Hey everybody, dig it -- We've streamlined the process for dealing with MIA editors and tried to make it easier to report Problem Editors. If anyone has any questions, feel free to drop me a line. Thanks!

MIA EDITORS


An editor is considered MIA if they have not been active on the site for over 30 days and/or submissions in their editor's queue have been pending for more than 3 days (for a show on our Top 20 List,) or more than 7 days (for a show NOT on the Top 20 List.) Any submissions left unmoderated longer than the deadline requires may be moderated by TV.com staff.


To report and MIA editor send a PM to ReportMIAEditor. Include the Editor's username, the guide or guides they are neglecting and any other information you think is relevant.


An editor will receive up to 2 warnings from TV.com Staff regarding MIA status before they are retired. Any editor receiving a warning MUST respond to TV.com Staff as soon as possible with an explanation. Failure to respond within 7 days to any MIA warning will result in automatic retirement from the guide in question.


The ReportMIAEditor inbox will be checked every Wed. and Friday. We will not issue responses from ReportMIA but you will recieve a PM from staff letting you know the outcome of the investigation. Staff will NOT discuss the details of the investigation.


Special Circumstances


If you are an editor and you know that you will be unavailable to edit your guide(s) for a set period of time, you can PM a staff member or
post the details regarding your absence from TV.com in the pinned Editor Special Circumstances forum
thread. If you give us this courtesy beforehand, staff will check your
queues for you during your absence. This will also ensure that you will
not be considered MIA and not be retired from your guide(s).

Reporting a "Problem Editor"


First, and most important rule -- DO NOT complain about editors (or any user for that matter) in blogs or forums. Even the most seemingly harmless gripe or criticism can lead to flaming or other offensive behavior. Complaining about an editor in a blog or forum thread could be considered Trolling, which is a TOS violation.


If you believe an editor is gaming (cheating) in order to keep a guide, report that editor to a TV.com Staff member via PM with the Subject Line: Problem Editor, and provide a detailed explanation of the situation. TV.com Staff will investigate these reports.


Editors Gaming/Cheating -- Consequences


Editors who are found to be gaming in order to keep or acquire a guide will be retired from that guide immediately and/or face possible suspension/ban depending on the results of the investigation. Each report of gaming will be considered unique. Staff will consider the results of the investigation and determine if subsequent action, in addition to retirement, needs to be taken.

This is wonderful, thank you! I like what I see and will give this a careful read-through.

This is great...I was just getting ready to post a "Revamp MIA Editor Rules" idea in the forums.  Guess great minds think the same...  

If the editor has used the thread in the forum saying that he is away for X reason and X time, I hope he doesn't get his/her guide retired anyway?!

That thread still exists? I had no idea.

Didn't that used to be pinned at the top of the Editor's Forum or one of the Support boards? I haven't seen it in a long time. As far as I know the "vacation" thread is MIA.

Wonderful, thanks!

At the very least, there should be a hyperlink to the Special Circumstances thread in every thread that announces the new guidelines for reporting MIA/problem editors.

I think these new guidelines are introducing lots of questions and .. I'm sorry to say, are full of flaw.

It seems that users have now more power to complain about everything. If they don't like a rejection of one submission they can complain as much as they want to the staff and even say that the editor is gaming if they don't have a proof and they don't even require any proof, on believes..

Also, I think users should be tell if the investigation resulted in something or if it wasn't conclusive etc.. so they may stop "promoting" ideas that X person is doing X thing.

There is also a big hole, like I previously said, about the fact that editors are taking vacations. They don't always stay in front of their computers, but these rules don't mention anything about the Special Circumstances Thread. they simply say that if someone isn't there X days, the editor is losing his/her guide.

But I'm really glad that the fact that users shouldn't start thread on other users, even if they don't mention them clearly but only subjectively, is not authorized anymore. It may protect some people that want to be keep in peace.

It seems everyone knows but me...what exactly is "gaming"?

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that users will complain and accuse people for no reason since you only need the "belief" that someone is gaming and no proof when you're accusing another user.

But some of them already do that sort of silly stuff anyway...

Exactly. I can't really see this change in procedure resulting in an increase of 'prank' reporting.

Even if it did, it's not really the end of the world - 'twould just mean that the staff had more 'spam' to delete.