation dispute resolvers to the team.

Funny how Mick denied the previous thread with over 66 agrees and no disagrees and broadly stated his personal opinion on it. Guess that shows something, but at least you guys are finally listening to what we have to say.

 

[Justis]

Funny how Mick denied the previous thread with over 66 agrees and no disagrees and broadly stated his personal opinion on it. Guess that shows something, but at least you guys are finally listening to what we have to say.

Mick himself had suggested the idea of reputation moderators to the staff team long before it was ever suggested by the community.
All of the development improvements required for reputation moderators aside, the reasons that it was denied are still valid.

We could not have considered changing the way an entire system is moderated, as well as changing the structure of our staff team, at the same time. Screw around too much, and you risk falling apart. If something goes wrong, you need to be able to isolate the source of the problem if you want to be able to fix it.

It would have been much better if the general moderation team was able to handle reputation all on their own, that is still the case. We hoped that improving the dispute process would make it easier on the moderation team, and allow for us to continue to take advantage of the benefits of a single team. But if that ended up not being the case, then that was fine as well. The permission improvements required to create a reputation moderation rank would have been developed regardless, and we would be prepared for the need if it persisted.
Unfortunately, making the dispute process easier has resulted in a massive influx of users taking advantage of that ease of use, creating a larger workload than our small moderation team can manage, especially with our mods Lotus and Kram prioritizing scam reports now.

At no point has anyone ignored the community. It was simply not possible or responsible at the time.

 

[Choo]

Mick himself had suggested the idea of reputation moderators to the staff team long before it was ever suggested by the community.
All of the development improvements required for reputation moderators aside, the reasons that it was denied are still valid.

We could not have considered changing the way an entire system is moderated, as well as changing the structure of our staff team, at the same time. Screw around too much, and you risk falling apart. If something goes wrong, you need to be able to isolate the source of the problem if you want to be able to fix it.

It would have been much better if the general moderation team was able to handle reputation all on their own, that is still the case. We hoped that improving the dispute process would make it easier on the moderation team, and allow for us to continue to take advantage of the benefits of a single team. But if that ended up not being the case, then that was fine as well. The permission improvements required to create a reputation moderation rank would have been developed regardless, and we would be prepared for the need if it persisted.
Unfortunately, making the dispute process easier has resulted in a massive influx of users taking advantage of that ease of use, creating a larger workload than our small moderation team can manage, especially with our mods Lotus and Kram prioritizing scam reports now.

At no point has anyone ignored the community.

Let's play 8 ball!

 

[elias]

Mick himself had suggested the idea of reputation moderators to the staff team long before it was ever suggested by the community.
All of the development improvements required for reputation moderators aside, the reasons that it was denied are still valid.

We could not have considered changing the way an entire system is moderated, as well as changing the structure of our staff team, at the same time. Screw around too much, and you risk falling apart. If something goes wrong, you need to be able to isolate the source of the problem if you want to be able to fix it.

It would have been much better if the general moderation team was able to handle reputation all on their own, that is still the case. We hoped that improving the dispute process would make it easier on the moderation team, and allow for us to continue to take advantage of the benefits of a single team. But if that ended up not being the case, then that was fine as well. The permission improvements required to create a reputation moderation rank would have been developed regardless, and we would be prepared for the need if it persisted.
Unfortunately, making the dispute process easier has resulted in a massive influx of users taking advantage of that ease of use, creating a larger workload than our small moderation team can manage, especially with our mods Lotus and Kram prioritizing scam reports now.

At no point has anyone ignored the community. It was simply not possible or responsible at the time.

hehe

 

[Mick]

Since the time this suggestion was made, the idea has now been implemented (and also been renamed to Feedback Moderator).

Even though it wasn't really this thread that lead to its implementation I suppose that I'll move this to accepted? I never really know how to handle situations like these with moving requests, but I guess we'll go with that.

Accepted, thanks for the suggestion.