Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

1. Regarding the editing and clarification of rules. I am constantly working on this. The rules are extensive. It is impossible to account for all nuances, accuracy of wording, possible interpretations, and game situations. Life always throws something new into the mix. The HP Rules were used as a basis. Over the past 5 years, they have been revised several times. The latest version is quite correct; questions and controversial situations arise infrequently (1-2 per month in those tournaments where I am a judge, and before version 2 of the rules appeared, there were disputes 2-3 times a week). I maintain close contact with other judges; we discuss difficult situations together – sometimes two or three people participate in the discussion, and sometimes even 6-7. After resolving a dispute, I IMMEDIATELY make amendments and clarifications to the rules, in consultation with other judges, so that similar issues do not arise again. This is a normal work process.

2. Rule prohibiting opening save files. The current formulation covers all cases - it is forbidden to open them - by anyone and under no circumstances, except for judges... in a disputed situation. This point has already been discussed many times. Judges have always interpreted it unambiguously. (I can provide some examples: a player did not show up for a replay for a long time; his opponent opened the save file, awarded himself the victory, and posted a report... Another example: a Новичок was interested in where his opponent got his heroes from if there were no resource nodes on the map, and he opened the game...). The vast majority of players felt that the wording was clear. In particular, about a year ago, directly said the Tournament Coordinator and Judge:

What are you talking about? Opening an unfinished match's save file is unacceptable!!! And it doesn't matter under what pretext.

, and you, Oelm, knew this perfectly well.
Back then, I wanted to make clarifications to this point in the rules, but both on the forum and in personal conversations with the judges, players said that this was unnecessary and already understandable. Therefore, I decided not to change anything.
Oelm’s situation was judged according to existing rules; no changes were made before this moment; the issue is closed.
Yes, after the post:

It should be stated in the rules on all resources as a separate line that loading a save without an opponent is prohibited, and moving without an opponent should also be prohibited, so as not to tempt anyone. It is normal for the opponent to give 3-5-10 minutes to remember the position and plans for the game before replaying.

, I suggested making clarifications to the rules.
If a similar situation arises today or tomorrow (until there are changes), the AC will again proceed from this formulation:

No one has the right to open the saves of an unfinished match except for the judge/tournament leader or a member of the AC, and only when a controversial situation arises in the match.

But even if there are only 2-3 players on the forum for whom the current wording is unclear, then, apparently, it needs to be changed so that there is unambiguous understanding. And if we are going to do this, we need to do it immediately, while something like this does not happen again, and the current situation is not forgotten. When else would we do it, in half a year?
/Personally, I believe that this is unnecessary. For me, it is obvious that you cannot open saves of a postponed match, even to refresh your memory, let alone to think things over, let alone scout, let alone reveal the entire map... all this gives an advantage in the game. Our tournaments are online; our rules are for online games; most matches are played with a time limit. Ideally, it is better not to postpone at all. In difficult situations, sometimes you panic and start making mistakes, which further complicates your position; this is online, and this is the dynamism and drama of our game. Here, postponing helps the losing player: calming down and thinking (with good memory, you can think without opening save files) is always helpful. You can draw a parallel with tennis when a match is interrupted due to rain, and then the loser manages to turn the tide./
In any case, we judges will think about whether or not it is necessary, and if we change the wording, how.

3. This situation - a dispute in the twaryna vs Oelm match. The essence is that twaryna believes, based on the Rules, that it is impossible to open save files, while Oelm believes that it is possible. Since the dispute concerns the fair play clause (violations of other rules are punished with a technical defeat, and penalties for unfair play are much more severe), the matter was considered by the AC. Based on the presented facts, there was clearly an instance of opening saves from a postponed match; this fact was acknowledged by Oelm; in the rules, this violation is classified as a violation of the fair play rule; therefore, the judges made a decision in favor of twaryna.

Interestingly, Lizard B, in the tournament where Oelm is currently playing, also seems to believe that save files should not be opened:

I would not impose any penalty sanctions beyond a tech loss in a specific game for something like this.

But here's what we have:

I always looked at saves in single-player mode in 90% of matches before this.
Moreover, sometimes I allowed myself to consult about saves with someone else or discuss plans.

So, logically, Lizard B should give tech losses in 90% of Oelm’s games.

4. Regarding this topic and Oelm’s posts in it. According to the AC’s decision, player Oelm should receive 50 points for violating tournament rules. Since as a result of this, Oelm will automatically be banned for the third time, we postponed this punishment so that he has the opportunity to express himself in his defense. In reality, Oelm confirmed repeated opening of save files from unfinished matches. There is no point in waiting further, especially since the user’s posts violate other forum rules. Therefore, I assigned the points. In a week, Oelm will be unbanned and can continue.
From the forum rules:

1. When 100 violation points are accumulated, the user account is automatically blocked by the system
2. A week after the user's account was blocked, 5 violation points are deducted, and the user's account is automatically unlocked
3. The fourth blocking of the user's account is final; after that, the account will not be unlocked anymore.