Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

This is probably the most important thing in the post.
That's why everyone has the right to write and express their point of view.
But there is also objectivity, which, one way or another, does or doesn't correlate with our subjectivity.
Recognizing this fact and being able to relate it – that’s what is needed for development, not for degradation/stagnation.

It's strange that you focused on such an obvious thing. Of course, in these two large posts, I was outlining my subjective opinion. That's exactly how it works: I write my subjective opinion, you write yours, we (and other forum users) discuss and form an objective opinion. In this situation, I tried to provide a fairly detailed justification for my point of view; 90% of the text was about this, but you dismiss it, saying that it's all subjective.

I already wrote about the Land of Magic map.
There are guaranteed Shaman Altars on both sides, and water.
Perhaps, the game rules for fixed maps included a clause about not using the Shaman Altar bug (specifically for this map), or maybe they didn't because it was obviously unacceptable, but either way, no one even tried to use this bug.
Both options work as precedents (with or without the clause).

That's correct. A fixed map clearly shows us that "using Shaman Altars is bad and unfair." And I agree with you; indeed, it shouldn't be used. But how does this imply that killing an opponent at level 111 in a Castle is fair or unfair? Maybe you can show me another fixed map where it is allowed to kill a blue player with a demonstrably weaker army at level 111? Or where it is forbidden.

He fought in a Castle,
i.e., he entered the game.

Let me quote your words again: "The game implies competition until the very end, until one side achieves a victory condition or someone surrenders. Where was the competition here? Since there was no game, there's no point in talking about the result," and "no actions from the opponent could have prevented this anymore."
These are wise words, by the way. Yes, he was attacked in a Castle, but he didn't enter into the game (i.e., the competition); nothing depended on him.

But he also took turns before the fateful 111, for at least 3 days (or even more if both sides were taking restarts).

Again, here is my first post. Before the fateful 111, Blue hadn't taken any turns; they had just started, and both players had two restarts each (if following the "Outlaw" rules). THERE WAS NO GAME YET. And then Red says: "Hey buddy, let's give me two restarts, and you get one." Is that considered fair play?

Regarding the chances of winning – they were practically zero:
The player got lucky and received a Diplomat hero, joined with junk units, and killed his opponent with an even greater power advantage than in the situation described above.
Ah yes, before the Diplomat crushed him, the opponent did take some turns.

And he should have made the decision to take the last restart considering the possibility of the opponent getting a Diplomat as part of mandatory generation, as well as considering the hole in the wall between the main towns, i.e., taking these factors into account.
Anarchy, gentlemen!

Zero chance of winning only occurs when Blue is killed at level 111. In other cases, anything can happen. One person gets a Diplomat who crushes someone at 111, another has a Celestial Dragon appear, and a third finds Winged Guardians behind shifted guards.

If you anticipate being killed at 111, don't take a restart if your turn has already come... or, assess the odds and take it anyway.
If you expect your Necropolis opponent to have a Legion of Skeletons, think about how to counter it and implement that strategy.
You can figure something out; think and implement it – with more or less chances.
Moreover, you always have not one option but several, and you choose the best one based on your judgment; this is what constitutes Gameplay.

In all these game situations involving skeletons, Diplomats, blocks, etc., the player makes the decision himself. Can he "counter" them? What should he do? How should he play? Should he take a restart? When he is killed at 111, he doesn't make any decisions (again, I want to clarify that there were no restarts before this, the game had just started).