Posts from Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

If an investigation was conducted, please provide a link. Did you see it? The decision is final and not subject to appeal... That is, no one ever makes mistakes. I respect that.

I agree with every word you say. And is this what you call an investigation? ;)

Whether it was an investigation or not, in that ill-fated thread, there was an accusing party, a defending party, there were arguments, and finally, a "court" decision. From everything written there, it was quite possible to extract bits of reason and draw some conclusion. At least for oneself. Without imposing anything on anyone. Perhaps the members of the Arbitration Committee also managed to draw this very conclusion, on the basis of which the decision was made.

Show the existing evidence - as it should be, with arguments, and not with links to squabbles in a parallel world.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything or prove anything.

Show the existing evidence – as it should be, with arguments, and not with references to disputes in a parallel world.

I apologize, but if you wanted to examine this evidence and opinions, the links would be more than sufficient. Everything is explained there in a very clear and understandable way. No clear arguments were heard from the defense or the accused himself, so all further arguments from Vitalik's defenders, which have nothing to do with the essence of the accusations, only cause surprise and irritation in me personally.

Do you think there's a chance of self-correction?

There's always a chance. I chatted with Vitalik in a private message. He seemed like a decent person, and if he was cheating, this situation will teach him a lot. Well, if not...

An amusing interpretation of the axiom of jurisprudence. :)

Show me the existing evidence — as is proper, with arguments, not links to squabbles in a parallel world.

No need. But the rules require it; read them yourself for once... There's nothing you can do about it... Either change the rules, or conduct an investigation according to the rules, or — you know what must be done...

The point of the thread has been lost, unfortunately. The procedure accepted by all AC participants was violated from the very first hearing. I agree that no one wants to dig into this problematic and sore issue. So don't refer to the rules next time, gentlemen. For they are not here, and everyone understands that; it's just that the majority seems to have made a decision, and that suits everyone — to sweep the matter under the rug, and then — come what may.

The main issue concerns the procedure used to combat negative phenomena. A barbaric procedure, let's be honest. As for the evidentiary basis on which the accusation was built — I won't speak to you about it as a lawyer... Look for it yourself on this forum, please... Let's just say — the tribe decided by a majority vote. This has happened many times in history — the majority has the right to self-determination. So rewrite the rules and put everything in its place.

Thanks to everyone who tried to listen.

If you have even the slightest understanding of jurisprudence, my next argument should answer the above-cited objections and remove questions about the "legality" of the decision-making procedure on HeroesWorld (ХВ).

So, in every procedural code, there is a section (articles, chapters, etc.) on evidence. I will quote one of them to you verbatim.

"Grounds for release from the burden of proof.
Circumstances recognized by the court as common knowledge do not require proof.
Facts established by a court decision (or other body that resolves disputes) during the consideration of one case are not proven anew when resolving other disputes involving the same parties.
A court verdict that has entered into legal force is binding on the court when resolving a dispute on the issues of whether certain acts occurred and who committed them.
Facts that are considered established by law are not proven during the consideration of a case. Such an assumption may be refuted in a general procedure."

I hope you have no doubts about the higher professionalism of lawmakers in the real world compared to the virtual one. Therefore, the AC's decision without a re-examination is completely logical and justified from the standpoint of jurisprudence.

Guided by the above, Vitalic has only 1 way left — to refute the accusations in a "general procedure," i.e., to prove the honesty of his brilliant play in real life or his correction in subsequent online games.

Added after 8 minutes

Regarding the question of why Vitalik ran to take the gold mine — I understood that this sir still doesn't know that mines can be used for speed — leaving slow troops there to stay overnight?

And also, gold mines can be guarded so that an opponent doesn't take them! After all, +1000 per day! I think you could also hide in the darkness near the mine and start accumulating money by skipping turns — well, why not as an explanation?

Many beginners, until they build a Capitol, don't stick their heads out of their native respawn :D

Ps: don't make people laugh. Having Town Portal (ТП) — you can speed up quite well in secondary towns, while replenishing mana along the way.

"Grounds for exemption from proof.
Facts recognized by the court as common knowledge do not require proof... Facts that, according to the law, are considered established are not proven when considering the case."

There was only one court – the subject of disputes on the forum, and before this "court," no "common knowledge" had been established. Therefore, all that remained were assumptions that needed to be either proven or refuted. Incidentally, formally, neither was done.

The entire body of evidence is based on the assumption of illogical player behavior on the battlefield from the point of view of mathematical statistics obtained by reviewing his previous games, as well as taking into account generally accepted methods of scouting on the map (i.e., atypical player behavior was established – such as "dwarves at the elevator" and so on), which is indirect evidence of a "possible violation of the rules of the game," but is not grounds for a final verdict.

And in general, did anyone from the AC take on formal advocacy obligations to defend the player – as is generally required? Were there any attempts to find even the slightest grounds for accepting this method of play as permissible? Just a question. I don't know what the decision-making mechanism is in the AC.

Guided by the above, Vitalic has only one way left – to refute the accusations in "general order," i.e., to prove the fairness of his brilliant game in reality or to correct it in future online games.

An unfinished sentence. It should be completed with the words: "...after which the Committee will reconsider its decision to punish the player with a black mark, offering all sorts of apologies and placing a "golden non-cheater mark" in the player's profile for life, etc." I understand that we can easily punish everyone, but we haven't yet figured out what to do with it.

Conclusion:

1. The body of evidence is based on probability theory.
2. The general mood of the players regarding the issue under consideration was taken into account.
3. The decision is based on a completely raw document that has come into force, "adopted unanimously, and no objections were received from the players." (Now, as you can see, objections have been received).

"We all know how to play, and our gaming experience shows that something is wrong with this player. What's there to think about, it's all clear to everyone, especially considering all the complaints. Let's create beautiful rules, approve them, and punish him on a legal basis. The matter is resolved and not subject to appeal."

Why all the farce with the impeachment procedure? A simple statement would be enough: "We believe that you are a cheater until you prove otherwise. Therefore – you're banned!" This method, by the way, would be much clearer because, from the point of view of probability theory, this is exactly how things usually happen in life.

P.s. I fully agree with the opinion that it is practically impossible to prove map hacking. This is an unsolvable problem at the moment. If the AC has definitively completed the consideration of this issue and does not intend to return to it, our conversation is simply sophistry. Well, at least it's in a polite form, thank goodness.

2Amber, Kyle, etc. Well, if everything is clear, and you yourself say that everything is clear to everyone, why do you keep bringing up this issue again and again? This decision was made, researched, and discussed within a certain group for about 4-5 months – and believe me, it wasn't an easy decision for these people! After a fight, people don't start throwing punches! And this is not a matter for the court; there's no need for comparisons. This isn't real life; it's just a game, but a fair and just game. And here, many honest players, whose reputation is beyond doubt, perhaps even Vitalik, have gathered and made a decision. Many others were not included in that list; not everyone is in Nagan's Ace. And this decision was announced, and there was time to discuss it. And no one dared to refute it. Now, everyone is just writing, undoubtedly very beautifully and eloquently, perhaps even convincingly. But it's nothing more than a lot of useless, beautiful words. Don't try; it won't change the opinion of those in a position of power.

Conclusion:
1. The evidence base is built on probability theory.

What is the evidence base for catching a cheater (map hacker) in online play?

If the answer is something like "there is no 100% proof in online play," then explain: what are you happy about?
Not that there is a cheater, but that the system doesn't have a 100% indicator to detect them? - there's nothing to laugh about here, but rather to cry! Instead of putting effort into finding these tools, you boast about the impunity of this phenomenon, thereby shaping the minds of young players and making them believe that this method of play is acceptable.

It's no secret that when all political efforts fail, the crowd, the masses, take over. And when they are strong, they are feared, and attempts are made to protect oneself from them. But in reality, it's not that complicated. ORT, RTR, newspapers, advertising, etc. But here, it's too difficult. We can't be deprived of communication, of ICQ, etc. Most of us are not famous players, but we want justice! And many on this forum sighed and said to themselves, "Finally!"

Added 1 minute ago
Damn, Neo, your post was epic! I was writing from my phone.

Captain, good job for checking the saves (probably the only one of the defenders to do so), but you only checked the saves of a single game. And if it were just one game, the argument about the gold mine could be "swallowed," but there are other games, such as Vitalik - Aldegir (finding a super-treasury) or Vitalik - Keba (unexpectedly finding Dragon Utopia)... there were other saves that the AC members didn't actually mind studying. In every game, something surfaces...

2AmberSoler: What is the point of these mile-long posts about nothing? Answer the question: have you seen the saves of at least these three games?

I'm curious, what are all these defenders of Vitalik trying to achieve? Do they have a goal? A realistic one? Let's assume the goal is to get Vitalik back into the game. This is unrealistic because: 1) The administration (AK) won't change its opinion on this matter. 2) The administration won't change its opinion on any matter that is lobbied with such poor arguments as those used by Vitalik's defenders. 3) Even if Vitalik's ban is lifted, which of the leading players will invite him to a tournament? And which of the top players will agree to play in a tournament in which Vitalik participates? And who among those who agree won't open the map to "be on equal footing"? And how widespread will cheating become if everyone sees that even such blatant cheating goes unpunished? Think about all of this, fellow defenders. However, I admit that their goal might be simpler: to rant, vent their negativity, show off to the administration in a white coat, and fill a few hours of their lives with something meaningful. This is not forbidden. Even old ladies on a bench need some meaning in their lives. But why are members of the administration participating in this… mess?

Vika, regarding your question about the goal – I myself suspected Vitalik of being a “100%” cheater. But these were just my suspicions... and I already said that I wasn't defending him, but I'm personally interested in analyzing game situations... And it's simply interesting to play with Vitalik... there are few others from whom I can learn something interesting.

Vitalik is undoubtedly a strong player, and it's very interesting to play with him; take, for example, this game, which I really enjoyed. However, as a person, he repels people with his pickiness towards newcomers, his quick temper, and his stinginess. Because of this, we never finished two of our games.
In our games with Vitalik, I didn't notice anything that could be considered cheating, and I have no complaints. Although I agree with many that he is a very experienced player with a good sense for advantageous moves, as in this game of ours:

I would suggest closing the topic for a while. There is a real risk of "fueling confrontation and trying to take advantage of the situation." Because when the argument escalates, people will start forming opinions – who will figure out who provoked it, who gave in. Everything will turn into a mess... And then new arguments will appear – see, everything was peaceful before, but now there are squabbles)).
Deleting posts is only a partial solution, and there is also a risk of being blamed.
P.S.
My actual post is purely to address the author of the topic – it should be deleted after reading, I think.

I certainly respect the desire to maintain a "clean" forum, free from arguments, squabbles, and negativity, but such methods remind me of the USSR, where there was no sex, etc. and so on.

But how can you just close a topic? How can you honestly say later that you have a friendly forum, that you don't argue, that you have a unique atmosphere, when all of this is achieved artificially?
Of course, no one will sort things out in a closed topic. Here, you need to think about how to achieve such an atmosphere through open and democratic means, and not through authoritarian methods – otherwise, this advantage will soon turn into a very serious disadvantage. IMHO.

P.S. – I saw the deleted posts between Britvochka and Loyal after sending this message. I hope there were good reasons for that...

There's no need to lock the topic, especially since the conversation hasn't formally ended. Besides, it can be done at any time.

Let's not get into arguments – the first alarming post, in my opinion, was left by Vic. I understand that he has grievances and that he is annoyed by the words of those who "defend" the game, and perhaps even by my posts... But I am trying, after all, to conduct the conversation as politely as possible. I haven't noticed any old men in white coats here, who are just whining and spreading their pathetic propaganda. I wish the same for everyone.