Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

He saves games, nerves, and time for good players from the Arbitration Committee.

I apologize in advance for the off-topic comment to the members of the Arbitration Committee, but Alfein's posts, and not only his, often contain phrases that are frustrating. Lately, any appeal to the Arbitration Committee is immediately considered as an attempt to harass the opponent, rather than an attempt to clarify the rules. And what if a player decides to write to the Arbitration Committee, does that already mean that the game and his nerves cannot be saved in a particular situation, but the Arbitration Committee is meant to save the time of other good players by reviewing this situation? Why write about the time that the Arbitration Committee spends on this, if the Arbitration Committee is designed for this purpose? At the same time, everyone understands that no rules can unambiguously describe all the problematic situations that arise in the game.
Since the beginning of 2017, the results of reviewing appeals to the Arbitration Committee have ceased to be published. I, and not only I, have the impression that there is no point in writing to the Arbitration Committee.
I believe that the review of various controversial situations in the Arbitration Committee with a public announcement of the verdict on the situation should encourage changes to the rules if necessary, or if there is no clear position and the opinion of the community is needed, then a vote can be held, as was the case with the Redraw and Grail issues.