Im glad all these people who say we suck never apply for HO. Except kolbe
(12-05-2018, 01:37 AM)AsylumParty Wrote:So now that we're on the outside looking in, ya'll trying to coup, or what? Please do dear lord please (12-05-2018, 12:37 AM)kckolbe Wrote:These are the motherfuckers accusing me of dishonesty.
To be serious for once though, I think people have false opinions on how we come up with punishments and why. We don't punish people because we hate them or anything like that, we just punish people when they've broken a rule. The appeal process is there if the person who got punished thinks it was unfair or that they didn't break any rules. Kolbe is obviously appealing, so we're going to take a look at it and come up with the decision as a group.
(12-05-2018, 07:47 AM)DeathOnReddit Wrote:so we're going to take a look at it and come up with the decision as a group. Wait, what? I thought it went to the appeals team, not back to HO. The whole point of an appeals team is to prevent having to deal with emotional inertia of the original decision-makers who, separate from unconscious bias, have demonstrated either an unwillingness or inability to handle this decision responsibly. Because whether or not the decision to not contact me was intentional (sources conflict on that), it is undeniable that my side of the story was not even casually sought prior to making a decision. (12-05-2018, 10:14 AM)kckolbe Wrote:Wait, what? I thought it went to the appeals team, not back to HO. The whole point of an appeals team is to prevent having to deal with emotional inertia of the original decision-makers who, separate from unconscious bias, have demonstrated either an unwillingness or inability to handle this decision responsibly. Because whether or not the decision to not contact me was intentional (sources conflict on that), it is undeniable that my side of the story was not even casually sought prior to making a decision. No, the appeals committee does not decide whether or not to rescind your punishment. They're supposed to work with you to come up with an appeal that we then look at. Kinda like the NFLPA. (12-05-2018, 10:14 AM)kckolbe Wrote:Wait, what? I thought it went to the appeals team, not back to HO. The whole point of an appeals team is to prevent having to deal with emotional inertia of the original decision-makers who, separate from unconscious bias, have demonstrated either an unwillingness or inability to handle this decision responsibly. Because whether or not the decision to not contact me was intentional (sources conflict on that), it is undeniable that my side of the story was not even casually sought prior to making a decision. I think it goes to the appeals board who makes a recommendation to HO regarding their original decision. Then HO makes the decision to repeal or replace the punishment. (12-05-2018, 08:42 AM)nunccoepi Wrote:I think it goes to the appeals board who makes a recommendation to HO regarding their original decision. Then HO makes the decision to repeal or replace the punishment. Looks like you are correct. @DeathOnReddit was wrong. Per the announcement: "After we come to a determination we will give a non-binding recommendation to HO. The Head Office is still in charge and has the final say on the punishment. Essentially they could choose to follow or not what we say. " (12-05-2018, 10:45 AM)kckolbe Wrote:Looks like you are correct. @DeathOnReddit was wrong. Per the announcement: thats what i mean i just said it in a bad way |
|