Notes on already reported post?

[Mrbluntzy]

When the same post is reported by 5 or more users, I guess the member that reported the post first will have a note stating that the report has been "handled," right?

For the other members that reported same post before it was handed, what note does their report get?

 If moderators give the same feedback (handled) that was given to the first member that reported the post, is that not unfair to the first report?

I'm suggesting that the member that reported the post first is the only person entitled to get the report marked as "handled" while those that reported same post late before it was handled should get their report marked as, "already reported by user_A and handled."

[Oshosondy]

Reported posts should not be so complicated for the moderators to handle, every user that make good a report before a moderator act on the report will be marked good, it is as simple as that. The moderator will act on it and do what is right to the post. After the report has been handled already, no one will report it again because the post has been deleted or moved to the appropriate board.

[Rikafip]

I'm suggesting that the member that reported the post first is the only person entitled to get the report marked as "handled" while those that reported same post late before it was handled should get their report marked as, "already reported by user_A and handled."

That suggestion doesn't make sense as we don't know whether posts are reported or not, and what you suggest would only make people hesitant to report, thinking that someone else already reported it so why bother. Your suggestion unecessarily complicate things.

System is working good as it is now: once reported post is handled, all that reported it get appropriate mark.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

If 100 users report one post it's marked as good for all of them so long the moderator has not attended to it before the report came in. Let's say I report this post for example and then after some time other persons also report it, if the moderator hasn't attended to my report before the others came in, then they are all marked as good.

However if I report, it gets handled before you report then yours is marked as bad since it's already been appropriately moved, merged or deleted.

[_act_]

However if I report, it gets handled before you report then yours is marked as bad since it's already been appropriately moved, merged or deleted.

Let us assume a post has been reported and has been marked as good, how will another people also report the post again? Assuming you clicked on a post, it has been deleted already, how will the person report that it should be deleted or it is a spam? Or let us assume a post supposed to be on bitcoin discussion board but the poster posted it on beginners and help, some people reported it to be moved to bitcoin discussion where it belongs, a moderator moved it. Can some other people see it on bitcoin discussion and still report it to be moved to bitcoin discussion? Also I can easily see a merged post already and not report it. Even the second post that you want to report and be merged would have been deleted by the moderator before you report it if it has been handled.

[Hatchy]

However if I report, it gets handled before you report then yours is marked as bad since it's already been appropriately moved, merged or deleted.

Why mark it as bad when the report had already been handled? Sounds unfair to me. Besides once the report has been handled another user might not be able to report it again for same reason. Probably he noticed something else wrong with the post and made another report but this time the mod marked it as bad.

[Mia Chloe]

Why mark it as bad when the report had already been handled? Sounds unfair to me. Besides once the report has been handled another user might not be able to report it again for same reason. Probably he noticed something else wrong with the post and made another report but this time the mod marked it as bad.

Well you can read that out to the mods. I'm talking based off experience not something I probably read on the forum. If moderators are very active during a particular period reports can get handled with 1-2 minutes during that period someone may have hit the report to moderator button and made a report.

~snip

There's a fairly higher chance of this happening if it's the case of a moved post.

[_act_]

There's a fairly higher chance of this happening if it's the case of a moved post.

You can reduce the chance of it happening to zero or to almost zero. What you will do is that you should make sure that after you finish reading what the user posted, refresh the page again and see if the post has been moved to the right board or not. If it has not been moved to the right board is when you should report it.

[Solosanz]

I disagree since it harm the reporter's privacy.

I'm not sure what you're looking for, is it because you don't want to see your accuracy drop? it's true some moderators would mark the post that has been reported by someone as bad, or they could left it unhandled. There's no need to seek for high accuracy, your merit or rank won't drop due to having 0% accuracy.

[Churchillvv]

“Handled” should just be the note to everyone no specialty if you reported first or last, as long as it was a good report then definitely handled should be the best title to it for every reporter.

However if I report, it gets handled before you report then yours is marked as bad since it's already been appropriately moved, merged or deleted.

Probably one of the reason why some of my report would be showing bad since it’s handled but does it make any sense to be bad? No because basically the late reporter has no clue if it’s reported or not for me if that be the case then it’s not appropriate.

[AVE5]

Reported posts should not be so complicated for the moderators to handle, every user that make good a report before a moderator act on the report will be marked good, it is as simple as that. The moderator will act on it and do what is right to the post. After the report has been handled already, no one will report it again because the post has been deleted or moved to the appropriate board.

Absolutely. When a post has been reported and moderator already reacted to it, there's nothing else other users will report about the post because what's needed about it had been handled through the first reporter.
Another case why moderator may not have responded to the first reporter could be improper construction of the post by the first reporter, so when other reporters posts catches the attention of the moderator base on the post or report quality, then that should be the one moderator would be attracted to react to.
Perhaps the judgement of the moderator may be either to delete or lock the post and after after attended to, there's nothing else other users will report about same post unless the user want to appeal for the moderators injustice or action.

[Smartvirus]

Reported posts should not be so complicated for the moderators to handle, every user that make good a report before a moderator act on the report will be marked good, it is as simple as that. The moderator will act on it and do what is right to the post. After the report has been handled already, no one will report it again because the post has been deleted or moved to the appropriate board.

There are ways to make good reports and bad reports. Some reports hardly gets acted upon because, the users to have made those report didn’t direct their reports properly.

When their is such ambiguity in having to make a report, writing a wall of text just to point out what could be wrong in a post, you might end up misleading or pointing the moderator in a different direction far from the context intended and you find those reports not acted upon as expected.

Keeping a report simple and precise makes work a lot easier. In the event that your report isn’t acted on, then you’ll be cool and know you might not have all the reasons why it should have or the post shouldn’t be.

[notocactus]

If moderators give the same feedback (handled) that was given to the first member that reported the post, is that not unfair to the first report?

If the reports are good, I believe moderators mostly treat those reports in a same way, good or bad. There are differences among moderators but not too much so in most report cases, moderator handles would be very similar.

Among reporters who coincidentally reported a same post, I don't believe that they have need of competing with each other for who is the first and how their report results are in comparison with each other. It's very unnecessary.

23. When deciding if a user has broken the rules, the staff have the right to follow their interpretation of the rules.[e]

[Unofficial Guide] Reporting effectively.

[SatoPrincess]

When the same post is reported by 5 or more users, I guess the member that reported the post first will have a note stating that the report has been "handled," right?

For the other members that reported same post before it was handed, what note does their report get?

 If moderators give the same feedback (handled) that was given to the first member that reported the post, is that not unfair to the first report?

Once a post is reported and handled, the post is either deleted or lobed to the right board by the moderator so it’s impossible for other members to report that same post

When  I'm suggesting that the member that reported the post first is the only person entitled to get the report marked as "handled" while those that reported same post late before it was handled should get their report marked as, "already reported by user_A and handled."

I think it’s just vain to want your name on the report so everyone else knows that you’re the first to make a report.

[Mrbluntzy]

what you suggest would only make people hesitant to report, thinking that someone else already reported it so why bother.

Yes, you have a point there but if the admin modify the forum function to indicate when a post has been reported, then anyone wanting to report a post will see that the post has already been reported. I not saying member should be hesitant of reporting a post thinking that is has already been reported, but let the first reporter get the "handled" feedback, while the rest reporters get a different note.
Maybe the suggestion is unnecessary like you said

so it’s impossible for other members to report that same post

That's if the moderators have already acted on the report, but in a situation where the report has not yet been acted upon by a mod, other members will continue to report it until it's handled.