0/10 not happening

alright so u wanted mods to comment, and heres my comment:

this is an unnecessary idea. we dont have any issue of mods doing their own appeals, because we always tell mods not to do that. if someone did their own appeal, we would see it on the "last moderated by" section. the only case where a mod would do their own appeal was if the appeal was invalid (i.e. appealing an appeal), and even then we tell mods not to do their own stuff because of complaints like this.

it would just give more people powers that they dont need and could abuse. you assume this would help because of the increased number of people, but if anything, it would just make it harder to keep everyone doing the right thing, especially since they would probably feel like they werent actually "mods" and therefore could do what they wanted.

plus community votes never work. weve done that once before and we saw how that worked out. overall this is just a terrible and unnecessary idea, because it has too many variables that you are assuming will work when, in reality, there would be a major conflict of interest for everyone involved.

tl;dr 0/10 bad plan

The only proper solution is to put me in charge of EM, I'm so corrupt it's like when you play an old game and the integer overflow makes your score wrap around back to 0.

Steve throwing out valid points

You cant make this popularity contest.
I am pretty sure if mods agree to this idea in the first place , they would be willing to nominate proper candidates.
And the whole ex-admin can nominate ensures that at least some candidates are not friends of current mods.

wouldn't the people in power just then nominate their friends and display the same bias that you seem to have a problem with? how is this any different than the current situation, where people submit applications and are chosen by the current mod team?

Yes. 1 person per mod is a great idea.
Not sure how I would implement ex mods, perhaps ex admins only.
And obviously one cannot be on mod team and Tribunal team at the same time.

ScubaSteve says

wait I actually read the OP. disregard.

so to eliminate circle jerks and cut down on bias, you want to institute another mod team through a popularity contest?

nominated by someone of influence with the requirement of a 3000+ score is hardly a popularity contest anymore

good thread

if you want to limit it even more just have every mod nominate 1 person and 1 person only

wait I actually read the OP. disregard.

so to eliminate circle jerks and cut down on bias, you want to institute another mod team through a popularity contest?

who decides the second team then, the community?

Tribunal team doesn't choose their own members unlike mod team.
This limits the chance of that situation arising.
Not that you care, with your sarcasm

Two teams of moderators sounds like a great idea. One red and one blue team.

But then that begs the question, if the red mod team gives someone a violation, and the blue team's friends with the person and overrules it, who keeps blue team in check?

If I may, can I suggest that we have a supreme court mod team to settle ties and power struggles?

It's not about being unbiased. There is always gonna be some bias.
It's about limiting the power mods have. How many times have you seen mods to their own appeals or randomly giving out no vios. Or simply refusing to go against their fellow moderators.

This does not affect the job of mods, it merely makes it so they are not judge and jury at the same time. Provides a proper 2nd opinion

One quick question, what's gonna certify you that the people in the 'appeal group' are gonna be unbiased?