Originally posted by Very Rusty
I see just a guess, like my 3 was just a guess...I thought it was pretty good one, being we were asked to check only 3 names. I don't understand how more people on a team, would be a problem, but then I don't know how the process works like you do for sure !!
...because we also had only 3 votes in the first game mod vote.
I can't presume that things will work the same in future as they did in the past, but generally before the admins banned anyone, every mod had to agree (a form of sign off) that in their opinion there was overwhelming evidence, beyond reasonable doubt.
It only took one dissension, or one vacation, or one slacker, and the outcome of a case could be delayed indefinitely. Even with the limited number of mods in the past, it could often take some lobbying and prioritizing to get a case closed and referred to the admins for action.
As the number of mods increase, individual workload might come down, but the potential for logistical delays would escalate. Somewhere, there is an optimal balance.
Of course, it's possible the admins might accept a majority verdict if there are a greater number of mods in the future, but I still think that justice is better served and that decisions have greater weight with a consensus verdict.