delete

[redsn0w]

I vouch for Quickseller too, though most of the time I just read and read how he bust and uncover those potential scams that could probably affect the community, especially the newbies. I think his reports (1600+ reports with 95% accuracy) is over-qualified for a position of a mod and he's always active as far as I can see. But still, it is for theymos to decide whether he'll accept a new moderator or not. The local languages boards seemed to be not that moderated appropriately, a Global Mod maybe could help fix things in there?

... but it is necessary to know some languages.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Why does a high % in report accuracy make you a candidate to be a mod?
I just checked mine & it's 87% accuracy yet I have no interest in ever becoming a mod of this or any other forum.
I think we should just let theymos decide if any other mods are needed. It's not a reality tv show where people phone in to vote for their favourite person. This thread is a little embarrassing. Let Quickseller get on with what he does & let the mods moderate.

[funtotry]

Why does a high % in report accuracy make you a candidate to be a mod?
I just checked mine & it's 87% accuracy yet I have no interest in ever becoming a mod of this or any other forum.
I think we should just let theymos decide if any other mods are needed. It's not a reality tv show where people phone in to vote for their favourite person. This thread is a little embarrassing. Let Quickseller get on with what he does & let the mods moderate.

A high % in accuracy mean, that as you become a mod, most of your decisions would be correct.
Quickseller seems to be doing just fine with his default trust and his reporting. The reporting gets confirmed 95% of the time, and default trust leaves a big red mark, making it very hard for the scammer to trade with that big red trust mark.

[Yamato no Orochi]

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator  

[Brewins]

Why does a high % in report accuracy make you a candidate to be a mod?
I just checked mine & it's 87% accuracy yet I have no interest in ever becoming a mod of this or any other forum.
I think we should just let theymos decide if any other mods are needed. It's not a reality tv show where people phone in to vote for their favourite person. This thread is a little embarrassing. Let Quickseller get on with what he does & let the mods moderate.

A high % in accuracy mean, that as you become a mod, most of your decisions would be correct.
Quickseller seems to be doing just fine with his default trust and his reporting. The reporting gets confirmed 95% of the time, and default trust leaves a big red mark, making it very hard for the scammer to trade with that big red trust mark.

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

[xetsr]

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator  

Some people didn't see QS's reported post count and accuracy  

Don't forget scams are not moderated here so if QS were to start doing that, he would probably be removed pretty quick.

[--Encrypted--]

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

or, he is really good on spotting bad posts that people normally wouldn't catch.

also I think only global mods can ban newbies. patrollers can delete any post by newbies even if they're outside their moderated boards. normal mods can't do jack outside of their moderated boards.

EDIT:
I was wrong, all of them can nuke newbies.

[Yamato no Orochi]

some people seem to think that being a member of Default Trust and hunting scams have anything to do with being a moderator  

Some people didn't see QS's reported post count and accuracy  

Don't forget scams are not moderated here so if QS were to start doing that, he would probably be removed pretty quick.

if you're implying that I didn't see that, you're wrong.  

it's just that some users actually added being on DT and outing scams to the "why should QS be a moderator" checklist.

and don't get me wrong. I'm actually in the pro QS group.

[Brewins]

95%, if true, also means that he only reported obvious stuff, like +1 posts, people that don't read the thread, or that can't speak english, bots, etc. I think a mod is supposed to catch the things that people normally would not catch.

And any staff member can ban newbies, accuracy on reports don't say anything about how a user would handle the banhammer

or, he is really good on spotting bad posts that people normally wouldn't catch.

also I think only global mods can ban newbies. patrollers can delete any post by newbies even if they're outside their moderated boards. normal mods can't do jack outside of their moderated boards.

Usually newbie bots and spams are nuked or banned way quicker than high ranked members if they decide to go mad, so I think the patrollers have some ban hammer.

[hikedoon]

 As long as he/she is selling account's then i see a potential for "conflict of interest's" problem's arising.
          p.s.
 I don't actually care who the moderator's are and have nothing against Quickseller either.
 I'm just stating the obvious.

[rapsaodan84]

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

[funtotry]

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.


~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

[rapsaodan84]

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.


~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

Maybe but still nobody could know which posts were reported by whom so they couldn't get negative attention from the people they reported

ckolivas is the mod -ck?

[funtotry]

Is 95% accuracy something very strange? I'd really like to see a list of top reporters. something like top 5 or 10 with 100% accuracy with 500+ reports (if any), top 5-10 with 99%, top 5-10 with 98% and so on...

ckolivas had 100% accuracy with somewhere near 1000 reports.


~BCX~

Exactly 100% accuracy? Thats damn good.
Top reporters would be good, but the problem is, it would be public, and you would be the "forum snitch". You might receive more negative attention, due to the lots of reports, especially from the people you reported.
You would probably also be harassed more, I don't think this information should be public.

Maybe but still nobody could know which posts were reported by whom so they couldn't get negative attention from the people they reported

ckolivas is the mod -ck?

Still, with quickseller thats 1.6k reports, thats around 1.6k accounts (Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?). Also, its pretty obvious that he reported you, if he makes a scam accusation about you or makes a reply to you or something like that.
Still, having the information public would make you look like a snitch to the community.

[ndnh]

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

[funtotry]

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

I don't know how the report system works exactly but heres how I think it works.
Mods have a chance to do action upon the report, and if any action is done (warning, delete post, ban, tempban), you get the report counted as good, but if they reject it, it doesn't count.
I don't know if the mods have the option to accept the report, however say that you were right. If you were right on the report, the mods would have to do something so I don't think thats the case.

[Muhammed Zakir]

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

No. What funtrory said is not true. There is no "certain" limits for reporting posts.

What happened in your case is predictable. When you report very few posts, your accuracy % can decrease drastically if some of your reports are bad. It happened to me when I started reporting.

[shorena]

--snip--
(Only 1 report per account before action is made correct?).
--snip--

Is this true? It clearly explains why even though the posts I reported got removed, I got a low accuracy per cent there.
There was this updownbot.bz guy who made abusive and spam posts, and I had reported some 10 posts of his, then. Dang!

Only reported 29 posts, but since I got some 39% rejected, I stopped reporting (to relieve mods of some useless stuff). May be I should start properly?

I don't know how the report system works exactly but heres how I think it works.
Mods have a chance to do action upon the report, and if any action is done (warning, delete post, ban, tempban), you get the report counted as good, but if they reject it, it doesn't count.
I don't know if the mods have the option to accept the report, however say that you were right. If you were right on the report, the mods would have to do something so I don't think thats the case.

As someone with a lot of reports thats not how it[1] works. Most reports I write are about posts that have been started in the wrong section. Hilarious told me it was very similar for them. I would also assume that this is the case of QS as well, as its the most common thing to report. Yes, there is a spambot here and there or a low quality/offtopic post etc. The big numbers though come from "sorting" threads.


[1] I dont know either how exactly mods handle a report, but thats not what Im refering to. Im refering to "1 report per account" and "1.6K reported accounts".

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Who can be bothered to trawl through the entire forum reporting posts for being in the wrong section? It sounds like a fake ass cop like a traffic warden or something, ticketing cars for a little bit of power

I've reported about 25 & most of them are that troll NotLambChop in the speculation section, mainly the wall observer thread for posting gay porn & calling bitcoiners pedophiles.

[Lauda]

Who can be bothered to trawl through the entire forum reporting posts for being in the wrong section? It sounds like a fake ass cop like a traffic warden or something, ticketing cars for a little bit of power
I've reported about 25 & most of them are that troll NotLambChop in the speculation section, mainly the wall observer thread for posting gay porn & calling bitcoiners pedophiles.

Anyone who enjoy contributing to various things, including this very forum. There are a lot of rules that tend to be broken and a lot of reasons for reporting on a daily basis. It can range from moving topics, off topic posts to bots and illegal things. I'm currently at 96% accuracy which I consider not enough for myself. However, it looks like QS has spent a lot of time contributing by reporting and by hunting down scammers. Mistakes are acceptable, since we are all human.

As someone with a lot of reports thats not how it[1] works. Most reports I write are about posts that have been started in the wrong section. Hilarious told me it was very similar for them. I would also assume that this is the case of QS as well, as its the most common thing to report. Yes, there is a spambot here and there or a low quality/offtopic post etc. The big numbers though come from "sorting" threads.

[1] I dont know either how exactly mods handle a report, but thats not what Im refering to. Im refering to "1 report per account" and "1.6K reported accounts".

It depends on the circumstances. I do not want to go into the specifics since we might stray away from the original point of the thread. Here is just one example: if someone gets nuked, every reported post of his will be marked as handled (i.e. good report).