Let me clarify the situation with the "silent" committee. Initially, the Arbitration Committee (AK) was created as a closed body, consisting of people trusted by the forum, and therefore their decisions were considered optimal a priori. A closed section was specifically created on the forum for the AK, and until a final decision was made, it was forbidden to disclose information about the progress of the investigation, both on the forum and in personal conversations with anyone outside the AK. That's why there are very few statements from me on the forum regarding AK matters; these are the rules of the committee's operation. The final decision is posted by someone from the AK, and I haven't had to play that role. However, this is not a personal decision of someone, but a collective one, and it makes no difference who announces it. Regarding greater transparency, in my opinion, the maximum that should be done is to also publish the results of the vote by name along with the decision. Everyone who is interested in the logical reasoning used in making the decision already asks about it in private messages, and we haven't refused anyone. It seems that with all this talk about transparency, people want to turn the AK into a talk show rather than a serious body