Restructuring of the Academy.

Restructuring?
Actually, there’s no need to place such emphasis on the importance of the decisions made by the Appeals Committee (AC), and, consequently, on the individuals involved. The AC, as a disciplinary committee (which was its main function), has outlived its usefulness – it has a high status, but there is no visible useful or creative activity. We need to try to understand what the Heroes community needs at the present time and help it stay afloat (!). This means collecting feedback, analyzing opinions, and generating new ideas based on them. Such an addition would be very useful.
Changing the name would also be a good idea. The word "appeals" evokes an atmosphere of legal proceedings, as if a fair trial will be held, and someone will be "thrown in jail." For example, a Council of Players, a Chamber, or whatever you want, in general, some kind of representative body for players, not against them. And the review of controversial games can be left to competent people (2-3 people) – this is just one function out of many, and it is not necessary for everyone to participate in it. Moreover, this function can be assigned to the organizers of tournaments (i.e., in the regulations, the organizer undertakes to secure the support and involvement of competent persons for the final resolution of disputes).
If a dispute cannot be resolved – and any dispute can be resolved – it is enough to clearly define the regulations and rules, and not make excuses for oneself in the form of shameful notes.

The host has the right to make any changes to the regulations and rules during the tournament, and also has the right to refuse participation to any player without publicly explaining the reasons.

This is also because moderators combine the functions of organizers, judges, and even… are members of the AC. Well, these are ready-made dictators-usurpers. Therefore, no one has the right to argue with them. Otherwise, they will be banned. Therefore, a counteracting mechanism is needed, as well as some additional limiting one. Of course, it is convenient in terms of editing posts, tables. But moderation is often used not for the benefit of the community.
For example, regarding the situation with the admiral's hat, everything is so clear that it was enough to include a clause in the rules prohibiting the intentional use of unfair advantages that are well known but may not be mentioned in the current rules. Another thing is if the player became a pioneer. Then the bug used can be counted as a plus. A Guardian of the rules is needed to answer questions about the rules, with a clear interpretation. There is a lot of unnecessary, burdensome information in the existing rules, which can sometimes distort the meaning. And all existing comments on the rules should be moved outside the main text.
The most important thing is promotion, if you want, propaganda. Objectively, Heroes (3) is a mastodon that is still holding on thanks to the unprecedented enthusiasm of long-time fans. The game's position is far from mainstream. And somewhere we need to draw support for this game, which is not very well-known. And use the opportunities and resources of the entire community. It is important that people feel involved in the movement, that they make some kind of contribution. I see my contribution in this way.