Ok let's take a look at this step by step.
The Current Process
This normally includes multiple conversations with the person in question. Normally someone reaches out, and I make it a priority to do it in cases where I can devote the time to communicating with said person. Now, I shouldn't have to tell you why I saw it as as a possible conflict considering the relationship that we have. Thus, I figured someone else would talk with you and get your side of the story, if I had messaged you there is a chance that it would be detrimental for you to not appeal your side to an already biased source considering what has happened in the past. I should've made sure that someone talked with you no matter what, but it slipped my mind and I was focused on DSFL and real life, since DSFL duties come first for me. If you don't want to believe me that's perfectly fine, but I believe you think that just because you've already shown in the past that you do not like me and will try to use me as a scapegoat whenever necessary.
As for the appeal process I can't comment since I'm not on the appeals board and it was not brought to me, instead the info was brought to dwyer.
Now for your problems with the process.
1. We already had something negative to look at. This was the basis for the leaking punishment, and what started the investigation. The mock draft you posted was the main point and is the basis for any process going forward, so we did not have the ability to start without a negative first look, as we saw the picks line up with what had happened in the draft.
2. This is two parts. First if you want to believe that people don't look at the evidence first then that's on you, but we do not just find someone, have 1 person take a look and they decide how we should punish if at all. Second, if you're not allowed to post a mock draft for TPE, why would you be allowed to write mock draft media? It wasn't written down because it's normally clear to people that you aren't allowed to post a mock draft anywhere, should we have accounted for someone hitting the gray area? Probably, and that's a mistake in itself that has been corrected.
3. There should never be public record of who voted, this is how witch hunts get started and members of HO burnout from people constantly acting like we're a detriment to the league only looking to punish people.
More appeals process, again I can't talk about that because it's not my area.
Your Solutions
1. We had evidence from both sides, there was more ways to get your side, although we should have gotten your side. Most notably Slm was an advocate for you as he believe you had not leaked and provided info about him telling you Maddox was the pick.
2. This was done, we don't just vote on stuff we aren't informed about, this is a conclusion you have brought up that has no basis of truth.
3. This is how witch hunts happen. People will harass members who don't vote in their favor and HO members will be put in a position where they're damned if they do, damned if they don't.
4. This doesn't make sense. Normally there is a reason for a rule, and if this were allowed people would be able to find some obscure thing and take advantage of it.
Appeals
1/2/3 of appeals I'm not gonna talk about.
4. The appeals team should not get a vote, we use their recommendation to determine the best course of action and everyone votes with the new info we have been given. Giving the appeals team a vote means that of the total HO members, there would be approximately 8 votes. This would mean that if the appeals team has about half of the votes, and that if the member in question is favorable with the appeals board and HO people in question could end up coming off with lighter penalties than others. We need to use the evidence given to us to make a decision, and the appeal doesn't just come in and get thrown away (as should be shown here considering your penalty was reduced), the appeals team has their voice, the shouldn't get their voice along with equal voice to HO members as well, which is what you're proposing.
5. I've said it every time. This is how harassment, witch hunts, and just insufferable attitudes occur. People will believe that they can harass members to get what they want by targeting members who may not have voted favorably in any part of the process.
The Current Process
This normally includes multiple conversations with the person in question. Normally someone reaches out, and I make it a priority to do it in cases where I can devote the time to communicating with said person. Now, I shouldn't have to tell you why I saw it as as a possible conflict considering the relationship that we have. Thus, I figured someone else would talk with you and get your side of the story, if I had messaged you there is a chance that it would be detrimental for you to not appeal your side to an already biased source considering what has happened in the past. I should've made sure that someone talked with you no matter what, but it slipped my mind and I was focused on DSFL and real life, since DSFL duties come first for me. If you don't want to believe me that's perfectly fine, but I believe you think that just because you've already shown in the past that you do not like me and will try to use me as a scapegoat whenever necessary.
As for the appeal process I can't comment since I'm not on the appeals board and it was not brought to me, instead the info was brought to dwyer.
Now for your problems with the process.
1. We already had something negative to look at. This was the basis for the leaking punishment, and what started the investigation. The mock draft you posted was the main point and is the basis for any process going forward, so we did not have the ability to start without a negative first look, as we saw the picks line up with what had happened in the draft.
2. This is two parts. First if you want to believe that people don't look at the evidence first then that's on you, but we do not just find someone, have 1 person take a look and they decide how we should punish if at all. Second, if you're not allowed to post a mock draft for TPE, why would you be allowed to write mock draft media? It wasn't written down because it's normally clear to people that you aren't allowed to post a mock draft anywhere, should we have accounted for someone hitting the gray area? Probably, and that's a mistake in itself that has been corrected.
3. There should never be public record of who voted, this is how witch hunts get started and members of HO burnout from people constantly acting like we're a detriment to the league only looking to punish people.
More appeals process, again I can't talk about that because it's not my area.
Your Solutions
1. We had evidence from both sides, there was more ways to get your side, although we should have gotten your side. Most notably Slm was an advocate for you as he believe you had not leaked and provided info about him telling you Maddox was the pick.
2. This was done, we don't just vote on stuff we aren't informed about, this is a conclusion you have brought up that has no basis of truth.
3. This is how witch hunts happen. People will harass members who don't vote in their favor and HO members will be put in a position where they're damned if they do, damned if they don't.
4. This doesn't make sense. Normally there is a reason for a rule, and if this were allowed people would be able to find some obscure thing and take advantage of it.
Appeals
1/2/3 of appeals I'm not gonna talk about.
4. The appeals team should not get a vote, we use their recommendation to determine the best course of action and everyone votes with the new info we have been given. Giving the appeals team a vote means that of the total HO members, there would be approximately 8 votes. This would mean that if the appeals team has about half of the votes, and that if the member in question is favorable with the appeals board and HO people in question could end up coming off with lighter penalties than others. We need to use the evidence given to us to make a decision, and the appeal doesn't just come in and get thrown away (as should be shown here considering your penalty was reduced), the appeals team has their voice, the shouldn't get their voice along with equal voice to HO members as well, which is what you're proposing.
5. I've said it every time. This is how harassment, witch hunts, and just insufferable attitudes occur. People will believe that they can harass members to get what they want by targeting members who may not have voted favorably in any part of the process.
[div align=center]
[div align=center]
[div align=center]