Suggestions For the Dispute System

[thegirlruka]

Now that the flag dispute system has been out for a while, I've got some suggestions. I guess this thread could be a general feedback/suggestion thread about it though.

 

My first suggestion is to attempt to anonymize the dispute system. I would suggest that any posts from the flagging team (if there's more than grimy) to be made with a bot like @PSNProfiles. It's my understanding that the flagging team is supposed to be anonymous, but with him closing all threads and posting the reasons people have been flagged, he's not really anonymous any more. The second way to anonymize the system would be to have a separate bot create posts on behalf of the disputer while giving that bot's profile the timestamps that are saved in the database for the flag. Doing this would minimize the witch hunts that are common with the current system.

 

My second (separate) suggestion would be to make the dispute subforum a subform of the premium subforum. This would minimize the number of people who see the flags--false and true--to the people who have the ability to flag games. You could make it a rule that only the disputed games can be discussed in the thread and that any other games found should just be reported instead. This would work out because everyone who can see the thread has the ability to do so. I'm not sure if this would work for non-premium members attempting to dispute since they might not be able to see their own dispute thread to answer questions. Perhaps by partially combining this with the first suggestion, the bot could show them posts in that specific dispute thread? Or maybe it could PM with any responses so that they could then respond as the bot?

 

Any thoughts on these suggestions? Any one else have suggestions to improve the system?

Edited April 10, 2017 by Jibril
Edited for clarity

[DaivRules]

I concur. I also support more transparency on the part of PSNProfiles to the disputed, informing them their dispute is only for legitimate disputes, and that under no circumstances will be loading a save be unflagged. Nip those disputes before they waste time. 

Inform them their dispute will not be private to just the staff, but will be shown to anyone who chooses to view the thread.

Im not going to waste more suggestions to civilize the Dispute Threads until more people weigh in and the community has spoken. Let's see if the community wants civility.

[MesopithecusUK]

I think having more transparency would be a great thing.  There needs to be more crystal clear guidelines for people raising a dispute as to what's acceptable for leader board purposes.  

 

The threads have somewhat turned into a free for all so having the anonymity would be a huge help, so that the daggers and pitchforks aren't being bought out. They definitely need to stay on topic more to the games being disputed and if there are additional games, then they should just be flagged and not bought up.

 

I agree with either keeping it a premium member only area, or having say maybe 8-12 delegated members to give their input on the flag.  I also like @Jibril's idea of having the final decision coming from a PSNProfiles account.

 

At the moment, the threads seem pretty humiliating for their original posters and some of the responses don't necessarily paint PSNP in a particularly good light.

[Galactic Hyper Balls]

Leaderboards only matter to players who are getting paid or speed runners.

I do like the trophy page with our own stats and milestones 

but most fast times are manipulated by save files

 

 

[grimydawg___]

It would also help if the disputers learned how to follow instructions when posting....

[BlindMango]

2 minutes ago, grimydawg said:

It would also help if the disputers learned how to follow instructions when posting....

 

It looks like no matter what they type, it reverts to showing "Replace this with why you should be unflagged" every time they hit the publish button and they essentially have to edit the post after publishing. I told Sly about this earlier today, hopefully he can find a fix for that.

Edited April 10, 2017 by BlindMango

[MesopithecusUK]

2 minutes ago, grimydawg said:

It would also help if the disputers learned how to follow instructions when posting....

 

I'm not sure if that is necessarily their fault, as I've seen it said more than a few times that their comments didn't pull through, so they have to edit the topic and retype it out.

 

Thank you for reminding me about that, as that was something else I wanted to bring up.

 

Looks like @BlindMango ninja'd me 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Rach

[colinmazzini]

I thought the disputes were mildly interesting at first and I still do enjoy seeing the people's reasons for dispute. That being said a lot of the responses make people look real unpleasant. For many people the leaderboards really do not matter. In the 2 years I have been here I have maybe looked 5 times and those were because I hit the wrong tab. For others they do and that's fine, but people don't have to be so terrible about it. It has certainly become a you are guilty and can't really prove your innocence. It has kind of soured some of the community for me (obviously not all there are a lot of good people here). It makes me worried that because I post here someone is going to click on my profile see the H next to my name, then start a witch hunt to flag me which is ridiculous I know but then I find there are people here who just enjoy flagging to flag and some how make themselves feel better because some guy might have done something 8 years ago when these new rules didn't exist(by the way to save time my H is because I started Rocksmith a couple years ago and then both my guitar and bass were stolen and the one trophy was bothering me knowing I wasn't getting a new one any time soon.)

[Aranea Highwind]

The dispute sub forum desperately needs an overhaul. Right now the dispute topics are having a rather negative impact on this website, there's too many off topic posts and even those on topic don't exactly seems friendly. Unfortunately the flagged games dispute sub forum is bringing out the worse of the community here and will make lurkers think twice before creating a forum account on this website. People who are caught cheating in no way deserve to be bullied on the dispute topic they create and having it visible for anyone to post in it doesn't help the cause.

 

Assigning an anonymous account to the staff and limiting the access of the dispute sub forum to premium members is a very good suggestion.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Aranea Highwind

[B1rvine]

Keep it exactly how it is, it's 1337 right now.

In all seriousness though, the only thing that should change is the bug that defaults the typed info to "Replace with why you should be unflagged."

[grimydawg___]

1 hour ago, Rach said:

 

I'm not sure if that is necessarily their fault, as I've seen it said more than a few times that their comments didn't pull through, so they have to edit the topic and retype it out.

 

Thank you for reminding me about that, as that was something else I wanted to bring up.

 

Looks like @BlindMango ninja'd me 

 

1 hour ago, BlindMango said:

 

It looks like no matter what they type, it reverts to showing "Replace this with why you should be unflagged" every time they hit the publish button and they essentially have to edit the post after publishing. I told Sly about this earlier today, hopefully he can find a fix for that.

Ah i see.  That can explain Why There are many mess ups...

Edited April 10, 2017 by BlindMango

[Dragon-Archon]

1 hour ago, Jibril said:

My second suggestion would be to make the dispute subforum a subform of the premium subforum. This would minimize the number of people who see the flags--false and true--to the people who have the ability to flag games.

But wouldn't it help if non-premium members could post their input too? I don't know how many premiums and regulars post in the dispute threads though, but if the first suggestion is implemented, that should stop the whole witch hunt part.

 

I do think a few rules would be helpful, such as if other games besides the disputed ones can be discussed or not.

[DaivRules]

11 minutes ago, grimydawg said:

 

Ah i see.  That can explain Why There are many mess ups...

To be fair, as far as the disputers being "bullied," they've cheated other games as well.  So, it's their fault....

 

As someone who is supposed to be reading all the dispute threads, it's mind boggling how you didn't notice that every single one started blank and needed to be edited to insert their reason, again, after already typing it out to get to the forum post. 

 

Also, please define how you are using "fair" in your second sentence as it's pretty indicative of the problem many of us have with the attitude in the Dispute Forum. Seems like you started with "To be fair" and ended up with the opposite of fair. Judging the dispute on other actions ("they've cheated other games") instead of the dispute itself. Which somehow makes it "fair" to openly insult and berate them. That's some pretty twisted logic right there. 

[Lithium_Lemon]

Most people here are so sensitive. We use the other games on their profile to see if they are trustworthy. Say if someone has a hacked game and they claim it was unlocked through some sort of glitch. Well, that may be, but it we look at their profile and find 5 more hacked games, then why should we even consider believing their story? Like @B1rvine said I think the only thing that I believe should be altered is that bug when the forum is first made. 

[KaganDraka4]

17 minutes ago, grimydawg said:

 

Ah i see.  That can explain Why There are many mess ups...

To be fair, as far as the disputers being "bullied," they've cheated other games as well.  So, it's their fault....

 

I completely agree but there few rare cases where some are actually innocent of any wrongdoing and they get criticized and bullied by others for other game trophies that are earned legitimately because of how they decide/choose to earn them whether it's the shortest or longest route. (i.e. legally/legitimately) I know that when I disputed mine where people would act all high and mighty, rude and condescending just for ONLY ONE flag, even when I provided evidence. Hell, I had one jackass that tried to flag me for another game that was legitimate because he couldn't read the damn timestamps and consistencies correctly because he had it out for me for the reason on that one special case I got flagged for. IMO there really needs to be a better system in order to avoid mishaps like this and any other unnecessary complications in the future.

[grimydawg___]

7 hours ago, DaivRules said:

 

As someone who is supposed to be reading all the dispute threads, it's mind boggling how you didn't notice that every single one started blank and needed to be edited to insert their reason, again, after already typing it out to get to the forum post. 

 

Also, please define how you are using "fair" in your second sentence as it's pretty indicative of the problem many of us have with the attitude in the Dispute Forum. Seems like you started with "To be fair" and ended up with the opposite of fair. Judging the dispute on other actions ("they've cheated other games") instead of the dispute itself. Which somehow makes it "fair" to openly insult and berate them. That's some pretty twisted logic right there. 

Actually,  i did notice it....  I even told folks to edit.  I didn't know it was an issue until like a day ago...  Folks who've disputed aren't usually active.  So perhaps they don't know.  How is it not fair to use other games, when they've cheated on the game disputed as well as other games? 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Stevieboy
Unnecessary comment

[thegirlruka]

19 minutes ago, Dragon-Archon said:

But wouldn't it help if non-premium members could post their input too? I don't know how many premiums and regulars post in the dispute threads though, but if the first suggestion is implemented, that should stop the whole witch hunt part.

It seems like most of the posts are from premium members now that someone bought MMDE premium.

[TristanBrown17]

Just going to through out my two cents for whatever it's worth...

 

I've seen a few disputes that have worked for the person disputing the game and many more where the disputee ends up with many more flags. I feel that anonymity on behalf of the flagging staff would be useful, but that the disputee should remain named for their post. The unfortunate part of the process is that there are a lot of flags that go unseen if it weren't for these dispute threads. It's for this reason that I think limiting the conversation to the game in dispute, while important, may allow the person to get off when they really should be put in a further hole. I also believe that hostility shown towards anyone within the dispute threads should be met swiftly with a warning, whether it be verbal or with a warning point. 

[grimydawg___]

Just now, TristanBrown17 said:

Just going to through out my two cents for whatever it's worth...

 

I've seen a few disputes that have worked for the person disputing the game and many more where the disputee ends up with many more flags. I feel that anonymity on behalf of the flagging staff would be useful, but that the disputee should remain named for their post. The unfortunate part of the process is that there are a lot of flags that go unseen if it weren't for these dispute threads. It's for this reason that I think limiting the conversation to the game in dispute, while important, may allow the person to get off when they really should be put in a further hole. I also believe that hostility shown towards anyone within the dispute threads should be met swiftly with a warning, whether it be verbal or with a warning point. 

That ain't up to me.  I just look at reports and i generally have knowledge Of the vast majority the games being disputed and if i don't, i know someone who does.  That's a part of the reason i try to close threads quickly as possible.

[Deceptrox]

I agree with the suggestion that only disputed games should be the topic of the dispute; if the players have suspicious timestamps of other games they should be ignored, you could make a report if you want but don't bring them up to the conversation.

 

Regarding people giving feedback on games, I think it is better if people who gives their opinion on the legitimacy or lack of it of the timestamps has actually played and 100% completed the game that is being disputed so that proper explanations would be given in favor or against the user who is disputing his/her flagged games. E.g. I only flagged users who have impossible timestamps of games that I have 100% completed myself because based on my experience I can tell if the timestamps are possible or not. I won't give feedback of any game I haven't played since it could be either shallow or inaccurate, or both. 

 

Also if any user disputing a flagged game is not very active on the forum and has not given an explanation, enough time should be given to him/her before making a decision and/or closing the thread. 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Deceptrox

[thegirlruka]

4 minutes ago, grimydawg said:

That ain't up to me.  I just look at reports and i generally have knowledge Of the vast majority the games being disputed and if i don't, i know someone who does.  That's a part of the reason i try to close threads quickly as possible.

Wait a second... so you're the entire cheater removal team?

[BlindMango]

So I updated the Dispute Rules & Format page to hopefully better explain how to post, what to say, and so on in that section of the forums, Sly can edit that from there how he sees fit

 

Basically, be professional in the Dispute threads!  

 

 

Edited April 10, 2017 by BlindMango

[grimydawg___]

Just now, Jibril said:

Wait a second... so you're the entire cheater removal team?

No, but i might as well have been for years...  I'm generally on point with reports.  I do occasionally mess up but thats like less than 1%

[MesopithecusUK]

1 minute ago, BlindMango said:

So I updated the Dispute Rules & Format page to hopefully better explain how to post, what to say, and so on in that section of the forums, Sly can edit that from there how he wants 

 

Basically, be professional in the Dispute threads!  

 

 

 

Can those dispute rules, specifically the part about posting a dispute, be placed at the front end of the site too?  Not everyone raising a dispute would check the forums first.

[BlindMango]

Just now, Rach said:

Can those dispute rules, specifically the part about posting a dispute, be placed at the front end of the site too?  Not everyone raising a dispute would check the forums first.

 

That kind of thing is up to Sly, he'd have to implement something like that.