Originally Posted by AintQytRite

I don't think. It's obvious.

Quality

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

I don't think. It's obvious.

I think we have a winner for "best use of a period" right there.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

Yes we should know every reporter. Users should not be reporting post that they aren't sure breaks the rules. Only obvious serious examples should be reported.

What makes you think that the reporters are not sure?

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

Yes we should know every reporter. Users should not be reporting post that they aren't sure breaks the rules. Only obvious serious examples should be reported.

What possible benefit would there be in such information being made public? What use would it be put to?

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

What possible benefit would there be in such information being made public? What use would it be put to?

Because I would know who I need to tone it down with in my responses so as not to ruffle their skirt

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

What possible benefit would there be in such information being made public? What use would it be put to?

Why, it would make it possible to ridicule the accuser, of course.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Because I would know who I need to tone it down with in my responses so as not to ruffle their skirt

What if they don't wear a skirt?
Since anyone or everyone can spot a violation of rules and report a post, not just those to whom you are responding, you'd have to tone down all your remarks across the board. Say, that might not be a bad idea anyway.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

I don't think. It's obvious

we all know. Especially with those threads you started as evidence.

Originally Posted by wrightme

LOL, I have.

So far, no 'proof' that those you accuse have reported anyone, except your own bare speculation.

How many times have you and mad reported me? Eagerly awaiting an honest answer.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

We have already been over this but the same reason we need to know who is infracted.

No one actually showed WHY they want access to that information. They just seem to feel it is wanted.


And, typically, those who claim to want it, want to do something with that information.

Originally Posted by AintQytRite

Yes we should know every reporter. Users should not be reporting post that they aren't sure breaks the rules. Only obvious serious examples should be reported.

That is your opinion. And, not all persons will interpret posts identically, nor will all persons agree on what counts as 'obvious.' That is part of why it is moderators who make the actual decision.


AQR, you seem to feel that only one person will ever report a post. It is likely that many more than that may report posts that break rules. Frankly, you don't understand that posting that will be information overload. Kind of like watching event logs on an Active Directory server.

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

Because I would know who I need to tone it down with in my responses so as not to ruffle their skirt

I just reported a post... I had not even posted on that thread.

I wasn't even the subject of the post.

Further, the site owner encourages help in identifying posts that break the rules.
I personally find it annoying to have to read posts that break the rules.

lol

Originally Posted by Kenny Sharp

I just reported a post... I had not even posted on that thread.

I wasn't even the subject of the post.

And, since that doesn't fit in HIS chosen meme, he ignores that as possible.

He appears to have tunnel-visioned himself into believing it ONLY happens the way he sees it, and is ignoring any other possibilities.


AQR, when you either see a warning in the 'recent warnings' list, or in your inbox, it does NOT mean that only one person reported, nor does it mean that 'only the ruffled person' reported that post.


I have personally seen posts by others, directed at me as a personal attack, and left them alone. Later, I would come back and observe a warning for that post. At times, I hadn't even SEEN the post that got warned, until later. In those cases, I would get accused of reporting the post, in spite of accurately denying reporting it, and in spite of not even having been online to see the post in the first place in some cases.



Your 'theory' is simply not valid. It is only ONE possible meme, and is NOT indicative of real-world activity.

Originally Posted by Kenny Sharp

I just reported a post... I had not even posted on that thread.

I wasn't even the subject of the post.

Jealousy will get you nowhere.