Dispute with mod

Why should you get to challenge a person who reports you? It's just a great way to have a public fight.

But it doesn't matter if its reported or not, mods can and do action comments that haven't been reported and don't action comments that have been reported.

A comment that breaks the rules does so whether its reported or not. And if someone reports a comment that mods decide doesn't break the rules then you challenging them on that report adds nothing to the conversation.

It sounds like you just want to see who is reporting comments so you can argue with them.

Or maybe it would have an alternative effect, maybe people would stop or reduce the amount of times they hit the report button if they are to be held accountable for it, maybe when everybody could see the serial offenders then it would help with moderating.

They're in prison.

Limited posting

Can't create new threads

Can't report posts.

Why is it so easy for this to happen 4 nights a week?

Do Vanilla not have any simple filters they can apply to determine what are BS threads?

And that aside, is there not still a minimum time/post count rule before starting threads?

While I 100% agree with not showing who reported a post, I do think showing how many times a post was reported might help encourage people to also report a post they have an issue with, rather than just start replying and pulling a thread off topic.

If I may make another suggestion, I think adding a bolded mod note to a warned post should be standard across the forum, for all mods.

As a poster who tries not to get in trouble (but sometimes fails) I find it encouraging when I see someone who is obviously trolling, or baiting, or just being plain being uncivil, with a little note on their post saying "warned". Its also serves as a visual deterrent to other posters, when things are getting out of hand.

Just that one word is enough. I don't need any more than that. I don't need to know who reported the post, or how many reported it, nor do I want to know.

But it does make it feel like the mods are more visible, more engaged, and a little more hands on. JMHO.

That's not actually correct, I believe both Overheal, myself and others have been banned. Granted I try to remain within the rules but I've had it happen once. So it's not correct to say they don't face bans.

This is demonstrably false, and to demonstrate it, I got a three day ban for the post below which merely criticised a sentiment…

Every one of Newstalk's presenters air their opinions on the subject they are talking about. It's part and parcel of what drives the audience participation with the shows. Eamon Dunphy did it, George Hook did it, Brenda Power did it, Ivan Yates did it, Damien Kiberd did it, Eamon Keane did it.

For fuck sake, even Tom Dunne and Sean Moncrieff aren't shy of giving their opinion on a matter.

Complaining about Newstalk presenters having an opinion is just the epitome of pathetic & childish whinging.

I’d have to agree with this, even if some of the Harris supporters do get banned it seems to be the majority of Trump supporters get banned, and in a thread where the ratio is probably 10:1 Harris supporters then it seems likely there is some bias taking place. Also given the higher ratio on one side then it’s likely the report function will be used more by one side more too, imo the current report process is too heavy handed, and in the example of that particular thread it’s actually a barrier to an evenly discussed topic.

How can I give the specifics if there is no transparency, that’s the whole point I’m making, have you just completely overlooked the context here?