Chess timer: step 3. Starting time. Also fairies and RR. 6 polls in one thread!

The situation is actually much worse.
I constantly make amendments and clarifications to the rules, without any voting or democratic discussions and arguments, acting like a tyrant and despot. I do this when controversial situations arise, or when there are opportunities for misunderstanding or different interpretations. This often happens after discussing the issue with other judges in the Arbitration Committee.
Putting every amendment up for a vote is unthinkable – neither the players want it, nor would it be practical, as our tournament threads would be drowned in endless, pointless polls, and I would simply die from it.

Regarding the percentages, I already wrote that that vote was not accurate, and I see no point in adhering to its results.
For controversial points in the rules that imply an alternative, I believe it is fair if the new version passes by gaining more than 50%.
I put those positions up for a vote that have generated the most doubts about the validity of the rule over a certain period of time (currently about a year).

For those who don't understand why I do this, I clarify that these rules are primarily the rules for the seasonal tournament, which I organize. Therefore, I have every right not to consult with anyone and to write absolutely anything that comes to my mind. However, I don't do that.