Email notifying the deletion of an abusive post

Report · Nov 09, 2009

When performing a test to try to understand how the deletion of posts reported as abusive works, I had a post deleted, and received an email stating that

The content you posted below was reported for
abuse and removed by our moderators

Now that Zeno Bokor has explained the process for me, I would like to suggest that this text is modified so that it clearly explains that the post was not only reported for abuse, but also considered as abusive by at least one moderator.

I have opened this discussion following Zeno's suggestion.

Report · Nov 14, 2009

Claudio,

Hope I got the attribution correct this time...

I got one of these some years back. There was little in the way of discussion as to why my post was removed, though upon reflection, I was able to fill in those blanks. It would be good to explain, so that the error/infraction did not happen again. Besides the tacit removal of a post, there should be a learning aspect, as well.

In a food/wine forum, I've had dozens of posts removed. With the vast majority, there was a full disclosure of the why. Often, there is some debate, as to the validity of the censoring, but not always. Still, there were a few, where it was "we think that you stepped over the line, so you are history in this thread."

Hunt

Report · Nov 14, 2009

That was not my point at all. And I am surprised to be the only one who thinks that there is a great difference between having a post removed just because it was reported as abuse, or because it was considered abusive by one or more moderators.

Report · Nov 15, 2009

Claudio, hiding behind the curtain is what protects the mods from explaining what they consider to be abusive when the rest of the world might not. It's pretty clear it's a do as I say, not as I do.

Report · Nov 15, 2009

I had a post removed as abusive answering a question Acrobat Mac group just last week a perosn who shall remanin nameless because if I do I might get maked as abusive again. what posted one of his diatribes. In answering the girls(woman's) post I added this line as the famous qoute in the Wizard of Oz goes: "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

I was obvious he had it marked as abusive. yet there was no content in it, that would be considered abbusive. I would loved to have had an email adress to send a protest to. But since the moderators don't do that. I have one mark aginst me unjustified.

Report · Nov 15, 2009

PJ,

do you think it was a mod or a user?

Report · Nov 15, 2009

It was a User of the system . Our resident pest that Adobe can't get rid of. you know the one.

Even as Strict as JVD is or Robo is, ther is nothing in that pose that anyone could consider abbusive. It was trictly done for spite only.

Report · Nov 15, 2009

Again, this is not the point of my suggestion, unless your message was removed simply because it was reported, without anyone checking if it was indeed abusive or not.

I am asking for the text of the notifying email to be changed from

"... was reported for abuse and removed by our moderators"

to anything that does not imply that it was deleted just because it was reported, unless the information provided in another thread by Zeno Bokor is inaccurate. He said that, to be removed, the reported message had to be considered as inappropriate by at least one moderator, which at least for me is quite a different matter. And I would consider it highly abusive if any message was removed automatically on the first report for abuse.

Report · Nov 25, 2009

Yes it was reported and deleted and I received notice, and what I said had nothing in it to warrant such removal. Therefore I believe it was removed automatically without moderator even seeing it.

Report · Nov 27, 2009

Claudio,

Were I the recipient of such, my preference would be something along this line. "Your post to ______ was deleted because it was reported for abuse. We deemed it to be so for the following reasons: ______, ______, ______."

There can be reasons, that the poster might not immediately be aware of. As I have only had one post removed here, I do not have a frame of reference. However, on some other fora, I have had several deleted. There, I got the full notification, with the reasons. I could see the point in some, but in the majority, a discussion ensued. In one case, the deletion was reversed, though in some it came down to "look, we make the rules, and enforce our take on those. You are a poster, and you will abide by our decision, or be forever banned." Let's just say that I liked the full discussions much better, whether I made my point, or not. There was discourse and that was important to me.

Maybe I expect too much out of various fora?

Hunt

Report · Nov 27, 2009

BTW, the Adobe post that was deleted was a reference that I had inadvertently made, regarding the use of Hollywood FX from Pinnacle in PrPro. I could easily see how this might have stepped over the line, and do not resent the deletion. I should have given the info from another direction, and also stressed that the user needs to "own" Hollywood FX, BEFORE they use those in their copy of PrPro. No biggie. I did not go far enough, and rather deviated off center. Should have read through things much more closely, especially between the lines.

Hunt

Report · Nov 27, 2009

The software totally automates email that goes out. We don't have the ability to choose to either send or not send it, nor to personalize it in any way. The mods are not happy about it, but we can't do anything about it either.

Report · Nov 27, 2009

Dorothy,

Thank you for pointing this out.

From a user's perspective, you can obviously understand consternation on our part. I think that the vast, vast majority of the users here strive to do the best to post within the guidelines and rules.

Personally, I wonder if some do not abuse the Report Abuse button, especially as it seems that an unregistered "guest" can do so. Maybe that has been changed, as of Black Monday?

Just some thoughts,

Hunt

Report · Nov 27, 2009

the_wine_snob wrote:
Dorothy,
Thank you for pointing this out.
From a user's perspective, you can obviously understand consternation on our part. I think that the vast, vast majority of the users here strive to do the best to post within the guidelines and rules.
Personally, I wonder if some do not abuse the Report Abuse button, especially as it seems that an unregistered "guest" can do so. Maybe that has been changed, as of Black Monday?
Just some thoughts,
Hunt

If you get one of those automated emails saying you were reported for abuse but a mod dismissed it; I would not let it bother you. Rather, consider it a "tip of the hat" to you.

The Abuse button is "abused" to some extent; thats why there is moderation of it. But; the majority of reports are for legit things like spam; and for that it is a handy little tool; imho.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

The Abuse button is "abused" to some extent; thats why there is moderation of it.

Curt,

Thanks for that. While I have never, to my knowledge, been a victim of that, I can easily imagine it happening. During the screen name turmoil, I visited the fora as a "Guest." I was surprised to see the Report Abuse button (only one available to a Guest) there. This could do potential damage to a thread, and could be utilized by anonymous poster. One rec. would be to disable this button for Guests. That way, anyone who utilizes it would no longer be anonymous, hiding behind that veil. Just a thought. The loss of anonymity often causes people to act a bit differently, and they often show more respect. There is an old adage: "an armed society is a polite society." While there are many other implications to that adage, I can easily apply an interpolation of it to fora.

Still, I have yet to feel the slings and arrows, that others seem to have - regardless of what the actual motivation might have been, that prompted them.

Appreciate your perspective on this,

Hunt

Report · Nov 28, 2009

the_wine_snob wrote on 11/28/2009 4:43 AM:

Personally, I wonder if some do not abuse the Report Abuse button, especially as it seems that an unregistered "guest" can do so. Maybe that has been changed, as of Black Monday?

That has not changed. Users that are not logged in can not and could not

report abuse. What changed is that now the link isn't visible while

previously it was visible but lead to an 'acces denied' page.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

That has not changed. Users that are not logged in can not and could not report abuse. What changed is that now the link isn't visible while previously it was visible but lead to an 'acces denied' page

Jochem,

In my limited experience, that has not been the case. As per a reply above, I was logged-out, and did not pick up on it. I hit the Report Abuse button (the only one then available to me), thinking that it was the Reply button. I got the Abuse editing screen. Now, I did not submit, as I recognized where I was, and quickly came to understand how I had gotten there. Now, maybe if I had submitted my "reply," I would have gotten the Access Denied page, but did have the Abuse editing screen up.

If I read correctly, it would have been at the next step, that I'd have been shut down. Is that correct? Are you also saying that when a Guest hits the Report Abuse button, the only one available, they will not get through? I have never tried it, but if I read your reply correctly, have to admit that I feel better about things now.

Thanks for the comments,

Hunt

Report · Nov 28, 2009

the_wine_snob wrote on 11/28/2009 7:43 PM:

>> That has not changed. Users that are not logged in can not and could not report abuse. What changed is that now the link isn't visible while previously it was visible but lead to an 'acces denied' page

In my limited experience, that has not been the case.

Abuse reports are stored in the jiveAbuse table and the jiveAbuse table

has a not nullable userID field for the user making the abuse report:

http://www.jivesoftware.com/builds/docs/clearspace/latest/DatabaseSchemaGuide.html#jiveAbuse

And since this runs on PostgreSQL, you can safely bet that that

constraint is enforced, making it impossible to have an abuse report

without a submitter. (Incidentally you can also see where the limit of

255 characters on the abuse report comment originates.)

Report · Nov 28, 2009

Jochem,

Thank you for that detailed reply. I'll go an follow your link.

Appreciated,

Hunt

Report · Nov 27, 2009

The notice I received was in the acrobat forums and was there long enough for the op to read. The last line added that caused unfounded deletion was "As the saying goes as quoted in the wizard of Oz: pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" it was in reference to a person who even adobe can't get rid of. I will not say anymore at this point, for fear that a abuse report will be made again just by my quoting this. By that person. In this case there was nothing said that would warrant abuse. Had someone said that to me I would blown it off, and went on with my business.

So I believe that no moderator even looked at this. I've had one other item reported at the very begining and a moderator sent a note saying the post was reviewed and found not to be abusive.

I knew from the start, when this abuse button was added that it would be a target for abuse, from individuals that have a grudge, or want to make trouble.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

PjonesCET wrote:
So I believe that no moderator even looked at this. I've had one other item reported at the very begining and a moderator sent a note saying the post was reviewed and found not to be abusive.

I doubt very much that a moderator would delete a post without reading it. I think a more likely explanation is that the person who rejected it did so by mistake.

When an item is reported as abuse, there are two options: Approve and Reject. If the moderator decides to reject the abuse report, the correct option is not Reject, but Approve. The idea is that you're approving the original post. Selecting Reject deletes the original post, and zaps off a "bad boy/girl" message to the OP. This caught out several moderators. I had a post of mine accidentally deleted by a colleague who was confused by the naming of the options. Hopefully, all moderators now understand how it works.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no system that keeps a record of how many times someone is reported for abuse. So, I think it highly unlikely that someone will get bumped from the system as a result of malicious reports. In fact, given the large number of forums and users, it's remarkable how few abuse reports there are every day. In my experience, most of them report spam; a handful complain about personal abuse; and very few appear to be maliciously motivated.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

I think a more likely explanation is that the person who rejected it did so by mistake.

David,

That could be a very likely scenario. Back when I was struggling with the impromptu log-outs, I was merrily posting away, and hit my normal Reply button. Boom! I was in the Report Abuse edit screen. As I had gotten logged out, the Reply button had been replaced by only the Report Abuse button. Luckily, it was obvious to me, that I wasn't "in Kansas" anymore, so a quick Cancel, and then a re-log-in took care of things.

As I do not know the mechanics of the Report Abuse submissions, I can imagine that some folk get to that screen, and do not realize that they are not posting/replying to the thread, but are "reporting abuse."

Hunt

Report · Nov 28, 2009

This last item references has been done within the last couple of weeks.

The last I will say about the subject.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

PjonesCET wrote:
This last item references has been done within the last couple of weeks.

I can't remember when it happened, but a new moderator deleted a fellow moderator's post in the past month or so as a result of misunderstanding the Approve/Reject options. So it still does happen occasionally. I didn't see your post that was deleted, so can't judge whether it was done intentionally in your case or by accident. However, from what you have written here, I find it hard to believe a moderator would consider it objectionable.

The moderation system provides a direct link to the entire thread. I always check the item in context before making a decision. If it's spam or deeply offensive, I take action immediately by deleting or editing the item. Similarly, if there's nothing objectionable, I approve the item (reject the abuse report). Anything else, I leave to a moderator who contributes regularly to that forum, as I don't feel it's appropriate for an outsider to intervene. I spend most of my time in the Dreamweaver forums, where we get about one abuse report a month.

Report · Nov 28, 2009

David,

FWIW, I most often see small segments deleted and annotated by a MOD. In the product fora, where I spend the most time, I cannot recall a post being deleted in over a year. Now, a few have been moved to the Video Lounge, where most feel that they belong, as they are in no way technical. Still, in that one year time frame, there have probably been there of those, at the most. Now, there have been small deletions within a reply, but most of those were because of personal info, etc., and in all cases, that I recall, the MOD has noted the reason for the deletion.

Now, my experience does not span THAT many fora, and almost all are product-centric. Elsewhere? I haven't a clue.

Thanks,

Hunt