Deals that are hot shouldn't be able to be spammed + give us the duplicate button already - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

All Comments

(9) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Infact can you just implement the dupe button and put a warning on using the spam button that it should only be used for dodgy sites or referrals?

This site really needs to be made more idiot proof, or remove the ability of idiots to wipe useful content off of the site.
It keeps happening and yet there's so many simple solutions to solve the problem :/

Edited By: Eldini on Feb 27, 2011 22:16: .
#2
The spam button is also to remove duplicate deals, why should a newer post get heat when there is already a post
banned#3
why shouldn't the spam button be removed to remove a duplicate thread?
#4
Eldini
Infact can you just implement the dupe button and put a warning on using the spam button that it should only be used for dodgy sites or referrals? This site really needs to be made more idiot proof, or remove the ability of idiots to wipe useful content off of the site.It keeps happening and yet there's so many simple solutions to solve the problem :/

The trouble with that theory is that the site always attracts better idiots! ;)

How about having a third option in the "report/spam" link; "duplicate"?

When "duplicate" is selected as an option in the pop-up box after clicking this link, the address of the existing (original) thread then needs to be provided.

Some form of automatic parsing of the other thread’s content could be undertaken to determine if this is a valid request as a “duplicate”. In the case of a deal thread; the same merchant, same price, & so on would be compared. If enough attributes match then the request to mark as a “duplicate” is granted.

An automatic comment is placed in the existing thread indicating a potential duplicate has been found with a link to that thread.

The thread being marked as the "duplicate" (or "spam" as it is now) is then locked apart from a link to the previous thread at the top (for visitors to review) & the option to remove (reinstate) the "duplicate" tag (i.e. "unspam").

A "duplicate" thread can be reinstated if enough members click the "not duplicate" link.

Arguably, the member that listed the thread that is considered a "duplicate" cannot reinstate it (to avoid misuse from those that do list true "spam" threads).

A quantity (say, two, or three) other members can reverse the "duplicate" status (after they read the automated comment in the thread considered the original).

The member that listed the thread marked as "duplicate" can, however, post their own comment in the original thread to ask others to review & reinstate (if they consider it has been marked as a "duplicate" in error).

Less moderation intervention is then needed but to avoid abuse of the feature there could be a maximum limit (say, five) on the number of times a thread can be allowed to be reinstated after being marked as a "duplicate".

After this threshold has been reached, the thread is handled as it is now; marked as “spam” & is removed from view. It can be reinstated by contacting the Moderators if it is still considered a genuine listing.

In fact, even if the above suggestion is not implemented & if the method of being able to “spam” threads continues as it is at present, if the member that listed a thread visits it & finds it to be marked as “spam”, a link could be provided to report the thread to the Moderators (that is only visible to the thread creator). That would be a “quick fix” that would save some time in genuine cases of marking threads incorrectly as “spam”.

BFN,

fp.
#5
fanpages

In fact, even if the above suggestion is not implemented & if the method of being able to “spam” threads continues as it is at present, if the member that listed a thread visits it & finds it to be marked as “spam”, a link could be provided to report the thread to the Moderators (that is only visible to the thread creator). That would be a “quick fix” that would save some time in genuine cases of marking threads incorrectly as “spam”.


I think the majority of your suggestion is overcomplicated and unnecessary IMO, but the above quote highlights one of the main problems of the current system.
There's simply no indication to the OP or any thread subscribers that the thread has been removed from the site, and even if you realise it's gone it's not very clear how to contact the relevant people to get it sorted out, or even why it was removed in the first place.


Even just having the system send an automated PM on spam removal, telling the user what's happened and what to do if they'd like the decision reviewed would be an improvement.

The trouble is having a post you took the time to write up being marked as "Spam" is offensive if you're new to the site, seeing as you're basically being told you're littering the site with junk.
(Which is sometimes the case, but is often to do with the site's **** poor search engine, or just plain unfair removal.)

This is especially a problem when nearly every user has the ability to remove any post from the website in this manner.

Fake Edit:
Infact i'd change it so posts that are hot and also posts with over 6 replies cannot be spammed without mod intervention, just so the non deal forums aren't neglected.

Though i'd still vastly favour a dupe button, with a misuse warning implemented on the spam button, but if you'd just like a quick temporary fix so we stop getting good content spammed for no reason, etc.

Edited By: Eldini on Feb 28, 2011 10:09
#6
deanos
The spam button is also to remove duplicate deals, why should a newer post get heat when there is already a post

colinsunderland
why shouldn't the spam button be removed to remove a duplicate thread?


Just to clarify, i'm not saying dupes shouldnt be removed.

The trouble with the current system is legitimate threads are getting spammed for removal by idiots, and then there's absolutely no trace of them on the site.

To prevent this i'm suggesting when a thread has reached a certain status it should require mod intervention to be removed from the site.

I think it's most likely rare that a dupe reaches hot status before being removed, and in this case you can still easily report the thread to a mod for removal using the existing buttons, etc.

Edited By: Eldini on Feb 28, 2011 10:22
banned#7
am I the only one who hates this infantile americanism? It makes no sense and adds nothing to a sentence.

Can we have the duplicate button already please

Deals that are hot shouldn't be able to be spammed + give us the duplicate button already

works ok as it is imo although shouldnt need 3 people to spam a dupe for it to disappear. Should be 1. Any serial offenders get infracted.



Edited By: csiman on Feb 28, 2011 12:19
banned#8
Eldini
deanos
The spam button is also to remove duplicate deals, why should a newer post get heat when there is already a post

colinsunderland
why shouldn't the spam button be removed to remove a duplicate thread?


Just to clarify, i'm not saying dupes shouldnt be removed.

The trouble with the current system is legitimate threads are getting spammed for removal by idiots, and then there's absolutely no trace of them on the site.

To prevent this i'm suggesting when a thread has reached a certain status it should require mod intervention to be removed from the site.


I think it's most likely rare that a dupe reaches hot status before being removed, and in this case you can still easily report the thread to a mod for removal using the existing buttons, etc.

mods have enough to do without having to remove dupes. Easier for them to reinstate dupes that are wrongfully spammed.
#9
If you had simply said "could we have a separate `Duplicate` option, I`d agree with you.

However, I`ve seen numerous instances of duplicate posts getting heat, including some getting more heat than the original, so I don`t see that heat should mean a mod should get involved specially. As csiman said, the mods should get involved if threads are being maliciously reported, but not before.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!