Sorry it replied with my note draft.
I don't believe this is fair at all.
What is more important than IR is the social contract that, "We expect you to play the game as you would play a board game with good friends, and to value fair play above any victory or power." Please ask yourself if this is how you deal with someone who breaks the rules in a board game. If you said yes I don't think you would have good friends so I guess you've never experienced this.
I don't deny that this was a violation of IR. But you cannot pretend that all violation of IR is the same. It is not. I slipped for one sentence. The reason there are no other obvious IR cases in the courtroom is because most of the players of this game have a little maturity and aren't mentally ill, anal retentive players who are turned on by rules. I have seen bigger IR violations than this (right to attend tournaments, sirion) responded to with an IC reminder + apology, with no harm done to anyone. The punishment is completely disproportionate in this case.
It also seems that the magistrate system is terrible. The case was put forward by a magistrate with a player in the same realm. Apparently he is allowed to then influence the discussion and vote. This is stupid beyond belief because of conflict of interest. Hes a Global Mod so this isn't relevant to this case. It still shouldn't happen though. Obviously he fervently denies this but I bet there will be a smirk on his face at finally taking down the Margrave of Oritolon, who he has argued with so many times, and which he just had to point out in the title. It is obvious this opportunity gave him an erection.
The Magistrate system is not representative of the player base. It only consisting of the most overeager cancerous no-fun players selected by a few guys on the basis of being yes-men. The people who jump at the chance to have the power to judge over their fellow players are not the ones you are looking for. Perhaps look for trust medals and recruit on an invite basis.
There are no guidelines for punishments. This is a serious oversight. Apparently a one sentence violation of IR warrants the harshest punishment below a ban. I expect this precedent to mean a two sentence violation gives bans. If this was retroactive like a quarter of all players would be banned.
There is also no guidelines on defence, making the process completely one sided. Sure I could have replied here but there was never clarity on whether it would even be looked at and what the timeframe is on the case voting etc. I suggest that it should be recommended to make a statement in the thread within 3 days and that the magistrates must make a response to that.
