This way it will though make it more difficult for the volunteer moderators to handle things, as they must always discuss verdicts and then justify them and then there is whining and then and then and then...endless food for rules lawyers.
No one said there wouldn't be guidelines for the moderators.
But there
will not be anywhere you can look to see, "Oh, if I go and call someone a slimy !@#$head, I'll only get a warning and 10 points! It's been long enough since the last time I mouthed off on the forum, I can do that and not have any problems!"
No. The moderators will have broad discretion, particularly to deal with people who would like to be rules lawyers. So someone like the above hypothetical jerk would not just get 10 points if he was known to be a serial offender; he'd get quite a bit more than that. And if he kept it up—trying deliberately to avoid more serious punishments by carefully doling out his venom and vitriol—he'd start finding himself hitting bigger and bigger warnings for the same infractions.
What you suggest would not reduce the "food for rules lawyers," Atanamir, it would be a buffet for them.
