This will not work for several reasons.
One, if leaders are given the freedom of choice to pick who to fight for an intervene without admins thought put into it, then you open Pandora's box that reveals a plethora of problems ranging from a top-tier charactet in strength stomping their intervenes which then opens up another box of complaints of some people overstaying their welcome -a hell that no one wants to go through ever again.
Having multiple interventions isn't a bad idea, but can have their own issues of balancing them for fairness -which is hard to achieve if you don't have someone actively gauging who is even to who. And can cause delays to the certain flows -issue number two.
I think having one for each team, with admin insight is ok. It's not perfect, but they have the data to make an even decision even at the dismay of some people.
One, if leaders are given the freedom of choice to pick who to fight for an intervene without admins thought put into it, then you open Pandora's box that reveals a plethora of problems ranging from a top-tier charactet in strength stomping their intervenes which then opens up another box of complaints of some people overstaying their welcome -a hell that no one wants to go through ever again.
Having multiple interventions isn't a bad idea, but can have their own issues of balancing them for fairness -which is hard to achieve if you don't have someone actively gauging who is even to who. And can cause delays to the certain flows -issue number two.
I think having one for each team, with admin insight is ok. It's not perfect, but they have the data to make an even decision even at the dismay of some people.