* * * JREF Forum Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Appeal Process is the Stuff of Nightmares Started at 30th May 2010 12:42 PM by Foolmewunz Visit at http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=176820 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : Foolmewunz Date : 30th May 2010 12:42 PM Thread Title : Appeal Process is the Stuff of Nightmares There's something wrong in Camelot. The appeals process, frankly, bites it! I had a legitimate appeal. Not on an infraction, but on an AAHing of what I felt was pertinent material in a particular FM thread. it took 8 days to address it. And the "addressing" consisted of "No, you're wrong." This is the second time this has happened (also with the unseemly delay). There is no discussion. Just a ruling. No indication of how that ruling was made, nor who was involved in the decision. As everyone is aware, all appeals are shut off to those not involved. That means 6 to 8 "judges" on one side, and one appelant, alone on the other side. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : UNLoVedRebel Date : 30th May 2010 05:11 PM The appeal section is a waste of time. Don't use it. The section is window dressing at best. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : lionking Date : 30th May 2010 05:17 PM Isn't this as it has always been? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : UNLoVedRebel Date : 30th May 2010 05:21 PM Yup -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : rjh01 Date : 30th May 2010 07:02 PM Does anyone have any facts? Check this out http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4799394#post4799394 During the month of May, about 180 infractions were handed out. 19 threads were created in Appeals during May; of those 19, only 12 were actually appeals. (The rest were complaints or nastygrams, etc.) Of those 12 appeals, 4 were upheld and the mod action was reversed. That's a success rate for appeals of 30%. The process works, and it works quite well. The thread is worth a read as well. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : lionking Date : 30th May 2010 07:08 PM The point is, I believe, that there are no reasons given for the dismissal or success of an appeal, and appeals take so long to be resloved. Thes not unreasonable requests. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Foolmewunz Date : 30th May 2010 07:46 PM Does anyone have any facts? Check this out http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4799394#post4799394 The thread is worth a read as well. I'm sure you didn't mean "facts", 'cuz ya know, that'd be saying that my statements weren't. Maybe you meant "stats"? Yeah, since nothing has happened since May of 2009 'round here to change anything, Im sure a snapshot of the appeals figures from a year ago should be applied. If appeals stats aren't regularly provided and an actual discussion doesn't take place, then it's a bogus system. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : chillzero Date : 30th May 2010 08:18 PM There's something wrong in Camelot. The appeals process, frankly, bites it! I had a legitimate appeal. Not on an infraction, but on an AAHing of what I felt was pertinent material in a particular FM thread. it took 8 days to address it. And the "addressing" consisted of "No, you're wrong." This is the second time this has happened (also with the unseemly delay). There is no discussion. Just a ruling. No indication of how that ruling was made, nor who was involved in the decision. As everyone is aware, all appeals are shut off to those not involved. That means 6 to 8 "judges" on one side, and one appelant, alone on the other side. Yep. The usual way to work with this is to firstly PM a mod team member to ask them if they can assist in getting your thread read and acted on by an admin when it has not been addressed in a week or more. Then, if the appeal is denied, PMing a mod to ask if they can help explain this, although with the understanding that the mod is not obligated to respond, and may indeed not be aware of the reasons for the decision (a mod might take time to ask an admin, if you are lucky and polite enough). It has always bothered me that the process is not reviewed by the admins to address this by-product of additional effort on the rest of the mod team, which to a large degree could be managed by the minor effort taken to add an extra sentence explaining their decision. I do accept to a point the current thinking from the admins that adding extra information leaves room for debate to continue and people often feel the need to argue against that or nitpick the details. Simply stating "Appeal denied" removes that .... risk. However, and I think it was Wolfman who made a suggestion previously about the minimal wording that could be offered in many cases, a more informative response could be at least trialled for a while. At worst, people argue back against the admins, who can simply ignore further PMs on the matter - and this probably isn't that different from how things go now, because I know people sometimes still PM admins or mods anyway to ask why the appeal was denied (ETA: I still get occasional PMs asking for my take on why some of these decisions occur, despite not even being on the team). Then we can return to the current method. At best, the complaints after appeals are reduced as people understand why the appeal was denied, and they also understand where they went wrong; can avoid it in future. Additionally, some people who believe that they do understand why an appeal was denied and take further actions based on that (erroneous) belief may actually be shown what it is that they misunderstand, and so resulting bouts of gaming the system / abusing the report function / angry complaints in FM / leaving the forum / protest threads, avatars and actions might potentially be reduced. Darat / Lisa ... what would be the harm in trying out a period of providing a brief explanation about why appeals are denied - the appeals thread is always closed immediately to prevent discussion? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Stellafane Date : 31st May 2010 04:11 AM Does anyone have any facts? Check this out http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4799394#post4799394 During the month of May, about 180 infractions were handed out. 19 threads were created in Appeals during May; of those 19, only 12 were actually appeals. (The rest were complaints or nastygrams, etc.) Of those 12 appeals, 4 were upheld and the mod action was reversed. That's a success rate for appeals of 30%. The process works, and it works quite well. The thread is worth a read as well. I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense. That's like claiming flipping a coin to determine the verdict in a legal trial "works" because 50% of the time the defendant is found innocent. Success isn't defined by some percentage, it's defined by whether or not appeals that have merit are upheld and the ones that don't are not. It's also defined by whether or not the system is transparent enough to reveal why a particular appeal is upheld or denied, so the person making the appeal learns from the process. The quote you have above says nothing about this, and claiming this as evidence that "the process works quite well" is just plain silly. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : rjh01 Date : 31st May 2010 07:25 AM You can expect that the appeal process to be slow as there are at best only 3 (if you include Jeff Wagg) people who could process an appeal. Worse both Darat and Lisa are volunteers. That means that if anything else happens in their lives then this job would not get done. As for the quality of the result, it would be difficult to prove one way or the other if the right cases get upheld. If anyone knows of an easy method, well they could get rich. Not just from reforming this forum, but from reforming the justice systems of the world. Chillzero has suggested that the reasons for the result be put in the appeal. I know in one case this was done (mine). The post was You reproduced a copyrighted image "just to be provocative". It is still a copyrighted image regardless of who uploaded it originally. Appeal is denied, thread closed. Yes it does not say much but I doubt that more words would be any more useful. This was done within 24 hours of me lodging the appeal. The only other way I know it could be improved is if certain threads could be read by all members. That issue has been discussed before. Does anyone know of any other method of improving things? Or is this just another thread to criticise this forum and the way it is run? And doing that without producing any evidence that anything critical is wrong. Anecdotal evidence is as is said in another sub forum, not evidence at all. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : rjh01 Date : 31st May 2010 07:45 AM I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense. That's like claiming flipping a coin to determine the verdict in a legal trial "works" because 50% of the time the defendant is found innocent. Success isn't defined by some percentage, it's defined by whether or not appeals that have merit are upheld and the ones that don't are not. It's also defined by whether or not the system is transparent enough to reveal why a particular appeal is upheld or denied, so the person making the appeal learns from the process. The quote you have above says nothing about this, and claiming this as evidence that "the process works quite well" is just plain silly. If appeals were decided on a flip of a coin then lodging one would not be a waste of time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : Akhenaten Date : 31st May 2010 09:03 AM You can expect that the appeal process to be slow as there are at best only 3 (if you include Jeff Wagg) people who could process an appeal. Worse both Darat and Lisa are volunteers. That means that if anything else happens in their lives then this job would not get done. Perhaps someone could start a thread, entitled 'Appeal Process is the Stuff of Nightmares' and the matter could be discussed in hope of improving the process. As for the quality of the result, it would be difficult to prove one way or the other if the right cases get upheld. If anyone knows of an easy method, well they could get rich. Not just from reforming this forum, but from reforming the justice systems of the world. This is a waffling, nonsensical answer to a question nobody asked. Please attempt to stay on topic. The only other way I know it could be improved is if certain threads could be read by all members. That issue has been discussed before. The fact that rjh01 only 'knows' of one method to improve things is in no way a reason to suggest that further discussion is unecessary. It's incredibly arrogant to think it might be. Further, the suggestion that "certain threads could be read by all members" is utterly meaningless. What the devil are you talking about? Does anyone know of any other method of improving things? That's part of the reason for making a complaint here, wouldn't you say? Or is this just another thread to criticise this forum and the way it is run? It's a complaint in the Complaints section of Forum Management. See how that works? And doing that without producing any evidence that anything critical is wrong. Since when are you the arbitrator of what constitutes a legitimate complaint, rjh01? Have you been appointed to a secret moderatorship? Anecdotal evidence is as is said in another sub forum, not evidence at all. You'll understand why I snipped your own anecdote above then. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : Akhenaten Date : 31st May 2010 09:06 AM If appeals were decided on a flip of a coin then lodging one would not be a waste of time. In what way do you think this nonsense advances the discussion? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : Foolmewunz Date : 31st May 2010 09:21 AM Does anyone know of any other method of improving things? Or is this just another thread to criticise this forum and the way it is run? And doing that without producing any evidence that anything critical is wrong. Anecdotal evidence is as is said in another sub forum, not evidence at all. Would you propose that I actually cite the exchange? From a closed area of the forum? Put it in public view? How do you think that would sit with the PTB who want that section to be private? RJH01, I'm in the complaints section. The mods and admins read this section (one would assume, by its very name, Forum Management), and they're quite capable of responding that FMW is making up a bunch of nonsense.... if that is the case. There is a thread already existing on the specific case. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5963872#post5963872 But rather than carry on a "discussion" that might possibly get heated, I decided to do a mitzvah and take it to the oft-suggested formal route and make an appeal. And, no, I do not think that my words are carved in marble and must be right at all times. A well-thought-out rationale for upholding the decision would be acceptable. Any evidence that it was well-thought-out would be acceptable. Any discussion of the issue with the complainant would be acceptable. It is not a life or death matter - the case itself. It is the process I'm complaining about. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : Stellafane Date : 31st May 2010 11:04 AM Originally Posted by rjh01 If appeals were decided on a flip of a coin then lodging one would not be a waste of time. In what way do you think this nonsense advances the discussion? Good question. Personally, were I a mod, I'd cringe at this sort of "support," because frankly it makes it look like there's nothing to say in my defense except to attempt to yuck it all off. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : chillzero Date : 31st May 2010 06:12 PM You can expect that the appeal process to be slow as there are at best only 3 (if you include Jeff Wagg) people who could process an appeal. Worse both Darat and Lisa are volunteers. That means that if anything else happens in their lives then this job would not get done. I think a week is a perfectly reasonable time in which people should expect to see their appeals reviewed. Chillzero has suggested that the reasons for the result be put in the appeal. I know in one case this was done (mine). The post was Yes it does not say much but I doubt that more words would be any more useful. This was done within 24 hours of me lodging the appeal. So, you respond to my comment (supporting other comments) that a brief explanation - a few more words than "Appeal denied. Thread closed" would be helpful. you show an example when you got a brief explanation that is exactly along the lines which we are asking that the admins consider providing a little more often .... and then say that it isn't saying much??? :rolleyes: Lisa, Darat - this is a good example of the kind of explanation that would be helpful to people who have appeals rejected. Does your use of it here mean that you are considering doing this more often, even just initially as a trial as I requested, or was it a fluke? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : GeeMack Date : 1st June 2010 05:07 AM I think a week is a perfectly reasonable time in which people should expect to see their appeals reviewed. And probably everyone except the mod team would think nine weeks is a bit longer than necessary and not "perfectly reasonable". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : deep Date : 3rd June 2010 01:32 AM There is no discussion. Just a ruling. No indication of how that ruling was made, nor who was involved in the decision. Well, if memory serves, all appeals are handled by one of the admins. In the event that an admin decision is being appealed, the appeal is handled by the other admin. So, instead of holding the mod/admin team accountable, it's really just a "spell check" on their own collective interpretation of the MA. I would like to see appeals handled by an entity that is completely separate from the mod/admin team, with the following distinctions: absolutely no access the report system, moderator discussion areas, etc. In other words, keep them out of the mod/admin feedback loop. focus more on ensuring that the rules are enforced consistently (e.g., by looking at past precedent), as opposed to simply reevaluating decisions against a separate interpretation of the MA. handle appeals for non-actions, as well as everything that can currently be appealed. Just my two cents- err, actually, wouldn't this be a suggestion on how to address a complaint? Wait, now that's a question. Ahh, to hell with it.. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : chillzero Date : 3rd June 2010 02:06 AM focus more on ensuring that the rules are enforced consistently (e.g., by looking at past precedent), as opposed to simply reevaluating decisions against a separate interpretation of the MA. umm... how are they going to do that without access to the reports? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : deep Date : 3rd June 2010 05:31 AM umm... how are they going to do that without access to the reports? The search function, past infractions, data submitted along with the appeal, etc. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : chillzero Date : 3rd June 2010 06:13 AM That's asking a lot, without access to the reports, where that same information is saved in an easy to locate format. When you search, you can't even see the yellow cards until you go to each post individually. And you lose information .... where the member may have been included in a more general mod box that is not part of their own post, for example. And perhaps you do not consider it relevant that other posts may have been reported and not actioned, but it most definitely can be useful to someone considering an appeal. You are depriving this appeal board of the majority of their useful information, and disabling them from making an informed decision. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Dancing David Date : 3rd June 2010 11:51 PM To no one in particular: Um, sorry, I do not see why the appeal should be handled by anyone other than the admins. Seriously, it is an internal housekeeping matter, it is not a court appeal in any sense. This is SOP for most private organization, which the JREF is. An administrator judges the facts as they are presented: 1. Were the rules, procedures and policies followed. 2. Is there a reason to believe that the rules were bent, broken or interpreted ina fashion influenced by personal issues of the moderator involved. 3. Was the consequence to the infraction consistent with the rules, procedures and policies. despite the feeling of ownership the members have, this is a private organization, the rules do not have to be enforced in an equitable manner where people can say "X did this here and got this and therefore if Y did this there , they should get the same". I have been involved in similar decisions in a DV shelter, context and history are everything in these settings. Often privy information is just that (which might not apply as much here), members do not have a right to know why every decision was made. There are times where people will do things and it involves legalities or confidential; communications (like PMs and e-mails). Admins may be privy to information that they may not disclose. People will often get a different consequence for the exact same behavior because of the history and context. This is a housekeeping matter for any private organization and I think the JREF tries to be about as transparent as it gets and tolerates a whole lot of discussion by members. Note: I am not saying that all decisions are perfect and I am glad that the JREF does allow discussion on the matter. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : NoZed Avenger Date : 4th June 2010 06:51 AM The appeals process is already a bit time-consuming. The persons who have filed appeals are those who feel a wrong decision has been made (obviously), but a fair percentage of them (guess only) feel it strongly enough to appeal and argue the point where other posters would shrug and move on. "Appeal denied" does not give the poster any real information. But then, it isn't supposed to. It is not designed to be a transparent process, it is designed to allow the matter to be closed off and have the person stop pestering the mods/admins -- thus "Appeal denied. Thread closed." I do not mean that in a negative fashion, because I am pretty sure the powers that be want to be fair, but also want an *end* to having to answer arguments and defend their reasoning. Providing reasoning would open the door for arguments; it would also provide an easier way to highlight inconsistent reasoning that some diligent persons would find. (Not because of any bad intent on the part of the admins, but because invariably over time there *will* be inconsistencies, or at least arguable ones) So what users may see as a bug, the system sees as a feature. By giving no reasons, the decision eliminates arguments, possibly prevents future arguments based on previous decisions, stops the need to defend the reasoning, and saves time. I can't say I love the situation, but considering the time-sink such a position is and the amount of pay being received by the volunteers, I can certainly sympathize with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : Foolmewunz Date : 5th June 2010 02:43 PM The appeals process is already a bit time-consuming. The persons who have filed appeals are those who feel a wrong decision has been made (obviously), but a fair percentage of them (guess only) feel it strongly enough to appeal and argue the point where other posters would shrug and move on. "Appeal denied" does not give the poster any real information. But then, it isn't supposed to. It is not designed to be a transparent process, it is designed to allow the matter to be closed off and have the person stop pestering the mods/admins -- thus "Appeal denied. Thread closed." I do not mean that in a negative fashion, because I am pretty sure the powers that be want to be fair, but also want an *end* to having to answer arguments and defend their reasoning. Providing reasoning would open the door for arguments; it would also provide an easier way to highlight inconsistent reasoning that some diligent persons would find. (Not because of any bad intent on the part of the admins, but because invariably over time there *will* be inconsistencies, or at least arguable ones) So what users may see as a bug, the system sees as a feature. By giving no reasons, the decision eliminates arguments, possibly prevents future arguments based on previous decisions, stops the need to defend the reasoning, and saves time. I can't say I love the situation, but considering the time-sink such a position is and the amount of pay being received by the volunteers, I can certainly sympathize with it. Your sig sums it up nicely, I think. As with Dancing David's response, is the answer really, "Because I said so!"? Sorry, but I don't agree. This is a board full of people who communicate with each other. I'd agree if an appeal was a rubber stamp. "I appeal!" Like in a baseball game where the umpire calls it "out" but you would like them to review it. But here, and in a court of law, you don't just submit a two word document, "I appeal", and hope for good news later. You present the case for why you've appealed and why you are taking the time to go through all this over what might be a trivial issue. Having taken the time to do so, and having been considerate enough to take it private so as to not get into a pissing contest in public, I believe "Appeal denied. Thread closed." is a totally insufficient response. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : UNLoVedRebel Date : 5th June 2010 03:33 PM Having taken the time to do so, and having been considerate enough to take it private so as to not get into a pissing contest in public, I believe "Appeal denied. Thread closed." is a totally insufficient response. I agree. Either the lazy approach to appeals should be changed or the appeal section should be removed from the forum. There are other far more qualified members who might want an Admin job. If it's too much to write a brief explanation why the appeal was denied then maybe you shouldn't be an administrator. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : Foolmewunz Date : 5th June 2010 04:07 PM I agree. Either the lazy approach to appeals should be changed or the appeal section should be removed from the forum. There are other far more qualified members who might want an Admin job. If it's too much to write a brief explanation why the appeal was denied then maybe you shouldn't be an administrator. Oh, I'm not going to go that far. There is a whole lot more to administration than just answering appeals. I have no bones to pick with Darat or Lisa as to their personal behaviour other than the behaviour as relates to this particular policy. And in that, I could be talking about Lisa or Darat or Jeff - anyone who's in a position to judge appeals. Mebbe I'm wrong. But I assume there is discussion that goes on, and a weighing of the pros and cons. I really can't see why they can't engage the appelant in that process. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from JREF Forum (http://forums.randi.org) at 5th June 2010 04:24 PM.