Revised — Incentivizing moderation reports with millimerits

[nurilham]

So, the idea would be for each user to have a "millimerit" balance (either hidden from view, or maybe visible next to the existing report accuracy numbers). Moderators could then award members with say 25 millimerits for any good report and -100 for any bad report.

The idea to appreciate good reports with millimerits sounds okay although I'm not sure if this is an effective way to encourage people's awareness. I am a bit worried that there are some people who are inspired to report posts excessively. It may trigger an uncomfortable atmosphere between us if some people target to report as many as possible in a month, to get 25 millimerits. At the end of the day, we may have an increase in the number (quantity) of reports but probably to decrease in the quality of reports.

Anyway, why bad reports should get -100?
It is like you don't respect people who try to give positive contributions to the forum.
If they don't make good reports, why don't just ignore the reports and no millimerits?  

[Welsh]

Maybe OP can do the heavy lifting for theymos to implement the reporter badges? That would be really cool.

I imagine the report padding strategies that theymos alludes too would be difficult to solve. Although, I don't think the consequences of users doing that is too bad. After all, it's a cosmetic thing. I personally don't see too many users creating alternate accounts, just to report their own posts. I feel like that would be too time consuming for a cosmetic benefit, although I might be putting a little too much faith into that if I'm being honest.

Even so, I don't think we'll be able to stop users from doing that, not easily.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

There's less spam (and much less posts in general). In the past week, 35,000 posts were made. 4 years ago, there were 280,000 posts per week (that's 8 times more).

Wow, that's a dramatic difference.  Were there more bounties/sig campaigns available then, or was it just that the market was much more bullish then than now?

It's been a long time since I've actually read through threads in sections like Bitcoin Discussion (which has been a magnet for shitposters ever since I've been a member), but I can totally see how low-value posts could have dropped in the past few years; there don't seem to be as many in sections like Economics and Meta, and it's likely a forum-wide phenomenon. 

But what happens the next time crypto heats up and bitcointalk once again starts attracting all of the illiterate spammers who want to enroll as many alts as possible into bounties?  We'll probably exceed 280k posts/week and you better believe at least 80% of them are going to be complete crapola.  I like OP's suggestion, but I doubt the boss is going to go for it.

[LoyceV]

There's less spam (and much less posts in general). In the past week, 35,000 posts were made. 4 years ago, there were 350,000 posts per week (that's 10 times more). (I corrected this data)

Wow, that's a dramatic difference.  Were there more bounties/sig campaigns available then, or was it just that the market was much more bullish then than now?

If you click the link: it was the moment Newbies needed 1 Merit to become Jr. Member. Many of them lost their signature space because of this change.

But what happens the next time crypto heats up and bitcointalk once again starts attracting all of the illiterate spammers who want to enroll as many alts as possible into bounties?

They'll still hit the same signature limits, so they can only spam the bounty boards for made-up tokens. I'd say let them, as long as the forum doesn't close that board.

[rosenbauer02]

The whole idea of merit is to reward a good quality post. I don't think we should confuse it with a reporter's reporting status.

I agree with this matter somehow it could be possible to use merits as incentives for doing good reports. Merits is ideal as incentives. In my opinion regarding merit should not only be applicable to good or quality posts but also to overall good deeds done by a user.

So, the idea would be for each user to have a "millimerit" balance (either hidden from view, or maybe visible next to the existing report accuracy numbers). Moderators could then award members with say 25 millimerits for any good report and -100 for any bad report.

The balance can (maybe, not sure) go negative, so you would have to "work off" each of your bad reports to get back above zero and each time you accumulate 1000 millimerits (40 good reports) the balance gets reset and you're awarded one real merit.

In my case with or without merit, If I had seen some shitty posts that added to ruin things that I read to a certain topic then I will report that post. Most of the time those post like cursing, disrespectful posts, and other offensive posts especially that is all against the forum unofficial rules and regulation.

[PowerGlove]

Thanks for your feedback, everyone.

I've updated the initial post with some revisions, and a thought about reporter badges.

[PX-Z]

I've updated the initial post with some revisions, and a thought about reporter badges.

About the reporter badge, it was proposed by theymos even asked for the reporter badge image^[1] and yet it wasn't implemented. Well, it's been already 4 years and counting. This is also the reason the surge^[2] of reporters seeking this badge

[1] Seeking reporter badge images
[2] Reporter Statistics

[TheBeardedBaby]

This has been discussed before, not with the same suggestion for millimerits but the idea for rewarding the reports with merit.

Then merit farming will be quite easy. All we know we have issues with the bots. Imagine if I create 5 spamming account bots and 1 reporting account bot then I will be farming merit in no time.

The only solution is the reward to be something you cannot sell/buy and worth nothing but some kind of respect. Which brings back the question when those badges will be implemented?

[LoyceV]

Get rid of the -100 penalty for a bad report, but instead of the 25 millimerits for a good report being sent automatically, leave it up to the individual moderator's discretion. That way, the mods can spot abuse themselves; if someone spams them with mostly inaccurate reports or if reports seem suspiciously like collusion (e.g. someone keeps reporting new posts from the same user over and over again) then they can decline to issue any millimerits. Maybe the rule could be that when reporting a post, the moderator that handles it has the option of sending you between 0 and 1000 millimerits depending on how useful/valuable your report was. Then (just making up numbers) original reports can get ~60 and redundant (but still good) reports can get ~20, really valuable reports like malware can get ~300, and so on (some moderators would likely be more generous than others).

As a Merit source, I don't have the time to send all of them individually (as in: 1000 millimerits at a time). I think asking Mods to manually send smaller amounts is a waste of their time.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Wherever can get quick merit, there will always be cheaters.
But as far as reports are concerned, it's just a matter of how long does it take to submit a report to the moderators? If someone carefully reads the posts or the whole topic, then low-quality posts or other violations of the rules will be visible. It takes seconds to file a violation report, the one who does not, shows that either he does not read other posts, or all posts look normal to him.
For example, a big post from a beginner, who just yesterday said that he knows nothing, and today he is already teaching lessons, hints to double-check it once again.
For those who report this, it is comparable to the cleanliness of their home, and I do not think that motivating someone with additional merit will be a reason for others to feel the same way, but only to create additional work for the moderators.
If we have bounty hunters, then there will be spam merit hunters.

[Pmalek]

There are a few reasons why people aren't reporting as much as they used to.

The forum culture in general is dying. Not just on Bitcointalk. The new generations don't like forums. They are bored by them. They prefer quicker means of communication, which takes place on social media. Twitter, Discord, and Telegram. The channels and groups on those platforms have hundreds of thousands of users who have probably never registered an account on this forum.

The other reason why people are reporting less is because many are noticing that their reports aren't being handled. This is especially true for reports of plagiarism and ban evasion. But there are other examples as well. Not that long ago there was a thread where someone complained about mods not addressing reports in the Wall Observer topic at all. If I was a reporter/investigator who finds cases of copy/pasting and ban evading, and I gather and present all the evidence in a topic only to be ignored by the admins and realize that nothing is happening, why would I continue wasting my time like that? No, thank you. Do it yourself then, or don't do it.

Sometimes the silence of the admins can also be off-putting. How many years have we been talking about reported badges and a forum welcome message and nothing has happened yet.

[Lucius]

There are a few reasons why people aren't reporting as much as they used to.

The forum culture in general is dying. Not just on Bitcointalk. The new generations don't like forums. They are bored by them. They prefer quicker means of communication, which takes place on social media. Twitter, Discord, and Telegram. The channels and groups on those platforms have hundreds of thousands of users who have probably never registered an account on this forum.

I think that this does not affect the current state of the number of reports on this forum, because there is quite a sufficient number of active members who could, with a little more activity, very easily increase the number of reports x5 or even x10 if they wanted to. Let's take the example of active members only in the Senior, Hero, and Legendary ranks, of which there were about 1000 active members in the last 7 days, and let's say that each makes only 5 reports per day, which brings us to 35 000 posts per week.

The other reason why people are reporting less is because many are noticing that their reports aren't being handled. This is especially true for reports of plagiarism and ban evasion. But there are other examples as well. Not that long ago there was a thread where someone complained about mods not addressing reports in the Wall Observer topic at all. If I was a reporter/investigator who finds cases of copy/pasting and ban evading, and I gather and present all the evidence in a topic only to be ignored by the admins and realize that nothing is happening, why would I continue wasting my time like that? No, thank you. Do it yourself then, or don't do it.

From my personal experience, I can say that this is not true and that the majority of reported posts are mostly resolved very quickly, in 2-3 days at the most. It is true that at one point there was a problem with users who were reported for plagiarism, but all those who actively deal with reports know that this is no longer the case. Plagiarism and ban evasion reports are not as easy to process as spam, because each requires a serious approach and more time.

I agree that a little more initiative on the part of the forum should be directed in this direction, especially in the assignment of moderators for all boards where there are currently none. In addition to all the other reasons we discussed in another thread, it is certainly part of the reason why some members do not contribute in this way anymore - because they think it is a waste of time - and I once wrote that even a simple thank you would be enough incentive for many, so it is not clear to me why the admin did not publish the top reporters statistics for last year.

[Welsh]

even a simple thank you would be enough incentive for many, so it is not clear to me why the admin did not publish the top reporters statistics for last year.

Big massive thank you to all the reporters . I've messaged a few users thanking them of their efforts, in fact I distinctively remember cyrus doing the same thing back when I was reporting. So, I know that it helps, and maybe we should keep that in mind.

It's as simple as this though; this forum wouldn't be half as enjoyable without the dedicated reporters. I'm not saying that I expect them to report, because I don't expect anyone to do it, as correctly pointed out by many, and in the past it's a largely a thankless task which takes a lot of time. However, we moderators get to see the hard work put in behind the scenes by some users, and it's greatly appreciated, more than we probably show.

[UserU]

There are a few reasons why people aren't reporting as much as they used to.

The forum culture in general is dying. Not just on Bitcointalk. The new generations don't like forums. They are bored by them. They prefer quicker means of communication, which takes place on social media. Twitter, Discord, and Telegram. The channels and groups on those platforms have hundreds of thousands of users who have probably never registered an account on this forum.

The other reason why people are reporting less is because many are noticing that their reports aren't being handled. This is especially true for reports of plagiarism and ban evasion. But there are other examples as well. Not that long ago there was a thread where someone complained about mods not addressing reports in the Wall Observer topic at all. If I was a reporter/investigator who finds cases of copy/pasting and ban evading, and I gather and present all the evidence in a topic only to be ignored by the admins and realize that nothing is happening, why would I continue wasting my time like that? No, thank you. Do it yourself then, or don't do it.

Sometimes the silence of the admins can also be off-putting. How many years have we been talking about reported badges and a forum welcome message and nothing has happened yet.

Honestly speaking, it's the trend.

As long as the discussion space is robust and dynamic, the place will continue to thrive. Tech, fashion, food, shitposts, humor, all in one place. Meanwhile Bitcointalk is more limited along with own terms and enforcements by the elders.

[saxydev]

It encourages people to report just for the sake of reporting, which doesn't sound nifty; and that part with -100, that's too harsh. Maybe there are not that many posts reported because a lack in the number of the active users?! Don't like it at all, sorry this is my feedback

[PowerGlove]

It encourages people to report just for the sake of reporting, which doesn't sound nifty; and that part with -100, that's too harsh. Maybe there are not that many posts reported because a lack in the number of the active users?! Don't like it at all, sorry this is my feedback

I (really) don't mind getting negative feedback when I'm just sharing ideas, don't worry.

I do, however, get a little irritated at feedback that reads like you only managed to get through 1/3 of the OP.

I get that not many people want to read a huge wall of text, but please consider that the value of your feedback is unavoidably correlated with how much of the OP you managed to get through before giving up.

For the benefit of anyone else that can't face reading the whole thing: Reporter badges > Revised proposal > Original proposal (IMO).

I still think the revised proposal has some value (I think it contains ideas that could be repurposed to help mitigate some of the things that likely worried theymos about reporter badges).

[saxydev]

It encourages people to report just for the sake of reporting, which doesn't sound nifty; and that part with -100, that's too harsh. Maybe there are not that many posts reported because a lack in the number of the active users?! Don't like it at all, sorry this is my feedback

I (really) don't mind getting negative feedback when I'm just sharing ideas, don't worry.

I do, however, get a little irritated at feedback that reads like you only managed to get through 1/3 of the OP.

I get that not many people want to read a huge wall of text, but please consider that the value of your feedback is unavoidably correlated with how much of the OP you managed to get through before giving up.

For the benefit of anyone else that can't face reading the whole thing: Reporter badges > Revised proposal > Original proposal (IMO).

I still think the revised proposal has some value (I think it contains ideas that could be repurposed to help mitigate some of the things that likely worried theymos about reporter badges).

It is not just much text, it takes 2 minutes to read it, where is the point entering a topic if you don't read it. And I have read all the other replies as well. Still keeping my feedback and from my point of view it was on point. I gave my feedback on what I did/didn't like from the origina/revised proposal and I don't like both of them anyway, just to be clear! It promotes signature shit posters with 10 lines replies talking about nonsense or everyone just repeating same things over and over again.

[Pmalek]

From my personal experience, I can say that this is not true and that the majority of reported posts are mostly resolved very quickly, in 2-3 days at the most. It is true that at one point there was a problem with users who were reported for plagiarism, but all those who actively deal with reports know that this is no longer the case. Plagiarism and ban evasion reports are not as easy to process as spam, because each requires a serious approach and more time.

I am not a spam or scam hunter, so I don't know how much has changed and how things look like now. I just remember seeing complaints and threads where several users talked about how nothing was being done. I am glad things are looking better now.

Simple things like reporting spam, multiposts, links to dubious software, bumping long-forgotten and dead threads are being handled quickly in my experience as well. More serious reports are not exactly my specialty. 

[digaran]

Actually more community participation means healthy community, unbiased moderation. If more people report with atleast 80% accuracy. Meaning people are the real moderators and the staff just execute.