Board Thread:Community Voting/@comment-30683785-20160814015027/@comment-24675554-20160814030136

I&#039;mDivergent wrote:

Avalair wrote:

Michaelyoda wrote: I&#039;mDivergent wrote:

Avalair wrote:

I&#039;mDivergent wrote:

Avalair wrote: I'm not making a vote just yet, but I do have a question...

What exactly does this statement mean: "... going to the admins afterwards and forcing them to actually review the situation. " Are you implying that we make decisions without reviewing the situation at all?? Because that literally makes no sense and it feels like you are criticizing me, and the others, without having any idea what goes on. That's kind of the problem isn't it. That we don't know what's going on Well according to the admin policy it is a requirement that we review the entire situation, and then re-review it if something changes. And if you dont think the current admins are capable of doing that, why did you vote for them in the first place? I've supported like three of the current admins. Some of the ones I have the biggest problem with were here before me therefore I was powerless during their promotion.

Also as many of the admins aren't very active here I'm guessing the information they see about users regarding blocks/bans is very filtered and biased certain ways. I can't see any other logical reason for banning a user for six months when they only gotten five short bans in the past year. It's called a "chat log." Which is a required form of evidence. All Ale has to do is link a chat log and say "they've been acting like this all the time and have an extensive ban log" and he can get anyone banned/blocked You can't say "they've been acting like this all the time" without evidence backing that up, or else no one takes you seriously really. :P