We've discussed in before in the mod forum but I'll start up another thread on it. However, based on previous times we've talked about it, let me give some insight into why we did not go that route.
1) Similar instances of infraction to other people are rather common to come up in these discussion. Precedent is something routinely looked to in terms of mod action that might be questionable or needing a second look. For example, a mod could argue that something should be overturned because in relatively similar situation X and Y, with posters with a worse infraction history, we only gave warnings. Doing that would indicate to the disputing poster what action was taken against Poster X and Y. This is something that can not, and will not, be talked about with another poster because individual mod action to other posters is private. Mods could not use the posters name but...a) That complicates the issues for the Mod's possibly making it hard to know what's being talked about to go back and look over and b) that still potentially makes it obvious for a poster to go and find out. As such, having a poster participating complicates a significant part at times to the dispute process.
2) Part of the reason it is private is that it allows mods to speak freely. We rely on each of us to call each other out when we think something is wrong, and we need to have that level of trust of privacy for that to happen. By having the poster involved, Mods become less free to actively and strongly argue and debate each other on the issue. The team functions as that, a team, and it hinges on an understanding that we can argue and fight and debate on issues regarding the forum with an understanding by all mods that what is decided is what we stand by in the end. Again, the trust in the team to be able to be fully open and honest with each other is important for this to work. We may talk about past discussions, things brought up in other infractions or report threads, and other such things. There's a lot there that can could be easily misunderstood, taken out of context, or misrepresented due to having only a tiny view into the larger scope of things.
3) By allowing a poster in there, you're presenting them with the ability to determine "favorites" on the mod team that they seek to leverage. Part of the process that keeps things consistent on this forum is that violations are reported via the report function primarily, not by PMing individual mods. All mods are expected to check the report forum when they come in. By doing it this way, it is an even playing field where any mod is as likely as the next to be the one answering a report and making a judgement at any given time. Five reports on five days of the same individual could each be viewed and decided upon by a different mod. This essentially creates a consistent playing ground. By allowing individuals to have insight into specific views an individual mod may have, it opens up instances where they run to that individual mod to attempt to get action taken rather than reporting it to the team and allowing the natural process to occur where the first mod that see's it acts based on their judgement. This actually opens up the chance for Mods to be wrongfully used to actually target individuals inadvertently.
4) It would further complicated, prolong, and bog down the issue. Already, with the method that we currently use, we have numerous posters that attempt to view it and treat it in the method you just said....court. They attempt to grasp at loop holes, argue continually on semantics, attempt to argue based on accusations to others, and etc. We have sought a streamlined process not simply for the posters, but for Mod's too. Again, this is a volunteer position and disputes is just one of a long list of things we need to do. Getting into long running "Debates" about an infraction with posters is not something we have a desire nor intention of doing. Especially since the case with disputes, often, is that the arguments that are used ("But others in the thread were doing X!"..."Yeah I said it but I mean, they should've known I was joking so it should be okay!"...."Yeah it was a personal attack but...come on, you let people get away with more than that!"...."This is biased and you're out to get me"..."it's stupid that's considered a violation!"...."He IS a [derogatory term], so I'm just calling a spade a spade!") are simply not an excuse, what so ever, for a rules violation. Allowing "debate" and "discussion" to occur in those disputes is not going to do anything but prolong the process, take up mod time, and frustrate a poster further as they continue to make the same failed argument that simply is not something that is, or ever will be, viewed as a legitimate defense. Most of those that would mount a legitimate defense, and there are cases of this with numerous infractions overturned, do so in their PM to the mod team and typically those are the ones that are most often to get overturned without any further need for them to enter the discussion.
I appreciate the polite method of presenting it, and we do have new mods so I'll reopen the topic. However, Redress is likely right. The likelihood that this will be shot down is high because, the fact is, what you suggested is something that has been discussed more than once already by the mod team in multiple incarnations. It's not a new suggestion, nor idea, and something whose merits have been debated and argued about before. It doesn't hurt to broach the conversation a bit again....but the reality is that, since there's really no new compelling suggestion as to why it should be done than there had been in previous times it's came up, the results are likely to be just the same. That's not simply "shooting you down", it's be honest with you regarding the situation in terms of past times this same suggestion has been brought up.
If you are not going to contribute to the topic of discussion, don't post in Feedback/Suggestion threads.
, we definitely have our times where we can become VERY heated over an issue with some strong disagreements. However, having the privacy and the ability to do those arguments to come to a conclussion that the team agree's to muturally hold is integral to the method of how we operate the forum. Without being able to be open in such a fashion, which frankly would not happen with posters being involved, then mods can not fully fight for what they think is the right thing in an instance with the passion that it deserves because it is not an entirely safe and trustfilled setting.