As a Roblox developer, it is currently too hard to figure out why some assets are moderated on the website.
The entire moderation process right now is very opaque and confuses even the top creators on the website. Assets can be falsely moderated and developers are left in the dark as to what went wrong.
Simply requiring moderators (or alternatively, whatever non-human does the moderation) to provide a reason for moderation could help shed light on what exactly goes wrong in these cases. Moderation reasons are already provided for more severe cases, so itâd make sense to extend this to all cases.
Will this actually help? You describe the issue as assets being incorrectly moderated â not being correctly moderated, and you just donât know why it is against the rules. A reason for declination would help in the case of the latter, but not the former. Knowing why an asset was moderated doesnât change the fact that it was incorrectly moderated in the first place, and the reason is irrelevant while appealing the asset.
What would probably be more helpful in the case of assets being incorrectly declined is:
If it is a specific type of asset that is regularly being incorrectly declined (e.g. white images), request that Roblox deliberately support that type of asset so it doesnât continue to be rampantly declined
If it is completely random with no root cause other than acceptable margins of human error, a trivial way to appeal declined assets
Without a reason given, it can be hard to tell whether moderation was unjustified or is based on an unknown rule. If a reason is given which is clearly not valid then you know itâs the former, otherwise, youâre given what the reason is and you know itâs valid. Appealing just to get the answer wastes everyoneâs time.
From OPâs PoV, it seems they are already presuming the assets were incorrectly moderated and just want Roblox to admit how wrong they are.
If this was not their intent, then this is generally why itâs also helpful to provide use cases for feature requests instead of just vomiting up ideas.
I donât completely agree with your interpretation. I think OP means that Roblox should provide a clear description of why the asset was declined, because in many cases they say âX is not appropriate for Robloxâ or providing generally unclear descriptions as to whatâs wrong with the asset.
For example: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/sorry-new-members/424391 - that op asks why the asset was moderated, but no (clear) response was provided. How can we know what to fix if we donât know what the issue is.? tâs the same as fixing your code! If there is an error in your code, but the output just says âthere is an error in your code somewhere, please revise your code and try againâ. Yes, please tell me where to start.
If I have 50 scripts and tens of thousands of lines, Iâm clueless on how to fix it. The same applies to assets on Roblox. If I upload a shirt on Roblox and they say itâs not appropriate, where do I start? Do I remove an icon on the shirt, and try again? Iâd probably get a new warning, or this time, maybe a 1-day ban because itâs still not appropriate for the platform. Okay, letâs try again, we remove some text on the shirt. Oh no, a 3-day ban. We try again and remove the color of the shirt, oh no 7-day ban, etc.
Iâm not saying these punishments are what you get, but I think you understand my point of our frustration. If we know the reason, we can do something about it. If nobody is here to pinpoint our mistakes, we never learn. And if we were to get a reason, and we highly disagree with it, we can appeal again, and justify why itâs not inappropriate. At least that gives us a chance to do something.
Exactly. The only one thing that tells me is bad is the font, but I DOUBT the font is mentioned anywhere in Terms of Service.
Itâs a font used in newspapers as wellâŚ
Clothes? Anyone can wear shirts! Doesnât have to be related to any sort of activity!
Not looking to tell Roblox âhow wrong they areâ, instead hereâs my logic behind the idea:
If an asset is moderated due to accidentally breaking a rule, the uploader knows the rule which the asset broke and can fix the issue on their own. This would save time from having to contact staff to try and figure out why it was moderated.
Incorrectly moderated assets are easier to distinguish from correctly moderated assets; if the reason provided is nonsensical (e.g. moderated for explicit content for uploading a circle) then the uploader can be more confident that itâs a technical error which can be reversed.
Itâs not a silver bullet solution that aims to fix every problem, but it at least adds a bit of transparency to the system to help us help ourselves.
I completely agree with this idea. I have looked on several threads in Moderation Review Requests, and if the request was declined, the moderator only leaves a canned message saying that it was moderated correctly, no further explanation is given.
Just a side note, but that does make sense because Moderation Review Requests is semi-public, anyone with a TL2 account can view any post in there. That whole category is kinda awkward because it gives a browsable record of people being correctly moderated for something.
They should definitely give more information in private though, in the window on the website where you get your warning / moderation action.
