Message Reporting Reasons Thoughts

Fujitsu / Ergopro x
January 5, 2017 at 03:40:51
Specs: Windows XP, N/A
Hi Justin, please review the message reporting facility.

a) it states messages are being reported for removal, whereas this may not be the case..

b) many reporting reasons are provided, but do not cover all eventualities..
Thus the report reviewer may be unable to identify the reason.
Suggest provided an additional non-mandatory field for the reporter to use

e.g. today i wanted to report a thread that appeared to have been solved, and thus perhaps would not be read by others,
I felt it had been mistakenly marked as such, and the marker removed
As reason I selected 'General' as it seemed closest, but was unable to expand further.
Especially as I was NOT suggesting removal of the msg... .

Thanks - Mike


See More: Message Reporting Reasons Thoughts

Reply ↓  Report •


#1
January 5, 2017 at 05:47:52
Hi Mike,

I agree that the terminology should be changed to not emphasize removal so much. However, the reason there is no free-form entry is not an oversight. There used to be a free-form entry a long time ago. It turned out that having that resulted in tons of reports where it was almost impossible to figure out why they were reported. I would much rather expand the listing to cover more possibilities, and leave the general as a failsafe. I realize it might not cover every possibility, but, history tells me a free-form field doesn't work well. One option might be an invisible free form field that is only usable once you select "Other." That way people won't see it until they select that.

BTW, I believe that message you reported was spam, so I did remove it. That is the reason the poster marked it as solved... That is a new type of spam where someone will mention a specific product without much other information inside of it. It can give a contextual SEO boost to that product.

Justin


Reply ↓  Report •

#2
January 6, 2017 at 01:51:55
... erm SEO... Not being very gifted in txt spk nor many of the current acronyms and abbreviations - what doe SEO stand for...?

Reply ↓  Report •

#3
January 6, 2017 at 02:47:19
SEO:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searc...

And several "spammy" posts have become quite deceptive in their methods of this....

"Channeling the spirit of jboy..."

message edited by T-R-A


Reply ↓  Report •

Related Solutions

#4
January 6, 2017 at 05:38:21
Hi all,

Just an update. I have implemented Mike's suggestion in terms of language. It no longer talks about removal. Also, if you select: "Other" for reason, it asks for an explanation. I think that is the best of both worlds.

Thanks!
Justin


Reply ↓  Report •

#5
January 6, 2017 at 05:43:44
Tak for the link and definition...

Occasionally I pose a question (seeking clarity for the record) in the mind set of some learned judges in the UK. They (allegedly_) are often prone to ask the obvious - so as to have the answer legally recorded as a legally acknowledged definition - for future use/consultation if needs-be.

Typically way back in the mid last century: "What is a mini skirt"?

Back to the cherry brandy and left over mince pies...


Reply ↓  Report •

#6
January 6, 2017 at 08:08:07
Hi Justin, thanks for your speedy response and actions.
I appreciate what you mean about not wanting to be swamped with verbiage.

Hi Trvir, I too am often flummoxed by txt speak.
Generally though Google is my friend in such matters.

Here in Contursi Terme village it is very cold out, there is snow in the air but it is not settling. The stops of the surrounding mountains now are snow covered and are looking nice..

Another holiday here today (Epiphany)
20-30 of us sat down at lunchtime to stuff our faces for hours!

Regards - Mike.

message edited by Mike Newcomb


Reply ↓  Report •

#7
January 9, 2017 at 18:10:07
Justin

Liked your mods in #4 - should be useful.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Reply ↓  Report •

Ask Question