The Reports module
With no reporting tool, a member who sees abuse has two options: ping staff in public — which inflames things — or do nothing. The module adds a third: report quietly, and get an answer.
Updated 12 September 2026
What actually changes
A public ping turns an incident into a spectacle. The person targeted digs in, onlookers pick sides, and the moderator arrives into an already degraded situation.
A quiet report lets staff arrive with context and without an audience. That is often the difference between an accepted warning and a three-day conflict.
The other, less expected effect: report counts become a measurement. A channel concentrating many of them tells you something nobody would have come to tell you.
How a report is filed
- By command, naming a member.
- By context menu, right-clicking the message — the fastest route, and the one that attaches the message automatically.
- The report can carry a reason and a comment, sparing staff from guessing what the problem is.
The targeted message is captured at report time. That matters: a message deleted immediately afterwards stays readable by staff, where it would otherwise have vanished without trace.
Handling it, staff side
- The report lands in a staff-only channel, never a public one.
- A staff member claims it, so three people do not handle the same case and none forget it.
- They apply a predefined sanction — warning, mute, removal — or close the report with no action.
- The reporter is told their report was handled. Without that feedback, people stop reporting after twice.
Grouping
Several reports about the same member are grouped rather than stacked. Staff then see one case with a number of reporters, which is far more useful than ten identical messages.
The count of distinct reporters is also a safeguard against reporting used as a weapon: a lone member flagging everything one specific person does stands out immediately.
What to set before opening it
- The handling channel, closed to members: it holds accusations, therefore information about people.
- The reasons offered. Three to five is enough; a list of fifteen gets picked at random.
- The predefined sanctions available, so two moderators facing the same facts apply the same thing.
- Who may handle reports. A moderator on trial can claim without holding the ban right.
Key points
- A quiet report avoids the public ping that turns an incident into a spectacle.
- The targeted message is captured: deleting it no longer makes it disappear.
- The reporter must be told it was handled, or nobody reports again.
- Grouped reports show a count of reporters, not a pile of duplicates.
- The handling channel holds accusations: keep it closed to members.
Frequently asked questions
Does the reported member know who reported them?
No. The reporter’s identity is visible to staff only; that is what makes reporting possible without fear of retaliation.
What happens if the message is deleted after the report?
It stays readable by staff: the content is captured at report time, precisely for this case.
How do you prevent abusive reports?
Grouping shows the number of distinct reporters, which exposes the lone member systematically flagging the same person. Staff can then treat the abuse for what it is.
Put this guide into practice
Kuratos sets up in minutes what this guide describes, and is configured from a web interface rather than through commands.