Admin Decision on the Banned Six

[Syrus]

Why would I argue with someone who puts himself above me from the very beginning, think about how a player feels when they read your post. It comes over as if you are on a moral highground, but until there's need for "admin actions" both of us are just people of the same community. Or is that already the admin speaking, dangling the sword of "justice" above my head?
In all honesty, is that a way for an admin to act? Yes, you have the facts, the evidence, but that is part of the problem: we don't. We're left in the dark. We just got rumors to work with for some and that's not a good point to start at with such serious matters. Sanctions of such severity need to be very clear on what caused them, both as an example and to stop any discussion dead in its tracks - unquestionable evidence or at least a clear description. (A ban for someone cheating can obviously just state that the person was cheating, no need for extreme details there.)
For most of the banned we can (somewhat) see the reasons (and I would have agreed to a few on that list), but of some others ... overall it just feels inconclusive to just dish out a perma-ban with no prior warning. This overall, this is what makes the whole thing wrong, and this is why everyone deserves it to be undone.
Besides, it feels like it could hit anyone at any minute just as the admins feel like doing it with the lack of proper knowledge for "what exactly deserved a PERMANENT ban". We are not talking about a small thing here, this is pretty much the "death sentence"-penalty for Disco. The "non-plus-ultra of a sanction" available. It should not be thrown around.

You made a mistake and then complain that it backfired heavily. You have the chance to undo it.
The only right choice would have been to unban all of the six and restart the whole matter with this being considered as their last warning, would that not have been the easiest choice to make, and probably the one that'd have put all sides at ease? It would have given you every justification necessary for a ban in a following incident, yet you chose the "not half, not full" option, with a very surprising outcome to any "normal human".


(And yes, there are biased people on your team; for some it might be obvious, but I won't be the one pointing fingers.)

---