Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

After Helen's reply a little higher up, the discussion doesn't really lead anywhere; it’s not worth breaking your head over. It wasn't worth it from the beginning.

Kamikaze should receive a reprimand for his unwillingness to play fair and a warning that if he continues to write such *nonsense* in AK, he will receive a preventative ban from all tournaments for several months. No problem, just need to think with your head when you are distracting people. Even in tennis, despite having an automatic system for determining whether the ball is in or out of bounds, players are only allowed three incorrect challenges. I think AK can afford to be stricter and limit itself to two instances of dealing with blatant nonsense. They aren't resolving these issues on a professional basis (for money).

The essence of "the complaint" lies in the fact that Kamikaze claims that the "date of discovery" for the reason for technical restart is 112, but in reality, the "date of discovery" was when it became clear that the second path did not lead to GO, and this definitely isn't 112. And 112 is the day Helen informed his opponent that there might be a technical restart.
And if the date of discovery isn't 112, but the game continued only until turn 113? Then what is the "date of discovery"? That's right. 113. There are no other options. As of the end of turn 112, the question about the second path remained open. (This is for lovers of jurisprudence).
Is anyone discussing the fact that there is no GO on the road at all? No, they are not. There is no GO, and this is an obvious technical error.

Is this some kind of complex calculation regarding the date of discovery? If someone wanted to think logically about the given topic, they would figure it out themselves in 10-15 minutes and wouldn't distract everyone with their writing (this also applies to Vik). It would be okay if there was any meaning to it (like in my lengthy posts Kappa), but there isn't.

Kamikaze receives a warning. The issue is closed. Thank you all for your attention.

And if he starts arguing now, ask for that video, and if the video shows that Helen wrote to him that there is another unchecked path where there might be GO, then immediately ban him from all tournaments for 3 months. Whatever you call it...
In this case, Helen wasn't really wrong. For Blitz, he performed more or less close to perfectly.