Prevented from reporting insults

[Silene]

Don't forget the duplicate reports, which were not included in that total, though the number of those were unstated.

You have no basis for assuming this and stating it as fact.

No basis for what? Your comment makes no sense.

I also read Xate's message as the dublicates being a part of the 33, not on top. I might be wrong but to me the "additional" they used sounds like "not only were some found as not guilty but additionally some of them have even been dublicates".

[Ceaseless]

You have no basis for assuming this and stating it as fact.

No basis for what? Your comment makes no sense.

I also read Xate's message as the dublicates being a part of the 33, not on top. I might be wrong but to me the "additional" they used sounds like "not only were some found as not guilty but additionally some of them have even been dublicates".

I read it at 33 original reports with roughly half not guilty, then the duplicates going on top of the original 33, as opposed to the duplicates being included in the 33. If the duplicates are in the 33, I'm not sure if the 50/50 split is counting the duplicates in the percentages or if they would mean the originals were split this way (or even both being true). I can see where you're getting your interpretation from at least.

[ChiefPointThief]

So there's very elaborate data on everyone's reporting behavior. Is there any chance you let player's access this info in the future?

This is a very good question which may never be answered.

I'm wondering about my own stats too and feel worried and a bit nervous about myself whenever I report someone.

I'm worried too! People cheat using multiple accounts and are playing again within no time worry free. Meanwhile if you challenge a mod twice you can have your account permanently banned. Which is scary considering people literally say, "I don't want to challenge my moderation" and are told they are in fact challenging it just by mentioning it when all they want to do is discuss bga's policy.

You made a public thread about not being able to send reports, and you want to complain about a moderator commenting on that very thread with information that might have been relevant to how this happened?

And how exactly is it relevant? This info rubbed me the wrong way too, because without additional context it doesn't mean anything at best. Were these 33 reports made over 4 years or less? Over 23000+ games or less? Maybe 33 reports are just too much regardless of time period and number of played games. Maybe 50% success rate is too low. Does "not guilty" status automatically mean that report is not valid? After all, not guilty doesn't imply that reported player is innocent. And finally, how does this all tie into this message:"Sorry but the 5 last reports you submitted to moderation did not manage to convince our moderation team (no ToS violations, or not accurate enough)"?

So, yes, it would be better if we saw some additional concrete guidelines about reporting instead of stating some facts about a certain player. It would be even better, if there was some intermediary automated warning when a player is nearing a permanent ban on reporting.

The information was not relevant to what happened, which was supposedly a result of the five most recent reports only. Even if it had been, I do not see where they get the right to publicise private user data in this way. And it was obvious from the non-relevance of the information and the omission of all relevant context that the intent was to make me look bad.

Yeah this rubbed me the wrong way also. Especially since wrldtrvllr didn't appear to attack bga in any way.

I also read Xate's message as the dublicates being a part of the 33, not on top.

Same.

[h_illes]

You have made 33 reports of which half were deemed Not Guilty.

In addition to this, there were multiple instances where the reports were duplicates of other reports from you, where we had already moderated and already deemed either Guilty or Not Guilty, and you again reported the same player for the same reason multiple times. This wastes the valuable time our volunteer moderators spend looking into cases and is unfair both to them and to the rest of the players waiting for the reports they submitted to be reviewed.

Your entire approach is just wrong. Instead of replying to his actual concern, you are trying to paint him as the bad guy. He had 33 reports over 24000 games played, which makes it about 1 report per 700 games. No way that's beyond reasonable. If you think it is too many, that shows you are understaffed for handling moderation reports, and you should look into that instead of attacking the OP.

Also, if you block someone from reporting harassment for whatever reason, that goes against the policy of keeping the site family-friendly.

Also, you should be transparent about how reports are handled and what are the possible consequences, because right now it just looks like you are using site policies selectively as random excuses to not do your job instead of a site-wide, consistent, transparent approach.

[euklid314]

You have made 33 reports of which half were deemed Not Guilty.

In addition to this, there were multiple instances where the reports were duplicates of other reports from you, where we had already moderated and already deemed either Guilty or Not Guilty, and you again reported the same player for the same reason multiple times. This wastes the valuable time our volunteer moderators spend looking into cases and is unfair both to them and to the rest of the players waiting for the reports they submitted to be reviewed.

Your entire approach is just wrong. Instead of replying to his actual concern, you are trying to paint him as the bad guy. He had 33 reports over 24000 games played, which makes it about 1 report per 700 games. No way that's beyond reasonable. If you think it is too many, that shows you are understaffed for handling moderation reports, and you should look into that instead of attacking the OP.

Also, if you block someone from reporting harassment for whatever reason, that goes against the policy of keeping the site family-friendly.

Also, you should be transparent about how reports are handled and what are the possible consequences, because right now it just looks like you are using site policies selectively as random excuses to not do your job instead of a site-wide, consistent, transparent approach.

Nothing to add. Well said.

[ReblScum]

This is a troubling thread.

[KenFin1]

You have made 33 reports of which half were deemed Not Guilty.

In addition to this, there were multiple instances where the reports were duplicates of other reports from you, where we had already moderated and already deemed either Guilty or Not Guilty, and you again reported the same player for the same reason multiple times. This wastes the valuable time our volunteer moderators spend looking into cases and is unfair both to them and to the rest of the players waiting for the reports they submitted to be reviewed.

Your entire approach is just wrong. Instead of replying to his actual concern, you are trying to paint him as the bad guy. He had 33 reports over 24000 games played, which makes it about 1 report per 700 games. No way that's beyond reasonable. If you think it is too many, that shows you are understaffed for handling moderation reports, and you should look into that instead of attacking the OP.

Also, if you block someone from reporting harassment for whatever reason, that goes against the policy of keeping the site family-friendly.

Also, you should be transparent about how reports are handled and what are the possible consequences, because right now it just looks like you are using site policies selectively as random excuses to not do your job instead of a site-wide, consistent, transparent approach.

That bolded bit is fundamentally important. Same as not removing the ability to red thumb players. They are the only defense someone has against stalkery aggressive abusive types.

[wrldtrvllr]

So then, to summarise:

1. There was no possible way for me to know that making five reports that the moderators disagreed with would result in a permanent ban on making reports
2. Even if that were not a secret rule, there was, and is, no possible way of knowing when one might be at risk of breaking it.
3. Querying this resulted in an administrator posting irrelevant details of my activities without my consent, clearly with the intention to make me look bad.

This is pretty outrageous really.

[GTSchemer]

Likewise, I would also like to request a way to check my history, and whether my last 5 reports have been not guilty / guilty.

I think at least 1 or 2 of them were guilty, but I do not report often so it is really hard for me to know. And if even 1 report per 700 games played is a dangerous rate, it makes me want to not report at all.

[Kayvon]

So then, to summarise:

1. There was no possible way for me to know that making five reports that the moderators disagreed with would result in a permanent ban on making reports
2. Even if that were not a secret rule, there was, and is, no possible way of knowing when one might be at risk of breaking it.
3. Querying this resulted in an administrator posting irrelevant details of my activities without my consent, clearly with the intention to make me look bad.

This is pretty outrageous really.

I agree with #1 and #2. In fact, providing some feedback, even just an acknowledgement, would help prevent repeat reports since you'd know they were received.

If you're willing to take some feedback from a different viewpoint, I think #3 is a bit harsh. You publicly asked for rationale on why you can no longer report and your activity is directly related to that. Nothing in the privacy statement claims they will keep that secret and, even if it did, you publicly requested some clarification. I don't think it was done in bad faith. To the contrary, the provided context is what helps so many people agree with your first two points.