Posts from Voting FOR candidates for the Arbitration Committee.

Judging by the poll results, the fact that a candidate streams and their popularity among the masses plays a significant role. I think this somewhat undermines the objectivity of the elections.

Are you talking about Dirty, Nitro, or Pita? It would be strange to see people who don't actively participate on the forum/streams/as judges/organizers among the successful candidates.

No. There are no doubts about their adequacy. Rather, it's about Zhek, whom I know not only virtually and generally respect. But after that "admiral's Muppet show," I wouldn't let him near the AK, not even within cannon shot.

The Arbitration Committee reached a different decision, but Redwait's opponent (I don't remember who it was) independently corrected it in the right direction, kudos to him.

Judging by the poll results, a significant role is played by the fact of the candidate's streams and their popularity with the masses. I think this to some extent devalues the objectivity of the elections((

Nitro was exactly, one could say, a newly minted member of the renewed AC)

Please include his and my vote when counting the results.

I didn't unsubscribe from the Admiral's Muppet Show back then because I was in the bath. And when I came out, the issue had already been resolved.

I'll unsubscribe now – my opinion is that controversial situations should be interpreted in favor of the players. Because forcing a player to think under a ticking clock about the nuances of the rules is inhumane; the rules should be simple and clear.

Specifically, in that story, Redwait had 2 serious arguments – the absence of a direct prohibition in the rules (even though it was a known bug) and unofficial permission from 2 members of the Arbitration Committee.

In such a situation, refusing to use the bug could result in post-game comments like, "Well, you're a fool; you missed an easy victory." Using the bug, however, does not create any obvious problems; you can always excuse yourself from the time warp using the two arguments mentioned. No one wants to be a fool, so using the bug is a perfectly logical (although not mandatory) decision for the player.

Therefore, the Arbitration Committee's decision, in my opinion, should have been as follows: award the victory, ban the bug.

The Arbitration Committee made a different decision, but Redwait's opponent (I don't remember who it was) independently corrected it in the right direction; respect.

Yura, since you brought up the topic of humanity, was it humane to use this bug against your opponent?
Judging by your text, you agree that this is a bug that should be penalized. The only debatable point is the measure of punishment – whether to deprive him of the victory or not.

The fact that he didn't violate the rules wasn't even discussed. The discussion revolved around the moral aspect.
What surprised me the most was not that he used the bug, but his behavior afterward. He could have backed down – said he was just joking around for the audience, and that's it, and now let's play again, so there are no hard feelings. But instead, he stubbornly insisted that it was normal!
Since the members of the Arbitration Committee have to make judicial decisions, I would like to see people with an adequate perception of the world in their ranks.

It's interesting, why do you think your perception of the world is more adequate?

Since members of the Arbitration Committee have to make judging decisions, it would be nice to see members with an adequate perception of the world in their ranks.