Unless Alan flagged it he won’t necessarily know why someone needlessly flagged a post. He could ask them I guess but I’m not sure there are enough hours in the day.
Well, given that hiding a post only happens (as far as I know) for reasons of ‘off topic’, ‘spam’ and ‘inappropriate’ I think that unless the system is being misused then the reason is fairly obvious. If it is being misused then there’s nothing anyone can do to change how those people operate.
He can see the reason given and read the post
It’s rare to see something flagged and not be able to figure out why so probably wouldn’t be too many messages
Anything talking about flags is, by definition, off topic in most threads so it’s generally not hard to work those out.
Anything having a go at a sector of society or the community or individual members is likely deemed inappropriate…because why would you do that and not mean it inappropriately?
And spam is quite infrequent because I suspect it gets caught in the automatic filters.
I really don’t see any wild ones out there.
I really don’t agree it’s obvious tbh. The community guidelines say you shouldn’t post low quality content - how on earth can one person distinguish what is and isn’t low quality content to another person? I think this kind of thing is the frequent reason we see discussions about ‘why was that flagged’ because what’s ‘obvious’ to one person may be completely obscure to another.
I often see things flagged and I don’t understand why tbh. Which is why I though a discussion about the reasons people flag might be helpful to understand why those people are flagging things and what people’s bar is, it’s hard to tell on an anonymous system
This is probably a useful time to make sure everyone has read the Code of Conduct:
It sets out guidelines for behaviour, then at the end of says:
Richard then goes on to explain how to flag a post. But it seems that that function is actually quite discoverable…
I have certainly read them!
I do like the way the code of conduct is written. But, the code of conduct is very broad. There’s a wide range in there from ‘this is explicitly offensive and malicious material’ to ‘this is a low quality post’ or ‘this repeats an earlier argument’.
Part of what I meant to say in the OP was that I question the merit of this broad use of flags. I think in cases like the former they are clearly justified, in cases where you think something is ‘low quality’ or you think it could offend an individual, maybe a DM would be much better and quicker at resolving that and actually foster a much better community. A personal and communicative approach vs an anonymous flag is also more consistent with other bits, like it says ‘when we are called out we ask for tips and help toward avoiding reoffending in the future’ - and yet with anonymous flagging that seems very difficult to do.
I DM’d someone last week to say basically “was that needed, it’s just going to start an argument” and they said it was.
If I’d just flagged it, maybe people would have just thought it was the trolling it obviously was and ignored it.
Alan came along and dealt with it in the end anyway.
Flagging isn’t fool proof, it ends up in a tit for tat, someone thinks you’ve flagged them, so they flag you etc.
It’s a bit of a pointless system and not much would change if it was completely removed. Alan did say he’s working on/looking at alternatives/improvements
Yeah I’m aware of that too, part of the reason I thought a discussion would be good? I’ve always managed to resolve things when I’ve sent a DM personally, that’s not going to work if something is deliberate and I guess that’s hard to call.
I do really think the more we can solve as a community without needing to appeal to authority the better, especially between regular posters.
I don’t post a lot but at times a lot of flags seem quite petty. I spend alot time reading and it seems to be some defend Monzo no matter what.
We all have different views and I think sometimes some forum members struggle to see any differing opinions.
Its pointless trying to guess why a post was flagged, that’s between the flagger and moderators. It could be anything or part of a wider issue.
Remember that a post can’t be flagged multiple times either and all flagged posts get reviewed. So enjoy the extra attention a flagged post gets and if there’s nothing wrong it will get removed after a short while anyway
I don’t think any major overhaul needs to happen. I’m sure the moderators would speak to the person or reduce their trust level if they noticed abuse of it.
I don’t know – sometimes it’s a badge of honour
This sort of assumption that gets trotted out time and again is what I struggle with. I think this is almost never true so I always end up looking for alternative motives for people claiming it is.
My reaction to this “explanation” suffers from and illustrates the pointlessness of trying to judge the motivation of others in flags or posts based on no evidence at all.
This sort of assumption that gets trotted out time and again is what I struggle with. I think this is almost[quote=“Feathers, post:25, topic:121460, full:true”]
This sort of assumption that gets trotted out time and again is what I struggle with. I think this is almost never true so I always end up looking for alternative motives for people claiming it
I understand you may struggle with the statement but the evidence is there time and time again.
Only to those who apply that interpretation to events. Everything is subjective, it’s unavoidable.
I think that’s basically the problem with the flagging system though.
Again the board guidelines explicitly encourage people to learn from where they are called out and generally that’s a good thing in any feedback system.
If your feedback system means you can find out people think you are doing something wrong but also it’s pointless to guess what you are doing wrong and actually probably against the rules to ask those people then that’s really quite a poorly designed system imo.
I meant it is pointless for everyone else to guess. We don’t know who flagged them, if it’s a common pattern of bullying, or even if the person is bothered about it.
Moderators know the answer to all these questions and can do something about it. It’s therefore probably best that we leave it between them instead of trying to be vigilantes and getting involved in other peoples drama.
Or if you’re saying that you want feedback after your post has been flagged. In the PM that you receive that tells you this, ask for an impartial view and here is when you’d also mention any wider issues. Not in the topic itself because that would derail it.
I understand @AlanDoe is reviewing how best to optimise the use of flagging.
Dopey question, I suspect, but is it the case that some users can flag and others not? I’m no flagger but I note the option for me is missing.
I think you have to be a certain trust level, then I believe they’ve been tightened up a little more from default.
I can flag, although I’ve only done it once.
You’re a ‘Member’, whereas I’m a ‘Regular’ - so Discourse trust levels are probably at play with this, although the ‘stock’ Discourse forum trust levels (TL0-New, TL1-Basic, TL2-Member, TL3-Regular, TL4-Leader) don’t seem to completely tally with the Monzo forum trust levels (Nothing [New], Member, Regular, Coral Crew)
Suspecting the Monzo forum doesn’t use the TL1-Basic tier and uses a hybrid of TL0 and TL2 for ‘Members’
But you’ll probably know this from helping to look after the FTForum ?!?!