Judicial system!

[tropic sedge]

I disagree, only promotes public shaming and biases 👍

[pine berry]

^ besides that think of the potential bias - and imo everyone will just troll

[bright lily]

It's not public shaming

Only one person gets to be the judge what else

And per say it's something which you have clear hard rock evidence upon then no bother

It's just having the third person to know that yes this decision was based on this evidence and this rule was broken

[bright lily]

What do you mean by potential bias

Ofcourse the judge ain't gonna be one of us

I said a random person

It's promotes a transparent system which helps people trust or understand how the muting system works

[tropic sedge]

No server does this, and for good reason.

Your statement about it being random, this doesn't filter out potential trolls or those who are harmful. Why introduce an entire system that I think everyone will confidently agree that the vast majority will troll with. Or, not take part. How can you truly make something random while making it function efficiently and appropriately at the same time.

Ontop of that, frankly players do not need to take part in such decisions. A players position is to play, that's it. They do not need to take part in such things and a lot of players wont want to more than one or two times. Those who do, should just apply, or the only reason they aren't is because they aren't able to make it into the team. We do not need to accommodate for this.

The entire point of a staff team is to moderate, and appropriately as such if confused about punishments, discuss amongst ourselves and come to an executive decision. Players on average do not know the rules better than staff or management, and as such what makes their opinion warranted?

I am in no way downplaying players knowledge or saying I don't care about their opinions, I am saying it's not their responsibility. We have a staff team whos entire role is to do these things, why do we introduce players to do a staff members job? No server does this for this exact reason, we can't expect everyone who partakes in such a system to cooperate appropriately.

This will not be happening, especially because we have more things to worry about at this time.

[bright lily]

Welp everybody has their own opinions

Either way, if we're here to shoot down everybody's ideas and just find a reason to show supremacy isn't really right innit, I mean we could amend something

Because I don't know the point of this suggestions channel tbh

Well because it has none

Or it could be an anonymous voting system

You know how you have channels for giveaways and all, maybe you could ask the people or the community with a specific role, about an anonymous guy who said something which could've meant anything without context

Should he be punished or

Should his sentence be reduced

Or should it be the regular one

[bright lily]

My guy

Have you seen like

Let's say a PD (law enforcement) has a racist or corrupt cop

They'll protect the cop to protect their repute

That's a bit biased I think

Or you could take a team of reviewers who would review the punishments given by the staff and then consult the admins or whatever

It's like appealing but much faster and affective ig? That would add more roles to the server

[ashen kernel]

me 😎

[tropic sedge]

Its not supremacy, this isnt a dictatorship. Its our responsibility, not yours. Those who want to take part simply apply for the role. Thats it.

[tropic sedge]

It feels as though you think we issue vast false punishments. On average the punishments are very straight forward and if they arent admins had some involvement.

It is also in no way “more affective”