General Repeals

[Tyler]

This is getting off topic. Sorry, just don't want you to get warned.

im not letting people call me a liar when im telling no lies -shrugs-

now back on topic, i've got mostly support for this suggestion, as valid points were brought up

 

[Timelord]

I completely agree with this, there will always be a biased outcome because they have already made a decision on this. Saying "Oh they aren't going to be bias" is factually not true. They have already layed eyes on the evidence and it needs a new pair of eyes to make a different outcome.

In my case "me quote on quote xraying" (the first time I was banned) I was accepted by the person but only after a long talk with the person they finally changed their decision.

In my second ban (like come on) I appealed and was immediately denied. I then contacted two admins and was successfully accepted.

The staff member knows what was going on during the situation, unlike a staff member who was not present during the event.

I'm sorry but this is not making sense to me. Should I be banned for what is not on tape even if I was seen hacking off tape? Evidence exists for a reason, without it there is no proof. Sorry I couldn't understand the statement made that well.
...
Anyways how about we test it? If it wouldn't make a difference then why not? I am being banned for the evidence given not anything else.

@(any mod or administrator)
Is there a forum you need to complete to ban/warn someone?

 

[Jxliee]

I completely agree with this, there will always be a biased outcome because they have already made a decision on this. Saying "Oh they aren't going to be bias" is factually not true. They have already layed eyes on the evidence and it needs a new pair of eyes to make a different outcome.

In my case "me quote on quote xraying" (the first time I was banned) I was accepted by the person but only after a long talk with the person they finally changed their decision.

In my second ban (like come on) I appealed and was immediately denied. I then contacted two admins and was successfully accepted.


I'm sorry but this is not making sense to me. Should I be banned for what is not on tape even if I was seen hacking off tape? Evidence exists for a reason, without it there is no proof. Sorry I couldn't understand the statement made that well.
...
Anyways how about we test it? If it wouldn't make a differance then why not?

@(any mod or administrator)
Is there a forum you need to complete to ban/warn someone?

No, but if there was evidence where a member was told to drop the topic, only the staff member and the user involved would understand what was going on during the situation and why they were being asked to drop the topic, unlike someone who wasn’t there to see the situation.
You still need proof for all situations, no matter what happens, but there’s times where another person may be unsure of why a topic was dropped or similar. This would really only be for chat offenses, not offenses as serious as hacking or etcetera.

There isn’t a forum you need to fill out, you punish based off the offense through the guideline, on the off case where a staff will misjudge the scenario, that’s why appeals exist and staff abuse reports are accessible. It’d take too long otherwise.