The big issue really is...people think they know the full story. They think they've seen the whole situation and know all the details...and if they don't, they try to nose out based on what they think happened (which as this thread proves, causes incorrect conclusions). The fact is, when a staff member makes a decision about what kind of punishment to give, it is based on all the information available. Including logs than no regular member has access to. Just because someone is sweet in public doesn't mean they're behaving themselves in "private". And whatever you think of staff now, it'd be worse if we broadcasted every dirty detail of every person's ban. Some people that were popular before being banned, if the public knew how much that person backstabbed and insulted everyone....

I don't think we're really arguing about any specific case here anymore Irethena. At least, I'm not. From what I understand from reading everyone else's responses we're all mostly trying to communicate out dislike of the way things are right now in general. And I agree with BT. I think that there should be some sort of list where it says "This offence gets this punishment and this offence gets this punishment." instead of the grey "just about anything can get you anything from a kick to a permaban." Moderators hold up the rules that the members are expected to follow, but where are the extra rules that the moderators are expected to follow to go along with their extra power. To quote someone much more rich and successful than I: "With great power comes great responsibility."

EDIT: I understand the admins have logs and that there are extra details that we do not know. But it would at least be a little comforting to know that someone was watching the watchers. (wow...what is it with me and the comic quotes today?)

As just mentioned above, this thread is discussing inconsistencies.

Inconsistencies lead people to believe that decisions are biased.

^ Well said.

This is why we try and allow for threads like these, to try and allow for a staff member or a staff behavior to be called on an action and then they will be reprimanded and talked to by sawine. It is a long process, but it has worked so far. I agree that we do need a new system but it is best not to bug sawine

Oki, Is there not a way that you could come up with a new system among yourselves then after you've debated it all out and hammered out all of what you see as potential bugs in the new system go to sawine and say, "Hey we thought of this new system for running the staff that might be more efficient. Do you like it or should we go back to the drawing board?"

Without a doubt Minetown Staff as a whole work brilliantly, and I have not yet found a rival.

It is true that people may be making incorrect conclusions based on only pieces of a puzzle, although I do sense that some people are on the same page in reference to inconsistencies regarding punishment as a whole.

We can talk about having more documented punishment plans....I'll ask Sayomie next time I run into him (possibly tonight).

I'm not sure what you mean by "more documented punishment plans." Do you mean a more concrete list for the membership of how we can be punished for what? Or do you mean some sort of obvious chain-of-command, or perhaps just keeping more records of punishment? Sorry, but this statement is very ambiguous and my brain works in funny ways, could you please clarify?

Dont run into him, id suggest walking up to him at a normal pace and discussing this issue...

Like say, if you do _________, you get _________. (duper, permaban.....slight grief, jailtime.....ban appeal posting, jail for an hour)

That sort of thing. That way there's no need for peanut gallery input on bans (meaning people are saying oh they did this but this person did this and got a different punishment)