Leaving Heroes of Might and Magic in protest of Alex’s removal from the Facebook group.

The full wording of the Arbitration Committee’s decision:

Disqualification from the tournament for violating the rules of the game, disrespecting the opponent, and unacceptable behavior of a fan. Also, to avoid similar situations in the future, the Arbitration Committee proposes to adopt the following amendment to the current rules /under discussion/: No one, except the judge/tournament organizer or a member of the Arbitration Committee, has the right to open the save file of an unfinished game, and only in the event of a controversial situation in the game. If, at the moment a controversial situation arises that requires opening the save files, there is no connection with the judge/organizer/Arbitration Committee, the game must be interrupted and saved by both participants until contact with the judges is established.

We decided to end the discussion of the situation, as it no longer makes any sense. When we post our materials, even an elementary school student can write a plausible essay on the topic of "How I visited someone." Those who are not closely following the topic may find Guest's explanations acceptable. I will make a detailed analysis on the Arbitration Committee website.

Regarding the matter at hand, yes, the decision is disappointing. There is no doubt about the technical error in the game, but the disqualification from the tournament is like saying, "We tried to prove cheating, but we failed, so to avoid looking foolish, we decided to impose some kind of sanction." For your information, in jurisprudence, there are only two options: either the defendant is guilty or not. There is no intermediate option. If guilty of cheating, then it is a clear case of cheating. If not, then it is a technical error in the game, due to the fact that Guest's knowledge of the situation may have influenced the outcome.

Why not a clear case of cheating? Any judge could have ruled that way and been right. We took into account the personality and authority of Alex and Cobra. Practically anyone else would have received a clear case of cheating. Where did the punishment options come from? We do not have rules for such situations or for punishments (we would have them...). No one could have come up with this. It is not customary to interfere in other people's games, play for someone else, etc. If we recognize this situation as normal, then after that no case of a game being given up, not saved, or cheating can be punished. It will be enough to find a friend/relative who says: "The player went to the bathroom, so I played for him." The person who posts the result is responsible for the game from start to finish.

Furthermore, rude behavior, in my opinion (and not only mine), is permissible in relation to anyone who accuses another of cheating without providing sufficient evidence. And it doesn't matter what status this person has - statuses come and go, but relationships remain.

Don't look there, look at yourselves! Yes, I am convinced that half of those present are cheating in one way or another.

An example from real life. A competition winner is caught doping. The result is annulled, and the athlete is disqualified for a certain period. Regardless of how the doping got into the athlete's body: whether he bought pills for a headache at the pharmacy, whether the coach gave him vitamins, or the doctor gave him a cough syrup, or the competitors put something in his soup at dinner. There is a test result, so the athlete is responsible for it. In our case, the situation is complicated by the fact that all this happens in virtual space. Regarding the form. We discussed a lot about how to convey the decision to the forum. I don't like this form either. There was a suggestion to simply post the Arbitration Committee's decision without explanation, and to have the moderators delete all comments on the forum. Would that be better? Suggest options, and if there is a good suggestion, we will gladly change the rules and act in accordance with them. Personally, I am accused of eliminating a competitor. I judge in many tournaments, and I play in some of them, and absolutely any of my decisions can be interpreted in this way. For example, I award a victory in OFB-3. Obviously, with the intention of reducing the chances of the loser, who I don't like, to advance to the Final Battle. I realized a long time ago that judging and playing on the same resource are incompatible. Recently, I stopped signing up for our tournaments. Although, if you don't play, then there is not much interest in the resource.