@emperor_penguin
My understanding of your proposal and its underlying assumptions are:
- FAF needs to be less toxic
- Its too toxic because the CoC isnt being enforced
- Having a rule that the CoC is enforced will solve this
I’d agree that it would be good to reduce toxicity in FAF, but it doesn’t follow that inconsistent moderation is the cause, and even if it was I dont see what having a rule that the CoC is enforced would do to stop it.
There are a bunch of other things that might impact on toxicity. To give a few possible examples:
-too many reports for the mods to keep ontop of (note your proposal could exacerbate this problem if it led to an increase in immaterial reports being made-a lot of mod reports will be ‘false’ reports such as reporting a teammate who didnt play perfectly)
-ignorance of the rules-as they dont strictly define what is acceptable but instead include a number of more subjective tests its possible people dont realise what they are doing is breaching the rules; and/or people dont even know the rules exist
-lack of effective deterrent-FAF is cheap to buy so the offender might think they can just buy another copy if banned for offensive behaviour
A solution to one problem can also cause others. Eg allowing anyone who volunteers into the mod team would be great for clearing the backlog of reports, but a bad mod could cause far more damage to FAF, and you’d likely see an increase in inconsistency. Very prescriptive code of conduct rules coupled with prescriptive punishments might reduce inconsistency of mod actions, but also lead to actions seen as unjust or unwarranted. Imposing changes to the mod team without their agreement also risks demotivating existing mods (who are volunteers).