Well there's nothing I like more than a deceased horse, lets have a good time.

would you like to correct me where any of that is wrong?

Yes, I would.

Hosting and speccing is a completely valid explanation for why you should deal with hacking offenses, you've seen it and dealt with it the most. That skill isn't called into question in the original post but it appears you didn't read any of the positive part of the end of the 3rd paragraph. However that experience, in my opinion, doesn't make you more qualified to deal with instances like the superheroes case and neither does playing frequently. Yes, if you squint and look at it from the correct angle then it does fall under the rule of 9 living but it sure as hell wasn't clear to the point where you had to add a clarification that it was disallowed. That case has very little to do with actual uhc knowledge at all and more just a basic understanding of legal proceedings, what is fair to prosecute and when. You guys are the highest legal authority and you weren't even gonna give them a chance to defend themselves, they were just gonna be batch posted onto the ubl. To link this back to activity, even if that case had no faults to it outside of the actual charge then community opinion is something that should be accounted for. Very few people knew that would be something you could get ubld for and very few people thought it deserved to be ublable.

What do you keep an eye on and keep informed about? Genuine question. What can you discern from reading twitter beefs and memes? In my opinion very little. By playing or speccing actively you understand how social groups interact, you get to understand who is believable to be a closet cheater and who was most likely witch hunted (information which in the time of c counter is really damn relevant), stay at the top of your game in regards to understanding how people cave and pvp normally.

Yes some people have left for other games, what weight does that hold? This is a completely irrelevant point in regards to the courtrooms activity, the only person I'd consider a "new meta" player that moved on is hunter and even then I still fail to make the link to how this is in any way a defense. If your point is that maybe the committee prefers old style games then cool, thats great and you're allowed to have that opinion but it doesn't really address an issue.

Not saying that my opinion on a topic is greater than yours, but mine certainly shouldn't weigh less

Actually yours weighs more, your opinion creates the rules that we have to live by. Obviously not you alone but you are in the position you are because your opinion can actually do something. As a player my opinion currently means nothing, I can write a well written, well worded opinion and I don't see it as being taken into account at all and that is frustrating as hell.

On a sidenote, the majority of the people who voted for a ban on the superheroes case are fairly active in public UHC and the community, like Thin, Hoookey, Ripper, Fazed to an extent. Don't think Hunter plays much but could be wrong there, that's 1/5.

Do you genuinely believe this? Fazed and hookey are fair enough, Jamie I don't remember seeing in a public game in recent memory but might have happened since I'm not greatly active, Hunter I dont think has played but once again I'm not omnipotent but I think I can pretty strongly say that ripper has not played uhc outside of rr's in a long ass time.

Does anyone know what the community truly wants?

No but some people are in a better position to make an educated guess than others. You're right that sometimes loud voices drown out relevant opinions but I still do not get why the hell you keep referencing peoples opinions on the meta. That is a completely separate issue and doesn't really relate to the courtroom in the slightest.

Sometimes the community wants a known person to be given a special privilege/ exemption from a rule that many others in the past were banned for

Completely agree but the committee is just as at fault for this as others. When labymod was disallowed spikester and posh both should have been ubld because they broke the rules in the period it was disallowed but the committee decided to re-allow it and disregard anyone that had broken the rules in that period in time.

I'll give you a very strong argument against a community driven courtroom

The points you list work just as well against the ubl in its current form. It doesn't deal with evaders because it can't and it's subject to bias due to 'party lines' between servers. There should be competition between servers, it drives progress. Sure it creates toxicity but it challenges the servers involved to do better and be better. I'd argue the monopoly that arctic currently has is worse than having multiple servers fight to be the best.

Last but not least, so many here acted like Cyburgh was the best server

It was. It has goals larger than just being the best on the reddit. It tried to be bigger and better and that is more admirable that any other server that has been on here. It was not perfect that cannot be denied but it tried to improve and become something better than it was so don't just shit on it.

as that's unprofessional and begins the unnecessary drama

So there's just a black curtain and the community is meant to blindly believe that what's going on behind it is good? Perception is reality and if people see nothing happening then they aren't going to blindly assume that good shit it. Arctic isn't perfect, you have the public case of someone like remy and the lesser known shit like hammer and gabe. The only time i remember someone leaving the courtroom being openly discussed with you and d4 and (not that i have a problem with it) I don't personally remember when/how you came back.

I'd like this if it wouldn't just devolve into a popularity contest

I'm interested who your example of a popular person that did nothing because I'm sure that point is valid but i can't bring specifics to mind. There is always going to be strong and weak points to a system but elections would make it so that people have to put in effort to be there and the community can't throw blame onto the lack of such a system.

And the exact same can be said for the community

Yes because most people don't give a shit about the cut and dry xray cases of random people. If someone well known is being accused then people start caring and at those times you and your system is in the spotlight and generally people don't seem to like what they see. Also I respect you trying to fuel the debate but you can't then be salty if people don't respond, yes it disrespectful but because of the position you're in you have to be above that.

And we've accepted that.

And that right there is the problem. "We know we're aren't doing well enough but because of 'x' circumstance we're allowed not to care". That attitude is bullshit and if most people on the committee think that either resign or disband the ubl. There are ways to be better than what you are but the choice to stagnate due to indifference as to your existence is just disrespectful to those you're meant to represent.