"King of the Hill"

He has already backed down significantly... and not just with some minor adjustment. How can there be any randomness when the organizer changes the random selection? Moreover, this "adjustment" deprives the player Amiloo (who has just started playing) of the opportunity to continue participating after losing. In that case, it should be stated in the regulations:
"The organizer assigns opponents at their discretion"
And then there will be no questions, including about transparency.

I completely misunderstood what you were talking about. No one is depriving anyone of the opportunity to play, and the amendments to the rules that I introduced after the start of the tournament are indeed of a "minor" nature.
This particular amendment, which you are criticizing, will be more or less noticeable in the second half of the year. Right now, we have a slightly more lenient system for all registered players, while still adhering to the overall idea of randomness.

What worries me more is your aggressive attacks on everything. It seems you haven't learned from our recent conversation.