There is a disgraceful post containing full on gay pornography hanging for hours in the lounge section. I’ve reported the post few hours ago but apparently there arent any mods online to take it off. There are quite a few regulars online though, could we give an ability to hide posts to regulars like @Strange or @studiot or @iNowif they agree to it? There are quite a lot of hits to this site per hour and a hanging pornographic photo along posts containing extreme violence is not something we want this forum to be related to. Maybe we could do a vote who we would want to have an ability to hide posts at times when no mods are online? @hypervalent_iodine, @swansont, what do you think? 

Edit: I am not shooting to be one of the people who will have the ability to hide posts, I am in for a few months of intense work and I would not be of use. 

Edited September 23, 20187 yr by koti

I'm not sure if there's a way to do this without making them staff, which unlocks a certain suite of powers and abilities. Also not sure why the software didn't flag the posts, though that may be because the poster had enough seniority, even if he did not have enough maturity.

47 minutes ago, swansont said:

I'm not sure if there's a way to do this without making them staff, which unlocks a certain suite of powers and abilities. Also not sure why the software didn't flag the posts, though that may be because the poster had enough seniority, even if he did not have enough maturity.

Maybe it would be possible to modify one of the existing, not used mod profiles to hide posts and delete all other abilities, creating a new mod profile from scratch would most likely be a pain. I wasn’t aware there is an automated funcionality in the software to flag content, if its actually there it definitely failed the test this time.

Edited September 23, 20187 yr by koti

20 hours ago, koti said:

Maybe it would be possible to modify one of the existing, not used mod profiles to hide posts and delete all other abilities, creating a new mod profile from scratch would most likely be a pain.

I don't think that's how it works.  

20 hours ago, koti said:

I wasn’t aware there is an automated funcionality in the software to flag content, if its actually there it definitely failed the test this time.

It flags posts with too many links and pictures, among other patterns, but is targeted at new users. It's not really setup to detect revenge porn.

Well I think the Lone Ranger (AKA Swans) got on top of it pretty smartly when he arrived.

 

What worries me is that there were several new starters around the time with unusual and a bit controversial posts, some a bit similar to the troll's provocations.

And I wondered it he had slipped in another puppet amongst them for later use?
He must have realised the eventual outcome of his unacceptable actions.

Subsequent to the original bans I also saw both the original account and subsequent puppets listed simultaneously in the members list as online on several occasions.