Post Checking System - a hugely important piece of functionality

[Stuart Wright]

Folks, the moderator checkpoint system (as it is called on AVForums) is a plugin I commissioned a number of years ago. It's an absolutely vital tool for moderators to quickly and efficiently ensure that the maximum number of posts are checked for rule breaches etc. with the maximum efficiency.
In order to present this functionality suggestion to you as completely as possible, I have made a video.
I hope this video explains why I think this feature is so important, how it works, how simple it is when you get to grips with it, and how I think it's absolutely vital that we have it in xenForo. Ideally as a standard feature, otherwise as a plugin. The video is best viewed in HD and full screen.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

If you think this suggestion would be useful to you in xenForo, please Like this post.
Thanks

 

[Dean]

so are we looking at this system as a mod or part of the actual XF system? I'm for it either way , im just a bit curious.

I would really like this for our forum, it is tremendous. But explaining how to use it to our moderators would not be easy.

I really do not think most forum admins/moderators would need this, so I am assuming this would be better off as a mod.

 

[Princeton]

The staff is already moderating why make them go through all of this work?

It increases staff workload ... click, click, click ... oh yea, click, click, click...
The time it takes to "click, click, click..." could be spent creating fresh content.

Personally, I think a different approach is required.

You should take advantage of what you have - you have over 300,000 members.
If you're going to create custom tool why not make something that empowers your 300,000+ members that can help keep "negative posts" away from public view?

Remind your members of what is acceptable.

Add a Terms of Service policy to your site. (I'm really surprised you don't have one.)
You have a Forum Rules and Conditions but I believe that's only accessible when you register. How many people do you think really reads that? When they click Register the last thing on their mind is to read a 100 page of rules. (can they go back to it?)

Infract people based on TOS - remind them that you are serious.

Create a better Contact Us / Help / Frequently Asked Questions - these are all unusable in their current form. Why have a Help and a Frequently Asked Questions section? That is confusing.

I'm guessing at one time your site was growing by huge numbers but now the numbers are falling or have plateaued. If you don't do something soon you will continue to see a decline. I've seen your site change so many times - yet, it still has a long way to go.


Basically what I'm trying to say is that you can improve your numbers by focusing on other things.


By the way, this request of yours would be great if it was all ajax driven ... click a button and done.

Overall I do Like the suggestion.

 

[DamienDarwick]

This would be extremely effective for large forums with lots of mods etc. If I remember this one correctly, its the one that mods do not check the same posts & threads over and over, they would know when another mod checked it for validity & infraction of the rules etc. That being said it could be useful on small forums too come to think of it.

 

[Tanax]

No, having post approval hides posts until they are approved. The Moderator Checkpoint system is not the equivalent of the vBulletin 'moderated' posts functionality which hides posts until they are approved.
Forcing approval of messages before they are visible is not a good way to run a forum because your community will expect their posts to be visible immediately.
The reason why you check threads in the way used by the Moderator Checkpoint system is to ensure that
a) your moderators are reading through the posts, reacting to any potentially libellous posts and anything else which breaks your rules and
b) your moderators don't duplicate effort in checking threads.

Actually it is a great way to run your forum. If you have a user who have several warnings for misbehaviour you might want to put him into moderation que every time he makes a post/thread. However, this shouldn't be done for every user.

 

[Stefi Таня]

I like this function. I would like to use it on xenforo

 

[Xarcell]

I also like this function and would like to see it in xenforo, but ajax driven.

 

[Stuart Wright]

Actually it is a great way to run your forum. If you have a user who have several warnings for misbehaviour you might want to put him into moderation que every time he makes a post/thread. However, this shouldn't be done for every user.

So you are talking about specific troublesome users. Maybe you might want to pop them into a user group which requires moderation of all their posts.
However I am talking about everyone else. People expect their posts to be publicly visible right after they have hit the submit button. Therefore we need a system which facilitates the indication of which posts your moderators have checked.

 

[Shelby]

I also like this function and would like to see it in xenforo, but ajax driven.

I agree, too much clicking and reloading. Simplify it, take it to the next level. Otherwise, it's excellent.

 

[Tanax]

So you are talking about specific troublesome users. Maybe you might want to pop them into a user group which requires moderation of all their posts.
However I am talking about everyone else. People expect their posts to be publicly visible right after they have hit the submit button. Therefore we need a system which facilitates the indication of which posts your moderators have checked.

I still don't really see any use of this. Perhaps it's just that not every board needs this. Even with this system, posts against the rules might be posted during your moderators sleep. What happens then? I just, really don't see this as a core feature. On the board I'm a staff-member on the regular members always report posts that are against the rules(and/or the law) so nearly nothing is being left behind for more than 12 hours.

 

[Xarcell]

I still don't really see any use of this. Perhaps it's just that not every board needs this. Even with this system, posts against the rules might be posted during your moderators sleep. What happens then? I just, really don't see this as a core feature. On the board I'm a staff-member on the regular members always report posts that are against the rules(and/or the law) so nearly nothing is being left behind for more than 12 hours.

I just have to ask, I'm not picking on you or anything, but did you see the video?

 

[Stuart Wright]

When you have thousands of posts every day (from 7 to 10 in our case), you can't rely on your members to report every problem post. In any case you shouldn't rely on your members since there is a lot at stake if someone, for example, makes grossly insulting personal remarks which are publicly visible on your forums for some time, you could get sued and lose your house. Believe it.
I made the video to show how the system currently works for us. I would, of course, welcome Ajax functionality and I know that if it is built into the core product, Kier and Mike will put their own slant on it. Provided it does the job, it doesn't matter. For example, you might automatically display threads in order of descending number of unchecked posts for moderators who are in moderation mode.

 

[Tanax]

I just have to ask, I'm not picking on you or anything, but did you see the video?

Yes I did. My statement still stands. Even with this system, posts are visible at all times. If your moderators are asleep, it doesn't matter if the posts checking system is there or not because an unchecked post will still be visible so it doesn't really fill any valuable function.

When you have thousands of posts every day (from 7 to 10 in our case), you can't rely on your members to report every problem post. In any case you shouldn't rely on your members since there is a lot at stake if someone, for example, makes grossly insulting personal remarks which are publicly visible on your forums for some time, you could get sued and lose your house. Believe it.
I made the video to show how the system currently works for us. I would, of course, welcome Ajax functionality and I know that if it is built into the core product, Kier and Mike will put their own slant on it. Provided it does the job, it doesn't matter. For example, you might automatically display threads in order of descending number of unchecked posts for moderators who are in moderation mode.

I don't know how it works in the states or wherever you are but getting sued for an insult over the net could hardly be a reality. Ever heard of 4chan? Or the swedish forum called flashback? On flashback they reacently made a forum member hang himself. He made a thread about him wanting to commit suicide, the rest of the members thought it was a troll and cheered him on, he also made a livefeed, showing the whole thing. Should those members get sued? Yes I think so. But they won't. So insulting someone could hardly be the cause of someone sueing the owner of a forum.

But enough of that. I don't know the law nor how it works where you live so it doesn't really matter. I'm sure Kier and Mike would be able to whoop this system up VERY nice but I still think it should be a modification outside the core. It might work well for you and I'm not saying it's a bad suggestion but I don't have any use for it. Just my 2 cents.

/Tanax

 

[Stuart Wright]

Yes I did. My statement still stands. Even with this system, posts are visible at all times. If your moderators are asleep, it doesn't matter if the posts checking system is there or not because an unchecked post will still be visible so it doesn't really fill any valuable function.

Posts need to be visible at all times. This system is there to instantly show the moderators which threads contain posts which need checking and a single click takes them to the first unchecked post. It's the fastest method I can think of which facilitates the removal of problematic posts quickly and efficiently. Plus you install several moderators for each forum, there is more chance that the forums are checked over a broader period.

I don't know how it works in the states or wherever you are but getting sued for an insult over the net could hardly be a reality. Ever heard of 4chan? Or the swedish forum called flashback? On flashback they reacently made a forum member hang himself. He made a thread about him wanting to commit suicide, the rest of the members thought it was a troll and cheered him on, he also made a livefeed, showing the whole thing. Should those members get sued? Yes I think so. But they won't. So insulting someone could hardly be the cause of someone sueing the owner of a forum.

But enough of that. I don't know the law nor how it works where you live so it doesn't really matter. I'm sure Kier and Mike would be able to whoop this system up VERY nice but I still think it should be a modification outside the core. It might work well for you and I'm not saying it's a bad suggestion but I don't have any use for it. Just my 2 cents.

/Tanax

We are in the UK. Imagine if someone on your forum makes a serious and detailed accusation of paedophilia against a public figure. It stays on your forum unnoticed until someone reports it to the accused person. It's been online a couple of days. Long enough for the accused to to make a serious claim against you of libel. Worse, imagine Google spiders the post and it starts cropping up in search engines.
Just how much trouble do you think you could get into? Ok so it's not likely to happen very often, but if you have a comprehensive moderation system in place, you are more likely to find the post and even if you don't find it immediately, at least you can use the moderation system to illustrate, in your defence, that you have methods in place to combat such posts.

 

[Tanax]

We are in the UK. Imagine if someone on your forum makes a serious and detailed accusation of paedophilia against a public figure. It stays on your forum unnoticed until someone reports it to the accused person. It's been online a couple of days. Long enough for the accused to to make a serious claim against you of libel. Worse, imagine Google spiders the post and it starts cropping up in search engines.
Just how much trouble do you think you could get into? Ok so it's not likely to happen very often, but if you have a comprehensive moderation system in place, you are more likely to find the post and even if you don't find it immediately, at least you can use the moderation system to illustrate, in your defence, that you have methods in place to combat such posts.

Again, I must point out that I really don't know the law very well but it seems quite illogical to sue the forum owner in that case. He did nothing. It's like if you're in some store, let's say IKEA('cause everyone knows what that is ) and someone makes a note and put up there that has a serious and detailed accusation of pedophilia against a public figure. Do you think that public figure will sue IKEA then for not noticing the note? Of course not. It's just stupid to do that. Obviously he/she will sue the person who wrote the note in the first place. They have cameras for detecting such stuff. Forums have usernames and IP checking.

 

[Stuart Wright]

Again, I must point out that I really don't know the law very well but it seems quite illogical to sue the forum owner in that case. He did nothing. It's like if you're in some store, let's say IKEA('cause everyone knows what that is ) and someone makes a note and put up there that has a serious and detailed accusation of pedophilia against a public figure. Do you think that public figure will sue IKEA then for not noticing the note? Of course not. It's just stupid to do that. Obviously he/she will sue the person who wrote the note in the first place. They have cameras for detecting such stuff. Forums have usernames and IP checking.

It's clear you don't know the law because I'm afraid you are 100% wrong. The person would sue Ikea. Let's take another example. Say a customer drops a drink on the floor in Ikea. Another customer slips on it and injures themselves. The injured person would sue Ikea.
Above you state that the forum owner 'did nothing'. Again this is wrong. The forum owner is responsible for the platform/publication which is publishing the libellous comments. It may seem illogical to you, but you need to think about it some more.

 

[Alpha1]

Folks, the moderator checkpoint system (as it is called on AVForums) is a plugin I commissioned a number of years ago. It's an absolutely vital tool for moderators to quickly and efficiently ensure that the maximum number of posts are checked for rule breaches etc. with the maximum efficiency.
In order to present this functionality suggestion to you as completely as possible, I have made a video.

The video in the first post is no longer available. Please upload it again.

I have posted an addon request here as well: http://xenforo.com/community/threads/post-checking-system.53446/

 

[Chris D]

This will be in development shortly.

 

[FloV]

What happend with this?

 

[Chris D]

Just to be clear; my post above was before I worked for XF.

It was developed as an add-on named Moderator Checkpoint commissioned by Stuart Wright. It will be updated to XF2 at some point.

 

[Digital Doctor]

A more efficient version of this would be to have posts flagged by the community.



As opposed to a monolithic "report" method, have varying degrees of reporting like:
- Report
- Rules violation
- Spam
- Moderate please
- whatever.

Different rules can be setup for different reasons and differing levels of moderation teams.

Use the community, dont just moderate them.
Like admin / moderation time isn't valuable.
They should be focused on making more content ....