Implement or amend policies that forbid the obstruction of justice

I feel that something like this would already be taken care of in an appropriate manner, wouldn't it?

Vouch.

I Vouch.

Are there any cases where you don't feel this is being dealt with appropriately as it stands? I would expect this sort of thing to be handled through our normal escalation routes such as via executives or failing them through me...?

Quote

@videogamesm12#7735 A forum administrator deliberately deletes or hides a thread containing crucial evidence against them or a friend of theirs.

😈 😈 😈 Never said forum MOD 😈 😈 😈

on a real though, this just should be a thing anyway, atleast in the admin conduct policy. vouch

What is the suggested punishment for this offense? Especially for your last point, I assume that the intention is that the punishment after a failed cover-up is more severe than the original punishment would have been.

I agree to all the points in the thread (as long as point 2 also goes the other way: if an adminstrator preemptively closes a thread because they don't want to / can't supply ample evidence.) But as far as this being an actual policy implementation I am torn.

I see this as redundant due to change in direction as to how the server is being managed by the ownership wild1145 or executives. If Wild chooses to ban a user, because he deems them harmful to the server property or reputation, then that's his choice to make - as he has made evidently clear in previous posts.
This also brings in to question @StevenNL2000's position as permban manager (if I recall correctly) - what's the use in having such a position, if ownership can override him. I do understand that the most recent instance of this was a discord ban appeal, but I also think that the Permban Manager should be responsible for judgement here as well.

Personally, I would rather retain the jury system, wherein the verdict is simply based upon a for / against-system.

vouch

@videogamesm12#7745 I think you missed my point. If someone is exhibiting the behaviours you propose to be included in policy, they should be being flagged by those observing it to more senior admins, to executives or ultimately to me... I'm trying to identify if this is for some reason not already happening / not clear, because I am really trying to reduce the policies we have and rationalize things to make them easier to understand rather than go the other way and have 2 million detailed policies.

@wild1145#7845 Really, the number of "policies" we have could be very low if people were simply able to apply common sense. It's quite honestly ridiculous to need an entire policy for everything. A rulebook sure, every server has those, but an entire thread detailing every tiny thing really shouldn't be needed,

On the grounds that this should be being enforced anyway, I don't feel the need to write up a dedicated policy for this, if you have concerns people are obstructing administration and the running of the server you should flag it to a more senior administrator or as a final resort directly to me.