Should accused residents get accuser's name and a copy of the abuse-report?

I appreciate that there are other poll options available but these are the ones that I can currently think of that seem most relevant/interesting to me.

But I may change my mind about that.

This is an anonymous poll. Once your vote is cast it cannot be changed (unfortunately).

Mods, my apologies if this thread is more appropriate for the 'SL In-world Political Science' forum.

-- Neal

Don't see the poll...

But my answer is no, because the accusers never get to see the end result.

Currently we don't know whether we get abuse reports or not - and we can't counter them if we do.

The system is biased in favour of those reporting - but I can't imagine that there is the public will to change it.

Decisions can be appealed.

after this happens revenge greifing increases 1000% this is a bad idea

Indeed

I've always thought that the lack of transparency in Linden Lab's disciplinary policies is incredibly strange. You are often disciplined without even really being told why, except some vague reference to some portion of the TOS. You have no idea who accused you, and don't get to present any evidence or explain your side of the situation.

If anything, as part of investigating an abuse report, they should check with both sides - especially in more serious situations. I know there is evidence available - server logs, etc.. but that does not always explain the context of the situation, and often times it is a grey area that is not well served by this bizarre system. You are right though, there does not seem to be much interest in changing it - you don't appreciate it until it happens to you.

I think it's important to get a copy of the abuse report, though never the name of the abuse reporter.

I was once AR'd but I have no idea why.

The right to face one's accuser is basic. The right to contest any accusations is basic.

I was accused of something, no idea exactly what. I requested follow-up info and nothing was sent. To this day I have no idea what I did or how to avoid doing it in the future.

I don't see how griefing would increase if we allow defendants the right to a fair hearing of all the facts, including naming the complainer. The second report would lead to even greater punishment.

It just seems unfair to be punished without any way to make your case. That's my opinion anyways.

Perhaps SL should use this form of punishing those who cannot get themselves to abide by the TOS, CS, FG, etc.: The names of those who are found guilty of violations will be given to the next batch of accused as if they were the ones who abuse reported the accused. The currently guilty people will then have the next batch of guilty people out to get them for the rest of their stay in SL. Of couse this has to done without telling anybody.

I agree with Cristiano and most thoroughly with Kevn Kline.

coco