[Ryan]

I don't play often enough to cast a vote, but I think if your first reaction to hearing that someone got a slur warning is "what slur did they say?" to gage how likely it would be to get the warning appealed is a pretty shitty mindset to bring into staff and I'd argue that it's telling that you wouldn't be able to staff objectively.

I also havent been active enough to cast a vote, but I have to hard disagree with this. What constitutes a slur is many times a matter of opinion. Rox, being relatively new asked a question because they didnt know for sure what we consider a slur.

Which slur and the context surrounding it's usage both play a factor in the moral severity of the offense, which would definitely have an impact on the chances of a warn appeal being accepted. Reading back on the conversation you are referring to, I see that is exactly what Rox was doing, and in the end, said that the warn would be very unlikely to be successfully appealed. 

You were immediately hostile and began antagonizing the person who got banned. Rox, on the other hand, was the epitome of objective. They didnt know what happened, so they gave neutral answers to someone who was complaining about the warn and then came to a reasonable conclusion once they found out the context. They even explained why it can be a good idea to appeal a warn even if it's likely to be denied. 

+0 for now. I just wanted to say my piece on this.