[Salsaccino]

If it was always precedent, outside of those who've been banned being allowed to appeal on the grounds that they've learnt their lesson, it was never well spoken of, never really written down in any format or made clear that if you were unhappy with a ruling as the victim that you could, in fact, appeal this. If it's not new policy it's certainly the first time I've ever seen it officially acknowledged as one. Which is, again, why I do think having it written down in an official medium that "hey, if you're unhappy with how your case was handled, you can ask for it to be re-evaluated" is absolutely the right way to go. I checked the rules and only saw that you can get a second opinion if you feel you've been unfairly punished, which makes me feel like it's missing the other half of the coin. I think it should be written down, so that anyone - new people included - can see that it exists.

Currently it's only worded that these sorts of relooks or appeals exist for the perpetrator / punished. That's what I mean there. It's all well and good repeating that over and over again in chat or in here but it needs to be written down in the right place.

Valid, certainly. Definitely something we can discuss as a team to add a footnote of it in the rules if we feel it's as necessary as you say.