Recently, we have made some alterations and improvements to our moderation practices. As part of these improvements, we are introducing a formal process by which certain moderator actions can be appealed. This guide will explain what kinds of actions can be appealed - and how you would go about appealing them.
1. Which actions can be appealed?
The appeals process applies to the following moderator actions:
At this stage, bannings cannot be appealed. This is because we view banning as a last resort, which we use only if we feel that we have no other reasonable options. (If you get banned from TCH as a punishment, either permanently or temporarily, then you've done something seriously wrong - and there's really not a lot of point in debating exactly how seriously wrong ).
2. How do I appeal a punishment?
If you feel that you did nothing wrong (or that you are guilty only of a lesser offence than the one for which you were punished), then you must PM an admin (either myself or Nilla) with a request to appeal your punishment. Your request must be civil in tone (attacking the staff will get you nowhere), and must contain both of the following:
Any request which does not contain both of these will be denied - and if a request is denied, then no further appeal requests for the same offence will be considered. Furthermore, the appeals process is intended for arguing that you shouldn't have been punished under the rules currently in force: it is not a place to complain that the rules themselves are unfair and should be changed. Any appeal requests that fall into the latter category (rather than the former) will be denied too.
3. What happens next?
If your request for appeal is accepted, the staff team as a whole will review the incident. This process normally takes around three days (allowing roughly two days for discussion, and one day for voting). Once the process is over, you will be informed of the result of your appeal - which will fall into one of the following three categories:
In rare cases, new evidence might emerge during the appeals process, which shows that the offence was worse than originally thought, and therefore additional punishment would have been warranted. In these cases, this additional punishment will not be given out immediately. Instead, it will be suspended (i.e. only applied if another offence is committed within a set period of time). For example, if the original punishment was a warn level increase, but after seeing new evidence, we conclude that it should have been worth a 1-week ban... then, the result of the appeal would be to uphold the original warn level increase, and only hand out a 1-week ban if another offence is committed within a set period of time (e.g. within the following 3 months).
Other than the above scenario of "suspended punishment for new evidence", once the result of an appeal has been decided and communicated to you, the matter will be considered closed. If the outcome of the appeal is not the one that you had hoped for, then please do not lash out: not only will this not change the result of the appeal, but it will be treated as another offence in and of itself.
Thank you for reading and understanding. We hope that you'll never have to use this (because you'll never have any punishments to appeal in the first place ) - but, if you ever do get punished when you believe you shouldn't have been, then this is the way to get that situation addressed .
1. Which actions can be appealed?
The appeals process applies to the following moderator actions:
- Warn level increases;
- Revocation of privileges (e.g. losing your signature, being put on the mod queue).
At this stage, bannings cannot be appealed. This is because we view banning as a last resort, which we use only if we feel that we have no other reasonable options. (If you get banned from TCH as a punishment, either permanently or temporarily, then you've done something seriously wrong - and there's really not a lot of point in debating exactly how seriously wrong ).
2. How do I appeal a punishment?
If you feel that you did nothing wrong (or that you are guilty only of a lesser offence than the one for which you were punished), then you must PM an admin (either myself or Nilla) with a request to appeal your punishment. Your request must be civil in tone (attacking the staff will get you nowhere), and must contain both of the following:
- Demonstration that you can see the moderator's point of view (i.e. you understand why the moderator in question punished you, even if you don't agree with the punishment);
- An explanation of why you believe your punishment was unfair (and your behaviour either didn't break the rules at all, or did but was worthy only of a lesser punishment).
Any request which does not contain both of these will be denied - and if a request is denied, then no further appeal requests for the same offence will be considered. Furthermore, the appeals process is intended for arguing that you shouldn't have been punished under the rules currently in force: it is not a place to complain that the rules themselves are unfair and should be changed. Any appeal requests that fall into the latter category (rather than the former) will be denied too.
3. What happens next?
If your request for appeal is accepted, the staff team as a whole will review the incident. This process normally takes around three days (allowing roughly two days for discussion, and one day for voting). Once the process is over, you will be informed of the result of your appeal - which will fall into one of the following three categories:
- The punishment is overturned in full.
- The punishment is reduced.
- The punishment is upheld in full.
In rare cases, new evidence might emerge during the appeals process, which shows that the offence was worse than originally thought, and therefore additional punishment would have been warranted. In these cases, this additional punishment will not be given out immediately. Instead, it will be suspended (i.e. only applied if another offence is committed within a set period of time). For example, if the original punishment was a warn level increase, but after seeing new evidence, we conclude that it should have been worth a 1-week ban... then, the result of the appeal would be to uphold the original warn level increase, and only hand out a 1-week ban if another offence is committed within a set period of time (e.g. within the following 3 months).
Other than the above scenario of "suspended punishment for new evidence", once the result of an appeal has been decided and communicated to you, the matter will be considered closed. If the outcome of the appeal is not the one that you had hoped for, then please do not lash out: not only will this not change the result of the appeal, but it will be treated as another offence in and of itself.
Thank you for reading and understanding. We hope that you'll never have to use this (because you'll never have any punishments to appeal in the first place ) - but, if you ever do get punished when you believe you shouldn't have been, then this is the way to get that situation addressed .
Board Information and Policies
Affiliation | Coffee Credits | Ranks and Awards | Name Changes
Account Deletion | BBCode Reference
Moonface (in 'Woman runs 49 red lights in ex's car')' Wrote: If only she had ran another 20 lights.
(Thanks to Nilla for the avatar, and Detective Osprey for the sig!)
My Items