BLITZ TOURNAMENT

No offense intended, but you've already explained it once... I'm saying this because, without your explanations, it would be easier for you to defend your position. But now, loopholes have appeared, and one of them has been exploited by a "hero" who is apparently currently "applying for a patent" on what he claims is his own invention.

But how could he not explain it? What should players with version 3.0 do if, during a Walkthrough, they have a sailor's hat and need to cross a stream in one turn and continue on land? Answer me that question. I'm asking Dmitry A.S. first. If you don't respond, the question will go to AmberSoler :)
P.S. I'm saying this because even if AmberSoler hadn't explained anything, players would still unintentionally use this bug in version 3.0. And it will be used. Either we need to prohibit everyone from getting off the boat on the same day they get on, or I don't understand what I'm saying wrong?

Added after 6 minutes

This "hero" is the least of my concerns... :) The flawed practice of looking for logical "loopholes" in a set of words, which is what any post is, is simply inherent in him... Even if everyone absolutely understands what is being discussed, there will always be someone who pretends not to understand anything and starts nitpicking at the words... Words, unfortunately, are not perfect.

AmberSoler, I think you misunderstood. I believe Dmitry A.S. was referring to Radik, not me. I'm not applying for any patents because I didn't get good results from this blitz and didn't take advantage of any loophole :D And you're referring to me in your post. Looking for logical loopholes in a set of words... If only that were the case :) Usually, this set of words is what the author uses to explain the RULES or AMENDMENTS to them. What logical "loopholes" can we talk about when it comes to such things! The rules should not give rise to ambiguous interpretations, as Dmitry A.S. rightly pointed out.
------------
5. In this case, the Walkthrough provided by Radik formally falls under the note set out in the previous paragraph. Escaping by bribing the guards in order to be hired in his hometown is sufficient grounds for using the Sailor's Hat. The hero had no other way to get to the city. So, I have no formal complaints here. Let's leave everything as it is.
------------
This is essentially what I was proving and defending, meaning that if a player is playing on version 3.0 (which is allowed), I absolutely agree with AmberSoler's decision in this case. I hope there will be no further disputes about this, although players with version 3.0 will fully use the Admiral's Hat, just like players with version 3.2