Originally Posted by madsci_guy

What past history is that? IIRC, I have claimed to have reported posts that were racist and one thread starter that was provoking another poster. Beyond that, I do not believe that you have any evidence of my reporting history. If you do, please bring it up.

Ends up your assumption was wrong. Arent you happy?

The past history of you saying I personally attacked in my post then me receiving a notice from a mod to edit it. Most can put two and two together and assume who reported it in these cases. It is not hard.

I said I don't have evidence of it. And that is the problem with this process. People can hide behind their reports. Are you saying you haven't reported me or that you only have not publicly claimed to have reported me ?

Originally Posted by madsci_guy

Why assume that your post was reported only once?

Because most people don't care what one person says to someone else, especially on the Internet.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

I said I don't have evidence of it. And that is the problem with this process. People can hide behind their reports. Are you saying you haven't reported me or that you only have not publicly claimed to have reported me and thus your point of me me not having concrete evidence and an incorrect assumption ?

That is not a problem with the process. It is an intrinsic design feature of tye process. You do not typically tell someone who has committed a crime the identity of the person who called the cops. That is for sound reasons and the same goes for post reports.

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

That is not a problem with the process. It is an intrinsic design feature of tye process. You do not typically tell someone who has committed a crime the identity of the person who called the cops. That is for sound reasons and the same goes for post reports.

Fine. In cases of actual crimes. But this is the Internet, not a murder case. And it encourages frivolous reporting to the point where mods have had to give points against the reporter for BS reporting.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Because most people don't care what one person says to someone else, especially on the Internet.

It's a fact that on occasion in the past, multiple posters have claimed responsibility for reporting a given post, so I think your theory needs work.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Because most people don't care what one person says to someone else, especially on the Internet.

That doesn't explain the "Report Ninja" who apparently cares a lot about posts not directed at him/her.

And it doesn't explain Will Haney.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

I said "most" cases. My theory needs no work. And you even said on "occasion". The only thing that needs more work is your epidemis.

I'm not too sure what an epidemis is. When/if I find it, I'll get right on it.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Fine. In cases of actual crimes. But this is the Internet, not a murder case. And it encourages frivolous reporting to the point where mods have had to give points against the reporter for BS reporting.

This is the first time ive ever seen you be correct in an issue. You are dead on we need to know who is doing the bogus reporting at least the reports that do not result in an infraction.

Originally Posted by madsci_guy

I'm not too sure what an epidemis is. When/if I find it, I'll get right on it.

Already corrected it before you replied. iPhone has a tendency to auto correct.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Fine. In cases of actual crimes. But this is the Internet, not a murder case. And it encourages frivolous reporting to the point where mods have had to give points against the reporter for BS reporting.

The most cursory glance at the number of points awarded in amy one time window would indicate that points for obnoxious reporting are a rare phenomenon. It is deliciously ironic that in several cases those points have been awarded against some of those who have complained most loudly about the reporting system and what they see as malicious reporting.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Already corrected it before you replied.

Actually the fact that your misspell was in my quote, says no, it wasn't. You have a 5 minute grace period to edit your post before the editing is mentioned.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

This is the first time ive ever seen you be correct in an issue. You are dead on we need to know who is doing the bogus reporting at least the reports that do not result in an infraction.

Wow. I'm hurt you think I've not been correct. How's that Democrat Racism jewel of a thread that you started?

Originally Posted by madsci_guy

Actually the fact that your misspell was in my quote, says no, it wasn't. You have a 5 minute grace period to edit your post before the editing is mentioned.

Wrong again. I corrected it seconds after it was posted.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

You are dead on we need to know who is doing the bogus reporting at least the reports that do not result in an infraction.

If the Mods think that you are frivolously or maliciously reporting posts, you will be warned, and that becomes public on the "Infractions page". What more do you need to know?

Sometimes, it's a case of misunderstanding the rules. You really want to reveal an honest mistake or difference of opinion?