I would just like to make this clear, this is not a complaint against any mods, it's just an idea.

FreakyAlex and I were thinking, you know that when a user has done something wrong, i.e.

instead of a mods decision by itself, maybe a trial could be held, since this is an ace attorney forum after all, There could be a:

Judge
=who could be an admin, who can just skim over the case files before the final decision can
be made.

The defendant
=The accused.

A Lawyer
=To make sure the accused will get a fair trial.

A prosecutor
=A Mod, who can lead the case.

It could be discussed over MSN, or a topic,(but PM's probably wouldn't work,) to try and help the false accused, (not that the mods are not doing a great job here.)
So, what do the people say?

---

This may be a Phoenix Wright fan forum. But come on... seriously? XD

I don't really think it's that smart. Trolling or breaking a rule is a non PW buisness kinda shit. So yeah. I don't really support this.

---

Like I said, It's only an idea, a terrible one if that; But FreakyAlex and I just thought about it when someone somehoe hacked my account.... thankfully he didn't break any sprite laws.... I hope.

---

I would support a Ban Appeal system where the forum members argue in favor of repealing a member's ban and administrators argue their views of the events that lead to the person's ban in the first place. I've seen it work before on another forum; there was one member who was the most juvenile and immature troll anyone could think of, but after his ban was appealed and was allowed access to the forums again his attitude and behavior made a complete 180 and now he's even one of the best forum Moderators we have.

I'm not saying that everything will be hunky-dory after a banned member is allowed to return. I'm only saying that I'm all in favor of implanting this system into the Court Records fan base.

---

But even if the mods did agree, we still have the whole 'where will the trial be held' predicament.

---

Err... while it's great in theory, and 'sounds' like fun; forum moderation isn't half that fun or in depth.

Case in point, no multiple accounts. Did you make a second one? Yes? Infraction. Done.

There's nothing to trial about.


Second off, popular opinion doesn't change facts. Mr. Scientist, you say that pollution is killing our future, but look at our opinion poll, which says otherwise. There are people that will voice an option without knowing enough to base the opinion on. Never mind the sadists who'll vote the opposite just because it's funny to them in some way. That's why we have a staff of Moderators. They're a bunch of people that we've found to have demonstrated outstanding mental competence and a care for the goings of the community. They're people we can trust to make an intelligent decision. Often it's cut and dry, sometimes not, in that case we do have our admin board ("Judge's Chambers" for people curious if it fits along our naming motif) for more open discussion and complicated debate.


Perhaps in a compromise we could organize a trial for the IRC room, for fun and games. Unfortunately, I don't have the energy to organize something like that in the foreseeable future.

---

I was going to say something, but then Wooster did a better job. In short, we have no plans to implement such a trial system in the future.

---

...Although I'm sort of dissapointed, I completly see where you are coming from, although the current system has made a few mistakes in my opinion, But I guess you two are the admins.

---

Well, if there are special cases where the ban seems premature or mostly uncalled for, then an exception could be made. Also, this should only apply for permanent bans (wait, first, can you undo a permaban?), and it shouldn't be as dramatic as a trial. Just other members who disagree with the banning ask why the banning was produced, the moderator/s who decided the banning would say why, and if the reasons weren't enough in the eyes of the members, administrators and other moderators, the banning is undone, and the moderator/s who did the banning are warned, and after repeated warnings, lose their mod privileges.

Say Moderator A permabans Member B, who was being slightly off-topic everywhere, but hadn't been warned. Then, if other members are surprised by the ban, ask "Hey, why was Member B banned?". Moderator A must expose why he or she banned Member B in a clear way, and if anybody disagrees (and has a solid basis for this disagreement), there should be a discussion, and if there's general agreement over unbanning Member B, then he or she has the ban lifted, and Moderator A gets a warning.
Of course, voting is absolutely not an option here, since democracy simply doesn't workthere are no actual basis for the votes, it's just "yes" or "no" without even a bit of deliberation. Also, because forums aren't a democracy. If this system is approved, we should all be grateful that the admins and mods actually care for what we think, because they could simply ignore us and do whatever the hell they want without explanations (though sometimes explanations just aren't needed... like banning an obvious troll). After all, forums are a dictatorship, just that this one forum is "kinder" than others.

But an actual trial with court monikers and characters to discuss the banning of a member is just ridiculous.

---

But isn't that already how it's done? I don't see how you're actually suggesting anything. Though the points for mods system is just plain stupid. A system based strictly on penalties? How demoralizing for the mods. If it's a misunderstanding then it's a misunderstanding. No harm done undoing what was done. If something more serious happens then we take action; see Kenji's demotion from Admin.

---

Despite sounding fun, going by the context of this forum, I'm going to have to go with the moderators here. Having moderator, and even administrative experience, the job isn't all it's cracked up to be. So here's my two cents...

You see something in the wrong place, you move it. You see an inappropriate thread, you delete it and issue the user a warning.

On the forums I've worked on, there has been a penalty system in place, however it wasn't the major factor. You could insta-ban someone and completely skip the penalties. What the penalty system does do is allow for an accumlative system where the user gets banned after he hits the 100% (that being, he gets banned after he hits the maximum amount of penalities). Over time these penalties can be worked off.

I presume CR has a warning/penalty system similar to this. I just haven't made any sort of infraction to find out.

On topic though, I don't like popular opinion to interfere with the moderator's "work". Because then a popular member, who is also malicious, would never get his/her just desserts. If they did something wrong, they should suffer the consequences. Forum rules are there to be followed.

---

CR is serious business! :p

...Even if it were, there isn't any need for such dramatic procedures. Since none of the things mods do can have a serious impact on your lives, you should just let them do their job, it's more efficient that way.

---

Bad idea. 1, there's no way it would work and 2, it would be completely unnecessary.

---

I like the idea but it wouldn't really work. It would be good for fun but not seriously. Besides, it would be a bit complicated with getting everyone to agree.

---

This topic is going nowhere fast.

Court is adjourned

---