[DENIED] Disallowing Certains Mod From Handling Cases

I have no clue if this is a current practice or rule for staff, but I believe its a good suggestion nonetheless. If a certain mod has friendly ties or a negative relationship with a person in a report (the reporter or the reported), they should be barred from handling the report and allow other mods to deal with it accordingly.

I know the main argument is going to be, "They're mods for a reason and are meant to be impartial / unbiased."

Lets be honest here, thats BS. Everyone here is human and is effected by bias in the way we deal with people and situations in our everyday lives - I just believe the best thing to do is enact a policy to minimize it. Also, we are a forum for selling and buying virtual items for video games, not something as extreme as a circuit court or a law firm. Even when you consider things like judges or law firms, they typically have a policy for these things as well. Judges, at least in America, are allowed to rescue themselves, essentially pull themselves out from handling a case, if a conflict of interest is known - the same policy is usually enacted with law firms as well to prevent bias in the way court cases are handled. I believe this would create a much more neutral, unbiased way of handling cases as I believe most people can think of a case or two where the person handling it might've had too friendly or negative ties to certain people.

Now, how would we handle this to ensure that bias doesn't happen?

There needs to be a 100% transparency policy in regards to who people are close friends with along with those they deem very negatively. I know that Sythe is a pretty close knit community nonetheless, but I'm speaking in specific cases where some mods have very overt feelings that may be positive or negative towards certain people in Sythe cases.

Personally, I don't have all the answers to this but I believe its a starting ground where people below can comment possible ways to create a policy surrounding conflicts of interest.

QUICK EDIT: Some mods may or may not do this in practice already, but it should be a policy to prevent it from occurring 100%.

 

If somebody believes a mod is being biased, that's when you go up the chain of command for a review.

If you choose to use sythe.org, you choose to use Sythe's appointed representatives for handling disputes.

 

You have the right to ask a mod to not handle a report.

 

uhhh wrong


BigBoiBets refusing to fulfill their part of the deal

 

That isn't necessarily true: look at the case recently of Probemas V. BigBoiBets

"You don't get to decide who works on your case. Probemas requested Video and Shin not be involved, but we aren't obligated to honor that and we aren't obligated to honor your request either. Staff are staff because we can trust them to handle difficult matters without bias."

You have a right to request certain mods to handle or not handle the case, but it seems they also have the right to deny the request. It seems to be more or less a way for the reporters or reported to possibly prevent bias, but there shouldn't be bias from the start.

A judge would be expected to rescue him or herself from a case before they handle it, not at the defendant or plaintiffs request.

 

Yes, the same way as if you get charged with a crime in America, you're expected to be dealing with American judges. This is a given, but it should be a policy that most law firms or courts usually enact to prevent these conflicts of interests from the start.

I truly don't see how this policy would be damaging in any regard except for preventing mods from being corrupt and being impartial from the get go.

 

In America you do exactly what tyler mentioned, if you believe that your case was ruled unfairly you appeal to the appellate court. Sythe users don't get to pick and choose which staff members may hear their case, and if there is an obvious conflict of interest staff themselves will make sure that it is appropriately dealt with.

 

The point isn't to allow people to choose who can and can't choose their cases, its so Sythe mods who are clearly biased don't handle the case in the first place. Yes, some mods already may choose not to handle a case if they feel as if they'll be biased, but the point I'm trying to make is that there should be a policy of punishment for those who don't do this in the first place.

Consequences of Judges Not Recusing Themselves | LegalMatch Law Library
Judicial Misconduct | LegalMatch Law Library

There should be some sort of policy of a punishment for those who choose not to be transparent in the first place and refuse to recue themselves.

 

We don't need to add something in the rules for something so rare that can be handled and called out on a case-by-case basis. If you see a mod who you believe may be biased or have some sort of conflict of interest, message one of their superiors with your concerns.

 

I mean I already agree with the if you ask a mod to not be handling it that's fine, on the other hand, BBB asked for it after a verdict was already made, and that is their own fault for not asking for a separate mod or writing they also didn't want a mod to handle it. But Champ had no bias in the situation regardless, of all mods Champ is probably the least biased of all in my opinion, for many different reasons. I support the right to ask a mod to not handle a case, but at the same time, BBB asked way too late personally. If they wanted another mod to ensure the decision was proper and correct that would more or less be granted likely. Charlotte though, confirmed no bias so...

 

I wasn't really specifically talking about Champs ability to be impartial, it was mostly in regards to the fact there is no rule in regard to requesting certain mods be allowed or disallowed to handle a case.

 

In order to determine if someone is being biased, you would need to contact an Admin for one of us to evaluate if they are - up until this point, any mod can handle any report. The only thing I would deem acceptable of a mod not being able to handle is if a mod works directly with/under the user being report. Being friends or whatever else will not bar them from handling a report. If someone thinks a mod is being biased for any reason, contact an Admin - if we agree with how the mod is handling the report, no harm done; but if we deem the situation biased we will take over and take action as is necessary.

I understand you are more so looking at the point of: What if a mod handled a report and were biased as per our own deduction/they didn't recuse themselves from the start having known their relationship may cause some sort of bias? What action is to be taken? Well, that is something Admins would deal with case-by-case.

tldr: In order for anyone to be evaluated in this manner, you would need to contact an Admin for the mod's work to be reviewed. Action taken afterwards, if any, would be handled case-by-case.

Denied/Approved? Idrk. Step one: Contact an Admin if there's a problem - it's literally as simple as that.