Board Thread:Community Announcements and Events/@comment-4799587-20140909072622/@comment-26474238-20140921143135

Datadragon Odahviing wrote: There is no harm in thinking more than less. There are loopholes in everything, nothing is perfect. Blatant rule breaking is uncommon except when chat mods are gone, because people know it'll get them banned. Which makes catching people red handed a problem.

I tackled the issues of plural witnesses (yes, I noticed), not singular ones. It is still a tyranny of the majority in any case (which is a problem which plagues this wiki). Please read carefully before leaping to conclusions.

We can trust a special rights user to make a ban in general, but humanity is inevitably biased. I was raising a legitimate concern about catching people red handed, because of how the chat mods act. PLP, Spey are exemplars of chat mods that were respected by most, but not impartial. LCB was a do nothing guy, even though everyone likes him. They might all be removed already, but it doesn't mean in future people won't do the same.

Note that not everyone must agree 100% agree with you. A consensus is where we agree to disagree. There is no foolproof method. Please do not make assumptions - I have never portrayed my opinions as facts, and I would prefer that to not be miscontrued. As for the rest:

Always preparing for the worst only leads to tunnel-vision. In my experience, 90% of rule-breakers are blatantly obvious, or might take a few warnings to properly construct a profile around them in which to base a ban around. There are always exceptions, but those should not be planned for, as all it leads to is red-tape and an overabundance of stifling rules.

For instance: your scenario in which a multitude of users creating a conspiracy to break the rules, is an exception that should be handled outside of the normal avenues of approach. That is not something any amount of rules will properly prepare for, and takes the leadership getting together to deal with properly. All adding more rules will do, is bog them down and force them to gather more and more evidence while the conspirators are out causing more harm - with just a general set of rules, and diligence, the leadership should just be able to go through and purge them without having to worry about the community throwing the book at them, and possibily invalidating the bans all because a few very specific rules were not followed to the letter.

And you will notice that they are no longer around. The community makes mistakes, but what is important is that those mistakes were taken care of, which means that the community as a whole is keeping tabs of what happens around here. And while your statement that humanity is inevitably biased rings true, there are still users that treat their positions with respect and integrity, which are the users that should be made into the leadership here. If their bans are ever questionable, then all that needs to happen is for a forum to start up to get an investigation rolling, and then possibly dealing with the banner should there be serious transgressions.

In all of these cases, witnesses are the most important form of evidence this wiki can have. Should there ever be a scenario as yours, in which those within the community are manipulating the staff, then it is your job and everyone else's to make the leadership aware of this issue so that justice can return back to normal. Like I said: there are always exceptions to the norm, and no amount of rules can prepare us against such exceptions.