Support *Insert silence story here* I strenuously support the one year, 1 strike removed idea... This does depend on the reason for the silence. Threats, racism, intentional bypasses etc shouldn't be overturned. -Voltron-
When I was silenced for my third time, i didn't realize what Happened. The first two times I didn't know what I did, the third time when I spammed because I just found out how to copy/paste on my new device. Then someone walled me what I did and then I knew what happened. I think for newer players is they should tell them why they are silenced to avoid further confusion
I was silenced like a year ago for saying the short form of Frequently Asked Questions, and my message got cut off after, but it was seen as a bypass, I have learnt my lesson with that. Also, I support this idea for those that arent very careful. I'd only have like 5 councils of 9 people, so not one council gets all the power. Nobody should know who appealed, or is another councillor. Nice idea Jav out
Perhaps another amendment to the idea of forgiving silences could be a type of probation. If a player is silenced within their first 3 months of playing, but then goes one year without offends all silences earned in their "probation period" will be removed without prejudice. Its likely such silences would be due to mistakes, because if they were malicious the player would probably not last a year offense free.
Support. I especially like chaos comment about the strikes being removed I was thinking about that my self like one strike every 6months or year.
If you're going to post no support, at least give a reasoning as to why you think this wouldn't be a good idea. Effortless posts will not be welcome.
Why not skip all of that and go straight to an ATA official? I think the appeal system is fine the way it is. I believe these things should be left up to ATA to decide. Even if it is anonymous. Now, if the 'council' were composed of a moderator team that may work. Because they know all the rules, are already trustworthy, and deal with these types of situations on the daily.
That's why we have moderators, huh? Because we leave everything to ATA. Surely nobody would like to volunteer to review permanent silence appeals on the community members that the devs don't directly have to deal with hardly ever. My point is, if a player such as a moderator has the power to silence, a player made council should be able to decide when, or if the player should be silenced. ATA doesn't directly deal with these people on a day to day basis, such as a typical player might. Why can't players decide these things?
The only problem I see is that the random players who are chosen each silence would need their ages known, this way a 9 year old cant be picked seeing their silence records.