Ombudsman User Reports

MediaRevolt Community Forum

This thread will serve as a place for us to publicly address any reported profiles, posts, news stories or content of any sort in effort of full transparency. We will aim to protect privacy of users yet disclose the details of how any reported activity was addressed.

As of this initial posting, we have had only two reported activities. Future activities will be date posted in thread.

The first reported post on this site was a feed post from a user that was reported by another user. MediaRevolt found that the post contained opinion, that was rooted in searchable facts, and that the reporter misinterpreted the intent of the post in their report and was disagreeing with their misinterpretation. It was the decision of the MediaRevolt obmudsman that disagreemen is not grounds for reporting of legitimate content as the original poster has right to post fact based opinion to their own feed without censorship. It was an authentic user and not propaganda. We ruled that the report could be dismissed with no action taken and that there was no need to alert either the original poster or the user who flagged the post as there was no indiscression.

The second reported post on this site was a technical issue. A user's post was breaking this website by embedding another website, fully functional, into ours.  It was not a malicious event. The user meant no ill will to the site. However, the post needed to be removed for the site to be fixed and to protect from such an event from happening again.  MediaRevolt's CTO contacted the user, communicated with the user, and all parties were satisfied with removing the post to fix the site. The user who reported this glitch was thanked.

This is how MediaRevolt will address reported content and users. Based on the standards that the MediaRevolt user community has input on and will shape, users will be treated as adults and the site will aim for full transparency.

03/11/2017 12:46:06

11/10/17 A user posted two pornographic images in effort to test if he would be reported. Several users reported the images and an ombudsman reviewed. The CTO took down the images and informed the poster why with a warning. This can not be a pornographic site as it is available to users 16+. not 21+. Posting pornographic images puts the project at risk legally. A user posting pornographic images is putting all of their fellow users at risk for the site being taken down. A user ignoring that warning, that this is a community standard to protect the site for all users, would have to be banned to protect the community. There are many places online to engage in pornography but this can not be one, nor should it be.

10/11/2017 12:05:54

1/5/18 a user with a private profile posted a public feed link that required a log in from our site. Mod on duty deleted the post and messaged the user as it was a malicious cross-site script requesting log on credentials.

05/01/2018 22:55:09

1/23/18 Deleted two support requests posted in the Q&A section because that's not what that section is for. Q&A is for crowd sourcing research with fellow users. Both support requests seemed to be user error as well.

23/01/2018 04:50:55
1 like

2/22/18 Deleted a forum topic which wasn't for a conversation but sharing a web link. Deleted topics on writing community standards because they have been implemented. Deleted topic on advertising policy as the steering committee is trying to avoid any marketing or advertising. We will reopen that discussion should it become crucial to the survival of the site.

22/02/2018 16:59:09

10/26/18 - Someone reported a member's post as fake news. It was a link to an Alex Jones piece, which we would consider fake news. However, the ombudsman review did not find this particular post violated terms of service so it was decided that appropriate action was to post a comment from admin that the site does not endorse Alex Jones in any way and considers content from Alex Jones highy questionable. While much of Alex Jones content would violate MediaRevolt TOS, this particular post was quite grey-area as it was stated as theory. We would advise members to not trust content from Alex Jones.

26/10/2018 19:42:55