Admin Feedback Thread (Archived)

[Sorrontis]

Guys, so I just had this shower thought. This problem of not trusting the admins + not wanting a democracy might be fixable with an observer committee.
Specifically, what if when highly controversial decisions (like the mass banning right around the time I joined) are observed by a group of "impartial" members of the community. Maybe after the fact even. No powers, no rights to give their opinion on the matter at hand.

They are only allowed to review the process used by the admins and report to the community of the decision was done in good faith (regardless of the outcome). Of course, they could not divulge details, so they have to be trusted by the community at large. They would be looking for things like biases in the admins, ignored evidence (for or against the case), anecdotal evidence, and anything that doesn't jive with proper judiciary procedures. Finally, they would disclose whether they agree with the verdict & whether they believe if it was done in good faith.

If they report that the decision was not done in good faith, the admins may want to rethink the process.

I think this would be a good balance between transparency towards the community and keeping specific details from being released.

Thoughts?

---

Good bye my friends. Good luck in space. Fly safe.