...Since the tournament is year-round and has just begun, it's impossible to objectively assess whose rights have been violated and whose have been exaggerated. The results or a comparative analysis (statistics) should be conducted after 0.6 or 1 year of gameplay.

P.S.
RebE, please explain to me, as someone who struggles to understand, what exactly you objected to with Namvan - just in plain language and without any hidden meanings - I want to understand.

Question for Namvan: how many players are actually participating in the tournament at the moment?

The host never intended to assess anyone's chances of participation since the tournament rules were announced, relying on randomness, which was also reflected in the regulations. Moreover, attention was drawn to the immutability of randomness. Fine, let it be.
But during the discussion, the regulations were significantly changed, even though they had been "carefully considered" beforehand. Never mind. Before the tournament started.
But even after the tournament started, there was a change in the rules (specifically, the tournament format) within a short period, smoothed over by the term "adjustment." But it's still a change!
I have a very negative attitude towards changing the rules during a tournament - it causes distrust, at the very least. But if there is a need to change the rules, then this should be done systematically, specifying this in the regulations, and implemented at the end of a semester, for example, or at least. Moreover, the change may be caused by certain events and should be motivated and justified. I regret the lack of transparency in this matter from the host. As well as the communication style: my specific, simple questions are called "grumbling" and "fierce attacks"