Dont let GM's who banned a person review the ban

[Aslan]

Just a thought. 21st century 3rd world problems to be solved.
Could also include reasons and arguments for the ban as justification since thats what justice is about, but thats a different story.

Edit: I have never been banned nor warned, its really just a thought about a major flaw.

[Fagatron]

Edit: I have never been banned nor warned, its really just a thought about what i think major flaw.

Fixed that
The reason für this is simple the GM that Banned the person Knows exactly what happened and thus is more qualified to review it. GMs have to stay objective at all times and if someone feels they are not then try the GM supervisor

[Aslan]

You could say 'what every justice system in moden democratic countries thinks' .
I didnt think I would really have to start elaborating about objectivity (seems to me that you are a little naive there) and the reason why its usually handled that way (independant second party) in short: its a basic human right for a reason.

NOT saying nostalrius HAS to do anything, they can do whatever they want with their players and server, hence its a suggestion. But frankly, whats the point of even appealing if you wont be reviewed by a higher in hierarchie or at least different person. Why would the same guy come to a different conclusion, be completely unibased, admit previous mistakes and by all means be totally objective.

You may say that its not doable and wont happen due to staff limitations, slim ressources or all sort of arguments, but if you claim that the previous investigator is the most familiar with the specific case and should therefore review it, you simply misunderstood what it means to 'review' something.

Cheers

[Fuhrern]

Edit: I have never been banned nor warned, its really just a thought about what i think major flaw.

Fixed that
The reason für this is simple the GM that Banned the person Knows exactly what happened and thus is more qualified to review it. GMs have to stay objective at all times and if someone feels they are not then try the GM supervisor

When someone appeals a case, do you think it would be fair to have the same judge?

[Fagatron]

You could say 'what every justice system in moden democratic countries thinks' .
I didnt think I would really have to start elaborating about objectivity (seems to me that you are a little naive there) and the reason why its usually handled that way (independant second party) in short: its a basic human right for a reason.

NOT saying nostalrius HAS to do anything, they can do whatever they want with their players and server, hence its a suggestion. But frankly, whats the point of even appealing if you wont be reviewed by a higher in hierarchie or at least different person. Why would the same guy come to a different conclusion, be completely unibased, admit previous mistakes and by all means be totally objective.

You may say that its not doable and wont happen due to staff limitations, slim ressources or all sort of arguments, but if you claim that the previous investigator is the most familiar with the specific case and should therefore review it, you simply misunderstood what it means to 'review' something.

Cheers

To make it simple:
If GM #1 bans someone because the Person was flyhacking past him you want GM #2 to review the case. Totally makes sense.
I get where u are coming from but simply Not doable in most cases.

[Fedelis]

I think good points are made from both sides of this argument. If the appeal system were more like court, having the GM that banned you review the appeal would be similar to having the arresting officer presiding as judge. The problem is that on Nost a large portion of the time the accused is actually guilty, and having the banning GM act as prosecutor instead of judge would add a large amount of unnecessary work, doubling the amount of staff it requires to simply say "no, you were obviously botting/hacking/scamming"