Earlier today, Gather implemented long-awaited enhancements to the content reporting system.
I managed to 'kick the tires' on this system a bit this morning, and the following is a brief summary of what I learned.
Reported content:
- No longer appears on any public listing, even the 'Most Discussed' or 'Most Read/Viewed'.
- Now appears in your content listings, but is viewable only to you.
- No longer appears in tag searches, and I assume will also not appear in article searches (the search index was not working this morning, so I could not perform a complete test).
- Is still labeled as 'flagged by the community', however the reasons identified by the member reporting the content are also displayed (as listed under 'Why are you reporting this?').
- Does not show the membername of the individual whom reported the content, or the free-form text they entered as details to support the action.
- Is still accessible through hyperlinks.
To view the new options, click the 'report this as potentially inappropriate' link at the bottom of this page.
Go ahead...it won't do anything yet.
You will see the new options, and the free-form text box. To hide these options, click the 'report this as potentially inappropriate' link again.
Hopefully, this will lead to significant improvements in the processing of reported content.
What are YOUR thoughts?
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 46
However, I would also like to see a way to 'report' a member, independent of content. Although, if you choose 'comments', or 'article', and then 'impersonation', I suppose you will arrive at the same result (except there are other violations that can occur outside of content, like mail messages).
Still, a great step forward.
As to the flagging, do you think that this will help gather to identify more easily those who tend to flag over and over again and perhaps, put a stop to it?
I like the changes, and my one concern is that hopefully nobody will flag an article with a phony reason just to keep it off the most-read/discussed thread. That's the only drawback I can see to it, but the rest is all good.
Flagged articles might well come unflagged much quickly with this new option.
Thanks for the news!
Marilyn -- I don't see this cutting down significantly on malicious flagging, as the new process only adds on a few extra steps. However, if reviewing and clearing of content takes less effort and time, Gather will have more resource bandwidth available to track down and prevent further abuse.
On thing that bothers me is; what if someone comes in and starts using profanity in the comments, the article get flagged, the whole article vanishes. I don't think its fair to the writer.
I think that is where 'Phase 2' will come into play, in the form of the new comment system. Hopefully, specific comments can be reported, while leaving the content intact.
That suggestion has been submitted to Tom several times (at least!), but you can publish all suggestions to the improve.gather.com (Building a Better Gather) group.
The definition and perception of harassment can be quite broad. I do not believe that this change signifies a modification to the existing TOS or Community Guidelines, therefore the existing definition would apply (whatever that may be).
However, now that these violations are associated with 'buttons', perhaps Gather will provide some clarification.
This article is addressing Gather, and specific functionality therein. Therefore, this is classified as 'fair use' of the trademark.
Others are having this problem as well. You may need to update your ActiveX controls, especially if you are using IE.
Tony Close, Vice President of Operations for Gather, just made a statement regarding the problem you, and others, are experiencing:
"All, this is indeed a problem with this mornings upgrade and it affects users of Internet Explorer 7. This will be corrected later this afternoon."
Now, if we could just control the "Drive-by 1's"!
Thank you for all you have done for Gather and its members. I know people say this all the time, but I want you to know that it is a heartfelt THANKS!
* Copyright Violation
* Harrassment
* Hate Speech
* Impersonation
* Incorrect Adult Settings
* Profanity
* SPAM
* Other
I am interested to see how this plays out, but I do believe it's a step in the right direction -- especially as it applies to Gather.com's enforcement on copyright infringement.
Checking at least one box from both sections, AND adding details are all required (it does state this). You may not submit the report until these actions have been completed. In the details box, you have a maximum of 256 characters for your explanation. However, I am uncertain if there is a minimum character count required.
The changes sound good. Does the flagger HAVE TO enter a reason now to flag something? or is that just an option??
I am thinking that not displaying the flagger's name is probably appropriate as long as they are linked to the flag. The flagger needs to be reviewed when the content is reviewed by the gather staff. That a log is being created of the flaggers, and that gather is going to regularly review those logs and take appropriate action in regard to habitual flaggers. Action also needs to be taken on the people whose flagged content is upheld upon review as inappropriate. This gate needs to swing both ways!
do you have permission to use the gather logo in your article?
pffft....