4 ms·
If the escalation is accessible, everyone will try it. That includes anyone who got handled correctly. And as detection becomes more accurate, an even larger r
by rocqua 8y ago
If the escalation is accessible, everyone will try it. That includes anyone who got handled correctly.
And as detection becomes more accurate, an even larger ratio of escalations will be blatantly wrong.
This explains why slightly inept well meaning companies shy away from such escalation paths.
I wonder about the stats on appeals in court. How many are successful. How many go to an appeal at all. How costly is a single appeal / how costly is the average successful appeal.
- GFischer 8y agoSome games (League of Legends, Ingress) have or had crowdsourced 1st level appeals for minor infractions. Maybe that's the way to go. I know many volunteers answer Google's forums.
- kkarakk 8y agoyes i want a random dude who thinks asian people are just naturally bad drivers to judge my traffic fine
- notSupplied 8y agoThat system (the tribunal) is gone. It has been replaced by ML (probably trained by Tribunal data) and hence 99% automated.
- icebraining 8y ago"Escalation" implies the first decision is automated; I was suggesting more of a process where the "fact finding" is automated, but the decision is still manual. That said, even the system you're describing and with a 100% escalation rate should be cheaper than a fully manual process. The problem is that those "well meaning" companies aren't; their goal is to minimize cost, stopping only if it drops their revenue. But no system will be good with such goals.