Wicc
Auto-translated
Vik - did a lot of useful things, but right now I don't quite understand him, or is this some kind of promotional move for the development of TE ... dunno ...
The main goal is the development of the Heroes movement. Development in breadth, development in depth. This goal is distant, abstract, and without specific benchmarks, which is precisely what makes it convenient. With this goal in mind, I run tournaments, write articles, communicate on the forum, refine TE/WT, etc.
Of course, one cannot limit oneself to purely constructive activity here; sometimes you have to destroy what was previously created or put down all sorts of inadequate freelance initiatives. Moreover, while I created various features that weren't always on point — there were mistakes and unsuccessful experiments — I destroyed almost everything that was justified, at least the course of subsequent events convinced the majority that it was bound to happen.
As for the AC — this experiment seemed strange to me from the very beginning, and I wrote about it even then, though not particularly aggressively, as it was still just an intuitive feeling, not firm conviction.
The reasoning was also laid out back then, and it was roughly as follows — "what for?" That is, what actual niche could this body fill? Going through the options, I realized none in particular — for settling disputed episodes, tournament judges are sufficient; for reviewing season games, 1-2 season judges are enough; cheating investigations will be handled by the entire forum anyway, etc.
That is, all the niches that the AC lays claim to are already occupied, and have been for many years; certain traditions and understandings of how things are done here have developed. After all, it's been over 10 years for Heroes.
Therefore, an attempt to intrude into this established ethical ecosystem with a charter clearly alien to it inevitably leads to an epic fail, which we had the opportunity to witness firsthand. If it weren't for Alex's case, it would have been something else — historical inevitability.
When I participated in AC-supervised tournaments on HeroesWorld, I didn't bother my head with the thought that the AC might strongly object to something. I figured they'd have enough sense not to throw themselves under the wheels, but instead take a wait-and-see position and let people sort things out themselves.
In fact, many people thought so, so the initiator of such a showdown could have been a very wide range of players. Moreover, it doesn't even necessarily require a serious accusation like cheating; the very fact of opposing bureaucracy with Cossack-style freedom is important, while the pretext is secondary.
There's too much anarchic romance in the Heroes movement, a desire for the freedom to choose one's own leaders and idols; imposing a bureaucratic system of "you elected them — now obey" is fraught with a mass of conflicts.
So no matter how you slice it, avoiding conflicts with top players (some leave — new ones grow) under such AC regulations is unrealistic. The matter can be mitigated by choosing the AC composition correctly — if it consists of older people well-acquainted with the traditions of Heroes communities, with experience in resolving conflict situations in tournaments, there's a chance to smooth over the rough edges.
The previous AC composition was clearly youthful, without serious judging experience, without experience observing schisms and reunifications of groups. For many of them, HeroesWorld seems to be their first serious Heroes community altogether. It's no wonder that many things obvious to me turned out to be revelations for them.
So anyway — ideally, it's better to have no bodies like the AC at all, but if one wants to play around with this trinket (I understand the idea is attractive, many are drooling over it), then precautions should be taken. For example, create a situation where mentions of the AC on the forum are kept to a minimum, and it's brought out like a machine gun from the closet — only when a serious fight is underway.
For contrast — Dubrovin's regular phrases "The AC will consider your request" (uttered clearly not without pride) evoke a persistent association with pompous bureaucracy, not understanding that ideally they are servants of the people, not masters. Therefore, it's better if these phrases don't exist at all, or at the very least, if they're not uttered by Dubrovin — for others, it might not be as jarring. As a trial, one could add a clause to the AC regulations with roughly the following content — AC members are forbidden from mentioning the name "AC" (and its synonyms) publicly, as well as using the word "we" in reference to the AC.
That's roughly my view of the issue ...
