Auto-translated
Also, some thoughts regarding the work of the AC, or the judging committee: if a player N suspects player X, then to consider such a claim, player N prepares a complete analysis of player X's game based on the save files, writes down what he considers controversial, what is suspicious, and what is logical. Only after that does he have the right to submit this proposal. There should not be something like: "hey, take a look at player X's save files, is there anything there?"
In general, a judge should be moderately lazy, otherwise people will take advantage of him. People have the useful property that if they can't get something for free, they start looking for ways to do something themselves. A large percentage of disputes that reach various instances are ultimately resolved by the participants themselves before the instances react (if they don't react quickly).
This is a normal practice in legal proceedings...
