What if we required a reason be entered for chat flags, which was then shown to validators and, if successful, the flagged person?

On one hand, the cynics among us will say that the reasons will always be simple, like "I was offended". On the other, it would still take enough time that some thought might be put into it for those who are flagging out of actual offense taken, and it would change the way flags were seen by validators who paid attention. Furthermore, it would create a means of fostering correction of the problem -- because, be honest, we've all seen flags for fairly random things, and stating what the problem is might help the flagged user correct themselves after the suspension.

  • 2
    Not gonna vote on this one, but I will say that the "How you dare you to flag! This is our room and we allow rudeness here" problem is far more urgent to fix IMHO – BlueSoul Sep 14 '16 at 17:37
  • @SPArchaeologist Of the flags I've seen, most aren't offensive by any reasonable standard. IE, the number "162". A grammar correction. You can't make people be nice to each other. You can encourage it and provide tools to make it easier. – user25296 Sep 14 '16 at 18:08
  • @Bart Fixed it. – user25296 Sep 14 '16 at 18:08
  • @SPArchaeologist would not allowing rudeness be an option? If so, I might take a visit to the room again. – John Dvorak Sep 14 '16 at 18:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .