2009 World Championship for Heroes IV Online.

Let's get things straight first, because it feels like we are playing by different rules :) And then I will answer your specific questions.
1. I am basing my position on the rules set out in the file WC_09_Regulation_Rules_rus.pdf, posted in the first post of this thread.
2. I clearly understand that I have offended a certain community of the "powerful ones" and that I will lose regardless, even if it is obvious to everyone that I am right.

Now regarding the situation. I am somewhat surprised that for all of you (except Zybr), it seems normal that both my opponent and the judge ignored me for several days. Once again, I ask you to put yourself in my shoes: The opponent leaves the game and disappears. The judge promises twice that the opponent will play, but in the end, he also ignores me. The round ends; neither the judge nor the opponent makes contact. In a panic, I write an open letter so that at least someone hears me...

Now to the questions:

SkidVicious, you have encountered a disputed situation. According to the rules, the resolution of disputes is entrusted to the judges. To resolve the dispute, saves were requested

You misunderstood the situation. The first dispute arose when my opponent called me a cheater and left the game. I turned to the judge STRANNIK (according to the Rules, see point 1 of this message). And he, as he later told me, resolved the situation by telling me that the opponent would play and everything was fine. I decided to continue playing as if nothing had happened, since the rules (see point 1) say nothing about liability for such unmanly (though I admit this may be perfectly normal for French men) baseless accusations like "cheater" (and they should). Thus, the episode (the first dispute) was closed. A few days later, I again asked STRANNIK for confirmation as to whether everything was indeed okay and if the opponent was playing. The answer: yes, he is playing. After a few more days (totaling more than 10 days since he left the game and 5 days before the end of the tournament, i.e., fully according to the Rules, see point 1), I inform STRANNIK that the opponent is stalling the tournament deadlines and not making contact—and this is currently the ongoing (or second) disputed situation. Therefore, I truly do not understand why saves are needed here, when it was simply necessary to find the person and, regardless of the search results, report those results to me!

The other side of the issue. Since STRANNIK ignores all my requests and complaints, I no longer trust him and consequently fear sending a save with a password, because the round is still ongoing and theoretically the opponent could reappear an hour after the save is sent with a proposal to continue the game, but already knowing all my weaknesses.

Saves were requested and, by your own words, a save (at least one) existed at the time of the request. You responded with a refusal and questioned the judge's competence. Immediately following this, you were warned in a correct manner about the consequences, but no saves were received.

Lord Nadicus sent a save upon the first request and included a password. That is, there are no questions regarding him until the save is opened; he fulfilled the judges' requirements. You, however, were given time and warnings.

The player is not being blamed for not making saves, but for ignoring the judge's request. At least one save existed at the time of the request. There were no complaints regarding the number or daily frequency of saves.

1. I did not refuse to send saves! I only clarified that I have only one(!) save and I cannot send many(!) saves, as requested by judge STRANNIK based on nothing.
2. Despite this response, many(!) saves were demanded from me, which I can interpret as nothing other than being blamed for the number of saves!
3. I didn't have a shred of time. To the question of on what basis I should send saves, the answer received was: Either the saves are sent within 15 minutes or it is a technical defeat for—ATTENTION—rude behavior (the correctness of the warning's form is questionable, to say the least)!!! And this after complete ignoring of my requests for four days (this speaks to the matter of behavior)! Sorry, but in 15 minutes I technically would not have had time to send my save, even if I really wanted to.
4. Just a stupid question: if the judge has a save from my opponent, why does he need one from me? Is it truly only for the purpose of giving the judge a reason to give me a technical defeat?
5. Another stupid question: where in the rules is it written that you can receive a technical defeat for not sending saves during an unfinished round?

When a football player ignores the referees' demands, he leaves the field with a red card. That is how it is in all sports. We are no exception.

However, if a judge makes unfair demands, such a judge then receives disqualification up to suspension for the rest of the Championship, which happened at the last meeting of the DRC of the Russian Premier League, when five(!) referees were suspended from their duties at once, two of them until the end of the Championship.

If there is no reaction, you must turn to the judges. As for how long to wait—let everyone's internal clock tell them :) But waiting until the last day is clearly not an option.

The funniest thing is that I did exactly that. And what? Nothing! The judge had no reaction. Zybr, get ready, a technical defeat awaits you just as it does me.

1. Award my opponent a technical defeat for avoiding the game. — Lord Nadicus advances to the next round
2. Official apologies for ignoring my requests to an official of the tournament — please: sorry, but you are to blame for your own defeat.
3. Remove STRANNIK from judging and organizational duties — the judicial corps remains unchanged; Strannik's actions were assessed as the only possible ones.
4. Choose a new judge from Russia, for example Zybr, as a very polite and responsive person, or Lee as someone with an excellent understanding of Heroes — recommendations for the composition of the judicial corps were accepted before the start of the tournament.

1. I understand your wish (see point 2), but I will still wait for an official decision (see point 1), since another judge is present here.
2. Thank you, but it's too early to talk about a decision on defeat.
3. It is your right to keep biased judges, but in my opinion (though it seems few people here are interested in it)—this heavily discredits the organization of the tournament.
4. If current ones aren't removed, then there's no need to elect new ones :) By the way, I registered for the tournament after the list of judges had already been accepted...

The judge received complaints from both sides, but since only one side has fulfilled the judge's requirements so far, it is clearly their advantage.

So those are the news. I should have turned to you immediately. And what complaint was received from my opponent? And when—yesterday, or did STRANNIK hide this from me too? I am simply unaware of any of this and cannot even understand what the opponent could complain about (surely not that I play better? :)). By the way, how did the opponent explain that he promised judge STRANNIK he would play, but not only didn't play, but didn't even make contact? I really hope for your answers, as it seems you are the only one who knows (or the only one not hiding) something about my opponent.

You sent the saves, of course?

Naturally, no!!! Because:
1. I don't have "saves," I have only one save, but judge STRANNIK was not satisfied with this and demanded several saves, threatening a technical defeat in 15 minutes if they were absent. What is the point of sending 1 if 10 are demanded?
2. I technically could not send my save within the stated 15 minutes.
3. Most importantly: there isn't even a hint in the rules that players must send multiple saves upon any request from a judge. Especially in an ongoing round. Especially without explanation of reasons. After all, are we playing by the rules proposed by the organizers and judges?
4. The judge did not explain the reasons requiring such urgent sending of saves (reminder: there were still several days until the end of the round).
5. At that moment, I already had many suspicions regarding the bias of the judge demanding the saves.