Complaint ARs, validity or number? What is the deal?

I have noticed, as I am sure many of you have, that the resmods have become fond of telling us things like "due to numerous complaints" that a thread is being locked.

Why?

I never thought I'd say this, but I'd prefer we just got the old Jeskatized reasons.

This is disturbing to me. It indicates that if say a group of people, or a person or two and their alts wish to have a thread closed, they can effect that.

I think it's crap.

It should NEVER have ANYTHING to do with the number of complaints and ONLY the validity of them.

Plus telling us about numerous complaints just generates distrust and a contentious atmosphere.

We don't need the gratuitous extra info. For one, it compromises the supposed confidential nature of ARs to some degree.

Figure it out.

I'll say one more thing - you folks who sit around and AR threads all day need to find a different hobby.

To clarify about this, Nol: it certainly isn't quantity alone. And it isn't a binary "OR" system. However, not unlike eyewitnesses to a happening, more corroborative accounts can accurately support where there might be things against the Community Standards, provided they are well-detailed, consistent with the Guidelines, and not gratuitous "I REPORT THIS POST 'CUZ IT SUX!".

So: to have many reasoned complaints is more effective than one reasoned one. But to have all noise and no signal is certainly undesirable, and effectively worthless.

I will emphasize this with the ResMods.

Moved to ResMod forum--it is a good topic for discussion here!

Tone should not have anything to do with it either. It should be soley a flag, that's it. Flagged and then the mod decides if it violates anything.

Just because I write a complaint in a reasonable tone doesn't make it more legit.

And if number doesnt mean anything, why is that being cited in thread closings?

I'm with Nolan on this one.

I did not mean "reasonable tone". I meant "reasoned", as in "having a good reason to flag a post", as in "not by number alone".

I side with whatever the majority opinion winds up being.

Thanks for explaining that to me, and sorry for misinterpreting.

I just hope you guys realize that when you (figurative you, no one specifically) cite that there's been a number of complaints, it might be wise to add a caveat like "legitimate complaints", because otherwise it certainly can easily be interpreted as being based on the number, especially when number is mentioned alone. Personally, I don't think "number" should be mentioned at all, as it invites trouble.

I realize it isn't binary Torley, and I should have crafted the title a little better. In fact I edited it a couple times, because I was having trouble phrasing it properly. Insomnia leads to brain farts.

I guess I mean that the reason should at least be pointing to where it violated the community standards or guidelines, saying a thread is being closed but giving "because a lot of people complained" as the reason doesn't seem quite like the best way to do things to me. People want to know why a thread is closed, and that reason should come in the form of "Here's what was done wrong, here's where it violates the rules"...

*nods*

I strive to be more like Jeska.

I think you do just fine yourself Tor.

You always cite the violation, and I have never seen you state that there were a number of complaints.

Torley, I should think every resmod would have read and studied the TOS.

Thus, if the resmods receive AR's about a post, they would be able to read the post AR'd and determine for themselves whether or not they think it breaks the TOS, rather than basing their decisions on any of the following considerations:

1. how many people have AR'd the post

2. how lawyer-like those people have been in explaining to the resmods why the post breaks the TOS

3. who reports the post (i.e., whether or not they are just a "certain few" to be ignored)

4. whether or not the post bothers the resmod personally

5. and/or the subjectively perceived "intent" of the poster, rather than the words actually used.

ALL those have been cited by the resmods as reasons for not acting on an AR, and none should be entering the equation at all.

coco

Torley, i noticed that this was addressed and posted to the (stickied) Best Practices thread in the ResMod forum.. excellent idea!

this seems to have been a problem a couple of times from what i've seen.. i remember trying to stress this point to other/newer ResMods.. that it doesn't matter if you get 20 ARs about one post.. "it's what's inside that counts". 1 AR has as much weight as 20.

each should be treated individually, reading the reported post and acting accordingly.

now, sometimes, i would trash multiple ARs.. BUT, only after researching the original complaint and coming to a conclusion based upon the reported post. so, if i had come to a decision about a post (actionable or not), then any ARs about that same exact post become a moot point.

in any case, i agree with the rest of you. multiple reports do not equal actionable offense.. and should never be cited as a reason for acting on a post/thread.

and thank you, Torley, for doing what you can about this problem!

Certainly I understand this reasoning......but I also agree that there's no specific need to mention that there were many complaints in the post about the thread. Simply explaining the violation would be enough, and it seems for many of us. The (immediately) above post is a good one; I'm glad to see there was a quick response to the issue. Thanks, Torley!