How to reported post, and status

[xOrpian]

If you report a post, how do you know it's progressing, whether it's resolved, or not? Mods can see your mail. Don't you deserve the right to even know the reason for acting on the report (if action took place)?

Also, how long does it take to take action on a post? (Any max duration?)

[Nwada001]

Once you report a post, it is sent to the moderator and it stays as unhandled until it has been handled, at which point it will then be marked as good or bad depending on the mod's decision regarding the post you reported.

There is a certain number of posts you should have reported before you will be able to see which of your posts is marked bad and which one is marked good, but for duration there is no max duration to how long it will take; it all depends on the moderator in charge of the board and how busy he or she is or how complex the post you reported is to determine its action.

[xOrpian]

Once you report a post, it is sent to the moderator and it stays as unhandled until it has been handled, at which point it will then be marked as good or bad depending on the mod's decision regarding the post you reported.

There is a certain number of posts you should have reported before you will be able to see which of your posts is marked bad and which one is marked good, but for duration there is no max duration to how long it will take; it all depends on the moderator in charge of the board and how busy he or she is or how complex the post you reported is to determine its action.

So, if a post gets unhandled for a month straight you'll have re-report it, even if It's off-topic, spam, or violates foum rules? (Or it will never be looked upon after 1st report)

[Charles-Tim]

Nearly all my reports are acted upon by moderators very fast. You can easily know if the report has been acted upon by a moderator if you click on 'report to moderator' -> 'your report history'.

Not everyone can see their report history. They will see it if they continue to report and have up to 300 reports or so if I remember correctly.

[Nwada001]

So, if a post gets unhandled for a month straight you'll have re-report it, even if It's off-topic, spam, or violates foum rules? (Or it will never be looked upon after 1st report)

All your reports are being seen by a moderator. If the first one was not handled either, it was not worth it, or they are still considering it. Sometimes for a post to be considered off-topic or spam and the other in some complicated cases, I think you need more people to report such posts so that action can be taken upon them and not just by one report. One report is easily handled for some obvious cases.

PS: I'm just giving this explanation based on what I understand from the 199 times I have reported posts and how they have been handled. I'm not a moderator.

[Btcdeybodi]

What i know is that if a post you reported has been handled, your accuracy percentage increases if your judgement is right but if it's wrong, your accuracy percentage decreases.

As for how long it takes before a report is handled, there is not specified duration but what causes delays most times is due to so many pending reports that have not been handled by moderator so when you send your own reports, it will line with other unhandled reports until when or the day the moderator will attend to it. That's all i know for now

[xOrpian]

So, if a post gets unhandled for a month straight you'll have re-report it, even if It's off-topic, spam, or violates foum rules? (Or it will never be looked upon after 1st report)

All your reports are being seen by a moderator. If the first one was not handled either, it was not worth it, or they are still considering it. Sometimes for a post to be considered off-topic or spam and the other in some complicated cases, I think you need more people to report such posts so that action can be taken upon them and not just by one report. One report is easily handled for some obvious cases.

PS: I'm just giving this explanation based on what I understand from the 199 times I have reported posts and how they have been handled. I'm not a moderator.

It's understandable, but does staff favor reports from someone while disregarding reports from someone else? I know it's dumb of me to ask, but nvm?

[hosemary]

So, if a post gets unhandled for a month straight you'll have re-report it, even if It's off-topic, spam, or violates foum rules? (Or it will never be looked upon after 1st report)

Here is what has been said about unhandled reports in the report history page.

"When a report stays unhandled, this does not mean that no moderators were available to look at it; rather, it means that several moderators looked at it, but none of them was sure whether it should be acted upon or not. A report that stays unhandled can be thought of as "soft-bad", since no moderator positively thought that it warranted action."

Not everyone can see their report history. They will see it if they continue to report and have up to 300 reports or so if I remember correctly.

To be able to see your report history, you need to have 300 good reports, not the total of 300 reports.

[vapourminer]

i have several unhandled reports that have been sitting there for years. like 3 in ~400 reports.

dont recall ever submitting the same post more than once though.

[Odohu]

If you report a post, how do you know it's progressing, whether it's resolved, or not? Mods can see your mail. Don't you deserve the right to even know the reason for acting on the report (if action took place)?

Also, how long does it take to take action on a post? (Any max duration?)

Based on the design of the forum as it is now, you can't know the status of your reported posts  but you can have idea of the mod or the possible mods that will attend to the reports since most of the boards have moderators assigned to them that handles such issues. Actually one may think it's right for individuals to know the status or outcome of posts they report but I think implementing such will require a whole lot of coding and designing,  hence I don't know if the forum admin would want to invest resources to that.

[KingsDen]

So, if a post gets unhandled for a month straight you'll have re-report it, even if It's off-topic, spam, or violates foum rules? (Or it will never be looked upon after 1st report)

Here is what has been said about unhandled reports in the report history page.

"When a report stays unhandled, this does not mean that no moderators were available to look at it; rather, it means that several moderators looked at it, but none of them was sure whether it should be acted upon or not. A report that stays unhandled can be thought of as "soft-bad", since no moderator positively thought that it warranted action."

and it seems that such unhandled reports are expunged after 6 months. I have read something of that nature, but I do not understand how exactly it works. It could be that unhandled reports after 6 months will not be handled again.

[hosemary]

Based on the design of the forum as it is now, you can't know the status of your reported post

I feel you didn't read the previous posts. As already said in this thread, once you reach 300 good reports, you will be able to see your report history.
In your reports page, you will be able to see the status of the reports you made in the past 30 days.

[Xal0lex]

Mods can see your mail.

Moderators can't see users' mail. This has not worked for a long time.

[xOrpian]

To be able to see your report history, you need to have 300 good reports, not the total of 300 reports.

What kind of data is mentioned in report history, at that point I don't really you need a dashboard of your reports, you're already good at reporting. (For new people dashboard is useful, in my opinion).

Mods can see your mail.

Moderators can't see users' mail. This has not worked for a long time.

Could there be users who might report but won't because of this?, I mean if you're a mod then it doesn't really matter the user reporting the post should know, you're hired to work on reports, user knows or won't it doesn't really matter tbh.

[Mrbluntzy]

If you report a post, how do you know it's progressing, whether it's resolved, or not? Mods can see your mail. Don't you deserve the right to even know the reason for acting on the report (if action took place)?

Also, how long does it take to take action on a post? (Any max duration?)

@OP, if you report a post, how to know that the report has been acted upon is if the reason of reporting the post has been resolved. For example, if a thread was created in a wrong Board and you reported the post to moderators to  moved it to an appropriate board, later you check and the post has be moved, it means that your report was handled.

There's no specific time duration before user's report can be handle but logically, I think that reports doesn't take more than 24 hours before a moderator see it.

After you report a post, click on that report option and you will see the number of your good reported post, number of unhandle reports and numbers of bad reports too. See example.

"You have reported 15 posts with 100% accuracy (15 good, 0 bad, 1 unhandled). Do not worry about your accuracy too much; one accurate report is worth many inaccurate reports."

[Findingnemo]

Could there be users who might report but won't because of this?, I mean if you're a mod then it doesn't really matter the user reporting the post should know, you're hired to work on reports, user knows or won't it doesn't really matter tbh.

That is why it is marked as good or bad, isn't?

We as users are helpfing the staff members to find the spam effectively and mods can still trash posts even if it's not reported by anyone at all.

Reporting isn't about credit and no one will know how many reports you have.

[Charles-Tim]

dont recall ever submitting the same post more than once though.

If a report is submitted more than once, the first can be marked as good while the second may be marked as bad. I have mistakenly reported a post two times before but the moderator marked the second as bad.

[xOrpian]

dont recall ever submitting the same post more than once though.

If a report is submitted more than once, the first can be marked as good while the second may be marked as bad. I have mistakenly reported a post two times before but the moderator marked the second as bad.

Possibly the after the first post got handeled, the data of 2nd report had some interference with db (if the first one had already been resolved then 2nd served no purpose)

Do you see those 2 reports in your dashboard, along with marked status?

[examplens]

It's understandable, but does staff favor reports from someone while disregarding reports from someone else? I know it's dumb of me to ask, but nvm?

I believe this is a question for the moderators. But it certainly makes their decision easier if the report comes from someone who has 10k reported posts with 100% accuracy.
Likewise, it may happen, that the responsible moderator clears all accumulated reports at that very moment, so yours is processed almost immediately.

[Charles-Tim]

Do you see those 2 reports in your dashboard, along with marked status?

All the reports and the details would be seen. Both the reports of the same posts would been seen.

It's understandable, but does staff favor reports from someone while disregarding reports from someone else? I know it's dumb of me to ask, but nvm?

I believe this is a question for the moderators. But it certainly makes their decision easier if the report comes from someone who has 10k reported posts with 100% accuracy.

If someone is having accurate reports, it will be handled regardless of how many reports he had. Most of my reports are handled since I have been reporting posts. I actively report posts but I am not even have up to 5000 reports yet.