Do all disciplinary actions appear in the blotter?

I was wondering... the police plotter states that the 25 most recent actions appear in the blotter. A few things suggest otherwise, the relatively small number of cases in a rapidly growing world, anecdotal evidence of the amount of potentially disciplinable offenses, and anecdotal evidence of people's accounts disappearing after an offense but no corresponding report. (I must be so boring not even a griefer is interested in bothering me, so I'm going on other's accounts here).

So do some actions not appear on the blotter, or is it actually not the most recent 25 actions but 25 of 'some of' the most recent actions? Are there actions by SL that fall outside the scope of the blotter (eg instant removal of offending alt accounts or similar). If any of this is the case, I think this is one of the greatest sources of confusion, and gives the illusion not much is being done in this regard. If this is so, do you think clarifying the wording on the blotter to reflect this would help counteract this perception?

If this is not the case, is there some reason why reported offenses are hard to make a conclusive judgement about? And is there anything residents can do in their reports to assist a clear determination?

The difference in scale between the world and number of actions on the blotter just doesn't seem to stack up... I personally don't doubt that LL is acting somehow but I think this disparity causes a lot of sceptism and negative perceptions towards the process. Lack of information can lead to misinformation. I think we need to know more about the process, total number and nature of actions, and what may or may not end up on the blotter. *

* not asking for anymore transparency in individual cases, the way you report the cases you do report is appropriate.

Apologies if this has been asked before, but if so, I couldn't find it.

Thanks!

I wish it was easier to search the forums--I know I've answered (part of) this one before! It's okay, tho, Fade.

First off:



I certainly think it's important to clearly state and set expectations. I'll be sure to suggest this to the Abuse Team.

With the Police Blotter, my understanding (and this is subject to change as abuse reporting gets ameliorated--this is also being worked on!) is that every disciplinary action with a specific "Description:", which goes further into details, appears.

However! That is *not* all disciplinary actions. You can imagine with so many cases to review, certain violations can get repetitive (e.g. "R-rated text in profile", so when applicable, there's copy-and-paste involved, or the Description doesn't get filled in. But! That doesn't mean the violation was any less serious: it simply means it doesn't appear on the Police Blotter, which, as you know by now, isn't fully comprehensive. There are also some cases in which the Police Blotter just doesn't have the ability to translate some workings of our inner systems. More context from Daniel Linden:

/108/c4/114966/1.html#post1099571

I have heard from fellow Lindens of many recent disciplinary actions which aren't on there. So be assured there's a lot more being done than is being shown.



Yes! Connected to what I said earlier, another very good example: griefer alts that get permabanned for starting trouble right out of the gate. Liaisons and Customer Service Lindens have been striking down some of them VERY quickly. Their accounts are quickly terminated. They don't show up on the blotter. Some of them are seeking attention too ("How many times can I show up on the Police Blotter?", so maybe it's best not to.

I should bold this because it gets forgotten a lot: the Police Blotter doesn't disclose someone's personal history. Someone who gets a harsh suspension for a seemingly "minor" thing may have done it several times before, or have incurred other demerits.

Some have requested more stats on the Police Blotter, like being able to show a cumulative running tally, or even a breakdown of which violations are the most frequent. They're great ideas, but this would require time to implement--time which is likely going to be first focused on making the actual process of sending an abuse report easier and more effective. To gage Resident interest, the Feature Voting Tool of course helps. But, I wouldn't put it past an enterprising mastermind in the community to do their own legwork.



More often than we'd hope, we're at a loss with incomplete abuse reports or those sans sufficient details. Like:so whenever possible, supply details. It's difficult when someone's angry, especially when they just wanna pound the keyboard, but if you can gain control of yourself, you can gain control of the situation. Another thing is perception: someone *thinks* they've given us enough details, but we aren't mindreaders, as insightful as we'd like to be.

Abuse details don't have to be long and wordy, but whatever helps us to help you. Frequently in disputes too, someone claims they were all in the right--when they infact took a few shots of their own, and we determined this. "No angels" cases muddy things up. Of course, people always have their side of the story. We like it when Residents can work things out amongst themselves, especially in such a rapidly growing world. When that isn't possible, however, we will enforce the Community Standards when applicable!

Welkies!