Jury duty has many Bugs and exploits
Summary:
Jury Duty has many issues, and in it's current form it is difficult to test and trouble shoot.
"Selected for jury, image shown was not the subject image reported by: @ullr"
@xander-miller has experienced this too, verified. The issue seems to be that a user who has recevied a strike can edit a post during the appeal process, removing the image or video or changing the text. making it impossible for jurors to see the post as the admin who reviewed the post saw it.
Users can also remind posts from jury duty and users can get flagged for content they reminded with no additional content while the original poster does not get a strike.
Create feedback for Jurors and participation record so jurors can review rewards,votes and verdicts
Create post snapshots for jury duty and content violation system
- Clone posts to a snapshot state in another data storage when Admins give a post a strike
-
Use snapshot for jurors to review
- Jurors will see what Admins saw so system cannot be exploited through editing
- Snapshot archive can be used in the future to train AI systems
- Snapshot archive can be used to audit strikes to insure our content policy is being adminsitered fairly and consistently.
- Give Jurors feedback when a verdict is reached so they can expect their participation reward
Diagnostic API endpoints for jury duty system
- Jury duty is too hard to test reliably in it's current form.
- Add diagnostic API endpoints to the app for triggering processes like jury duty for testing and diagnostic purposes.
- These endpoints could be triggered with Postman.
- These endpoint can be secured with Keys and even time based one time passwords.
added scoped labels
- Reporter
Invited community member to messenger to collect additional information
made the issue visible to everyone
added scoped labels
added scoped label and removed labels
changed title from Jury duty to Jury duty
changed the description
assigned to @brianhatchet
- Developer
@benhayward.ben Any additional thoughts? Feel free to edit.
- Developer
I am going to find a time for @benhayward.ben, @xander-miller, @markeharding to sit down and hash out a solution for these ongoing issues.
- Developer
Sounds good to me.
changed the description
mentioned in issue #1006 (closed)
removed label
added scoped label
assigned to @markeharding and @benhayward.ben
assigned to @xander-miller
- Developer
- Owner
If there are urgent bugs in the jury please escalate them into the next sprint.
- Developer
Very much respect his opinion on this, but I don't personally agree with Luculent on that above point, as:
- Members may be less likely to report someone if their name is revealed to the accused.
- This would allow the accused to harass the accuser.
Anonymized report systems are quite standard practice in many places for these reasons.
I do also consider the system to be in the community's hands. Admins do have some input, but only acting as a harassment, abuse, and misuse filter. The decisions are policed by the community.
Aside from this, there are bugs, and there is room for misuse of the system that needs to be looked into urgently. All of this will be discussed in a meeting with Mark and Xander tomorrow. We're going to talk about current issues with the system, and adding better tooling to help us in the further development of the Jury system.
Edited by Ben Hayward