Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Water, water..."Imagine if"..."until the first instance"..."until it's too late"... All these "what ifs." Regarding the fact that the suddenly appearing Davalista would pass into the new AC – that's far from certain, and again, it's your assumption. People voted, and it wasn't as if they voted for a list of AC members, but for specific individuals, so your thought experiment is worthless. This also applied to my 33, but the point is not about that. For example, why did you raise the issue of the AC's closed nature after the elections had already taken place? Suppose a particular AC doesn't want publicity; what should be done? Elect a new one? That's exactly what Kostya wrote – publishing AC information will lead to so much spam and trolling that it's unbelievable.
Sanin
If this entire point is written with one specific moderator in mind, is it worth introducing a rule? Wouldn't it be easier to replace the moderator?
Such remarks don't do you any credit; instead of discussing the issue at hand, you resort to personal attacks. Regarding the elections: you, for example, beat Amila by 4 votes and lost to Redwait by one vote, while skillfully voting against both of them in the last days of the voting. Coincidence? I don't think so :D
Hmm, I thought there were 3 moderators and 1 coordinator in the AC. Well, I didn't really lose to Redwait – Hivanna's vote shouldn't be counted, as he didn't play in a single tournament (he was disqualified as a newbie). And regarding when and why I voted the way I did – feel free to message me on ICQ tomorrow; I'll explain if you're that interested.
dom2
11 years ago
Auto-translated
All the pain of unchosen prophets...
Palach HP
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Congratulations to everyone who was elected to the Administrative Council! Now I would like to hear what issues will be considered in the near future. As in any state, those who come to power hold an amnesty. Is there anyone you would like to release from confinement? We don't have that many players, and old grievances can be forgotten.
Regarding the poll, I also believe that the maximum should be publishing the question and who voted for what. If people want to ask why things are the way they are, let them ask in private messages; no one is paid for being a member of the Administrative Council, and there's plenty of hassle involved. That's why, for example, I didn't even participate in the voting.
After all, this is not a parliament, so there is no need to post so many documents.
Iamsamstan
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Or am I missing something, but I have a question: what is the purpose of the opposition in the Arbitration Committee?
As I understand it, the Arbitration Committee is an appeals body that resolves disputes regarding specific matches and provides solutions, meaning it is more of a judicial body. Judging by its composition, it resembles a jury, isn't that right?
Gomunguls
11 years ago
Auto-translated
I'm not a big fan of Vic, but he's right about some things.
I partially agree.
Making the activities of the AK open isn't a great idea, but the results should be recorded, along with who voted how, and not like last time... in the previous OFB, a decision was made, and I wasn't even aware of it. Then Rebellius writes to me, asking why such a decision was made, and I'm hearing about it for the first time. In that case, I was on his side; there was definitely some nonsense with transferring the results to the main section.
And our rules are just constantly changing... for some situations, it's necessary to clearly define them so that there isn't even a thought that things could be different.
Also, in the FB tournament, stability is just a dream... the number of players changes, the format is almost random... This is not good at all.
P.S. The analysis of matches should be done properly, and not like Roger Dalta Villa does, when he tells me some nonsense when analyzing a controversial match.
Water, water..."Imagine if"..."until the first incident"..."until the rooster crows"... All ifs and buts...
Smart people learn from the mistakes of others, fools from their own. I have seen many such mistakes in my time, so I am warning you in advance - the situation has the potential for conflict. Waiting for it to become obvious is an option, of course...
Regarding the fact that the suddenly appeared Davalista would pass into the new AK - this is far from a fact, but again, it's your assumption.
Not an assumption, but a well-founded assumption. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to verify it, but from the experience of past votes for the AK composition, it is clear that AK members who have not been personally involved usually get many votes "for", even if they have not distinguished themselves in any specific way. Because approximately 20-30% of players usually vote for the entire AK composition at once, without looking into the individual members.
For example, why did you raise the issue of the AK's closed nature after the elections were held?
I have been thinking about the idea that something needs to be changed in the AK for a long time, and I have repeatedly written complaints on all 5 points in different topics.
There just wasn't a reason to make a fuss, and there weren't any arguments either. Now they have appeared.
Because, for example, if the AK does not want publicity, what should be done? Should a new one be elected?
Yes, that's right. The AK is an elected body created to serve the interests of the players, and therefore it is subject to a general referendum. Or did you think that you received a party card and can do whatever you want?
Kostya was right - publishing AK information will lead to so much spam and trolling that it's a disaster.
Judging by the fact that you and Kostya are so upset, you must have said something compromising behind closed doors. I have no other reasonable explanation.
What could be secret about the arguments for making certain refereeing decisions? I have been doing this for many years, and I cannot remember any situations where my motives were undesirable to publish - everywhere there is either a reference to the rules, or to common sense, or to the ethical aspect of the situation.
Added after 14 minutes Iamsamstan
or am I misunderstanding something, but I have a question, what is the purpose of the opposition in the AK? As far as I understand, the AK is an appeals committee that deals with disputes on specific matches and provides solutions, that is, it is more of a judicial body and, judging by the composition, similar to a jury, isn't that right?
In theory - yes.
In practice, however, the powers of the AK are broader and include not only judicial, but also legislative and executive powers. This happens because of the combination of positions - there are 3 moderators and 1 author of the rules in the AK.
That is, the AK is not just a judicial body, but a full-fledged authority, so the emergence of an opposition is quite logical.
For this reason, mistakes in one of the aspects affect the entire structure. A moderator acts arbitrarily => criticism of the AK. Chaos in the rules => criticism of the AK.
While Pete was overseeing the situation, there were no exacerbations. But as soon as he reduced his involvement, problems began to emerge. That is why I say that the situation has the potential for conflict, and it is desirable to somehow redistribute the powers in order to resolve it.
Dirty_Player
11 years ago
Auto-translated
2Wicc, your suggestions have been heard and will be considered. Thank you, your feedback is very important to us.
Congratulations to everyone who was elected to the AC! Now I would like to hear what you will be considering in the near future. As in any state, those who come to power hold an amnesty. Is there anyone you would like to release from imprisonment? We don't have that many players, and old grievances can be forgotten. Regarding the poll, I also believe that the maximum should be the publication of the question and who voted for what. If people want to ask why it was done this way or that, let them ask in private messages; no one pays for AC membership, and there's plenty of hassle involved. That's why I didn't even participate in the voting. After all, this is not the State Duma, so we shouldn't post so many documents.
Indru should have been unbanned a long time ago; that would be the right thing to do. It could be done under certain conditions:smile32:
Added 7 minutes later Gomunguls
I'm not a supporter of Vik, but he's right about some things! I partially agree. Making the AC's activities open is not a very good idea, but providing information about the results is necessary, along with stating who voted how, and not like last time... in the previous OFB, a decision was made, and I wasn't even aware of it. Then Rebellius writes to me, asking why such a decision was made, and I'm hearing about it for the first time. At that time, I was on his side; there was definitely nonsense with transferring the results to the main part. And the rules are, of course, a mess... in some situations, it's necessary to clearly define them so that there is no thought that it could be done differently. Also, the FB tournament... there's only a dream of stability... the number of players changes, the format is almost random... This is not right. P.S. The analysis of matches should be done properly, and not like Roger Dalta Villa does, when he told me some nonsense when analyzing a controversial match.
I agree with everything, but it should be noted that everything should be done without fanaticism in this case, and control by the community (especially its useless part) over the AC should not exist, because the AC monitors itself, and in general, everyone only starts complaining when the judges make borderline decisions, and when they do their daily work, no one even says thank you. Decisions on important issues should, of course, be announced here; there is no dispute about that. Obtaining explanations regarding the decisions made is also possible, but I think it should be done in private messages and only with those to whom the decision applies. Something like that.;)
2Wicc, Your suggestions have been heard and will be considered. Thank you, your input is very important to us.
Good job :D :D :D
But seriously, to prevent Wicc from losing enthusiasm and his desire to help the community, you could "suggest" that he write more detailed rules for the games, eliminating ambiguous interpretations, etc.
1) Complete transparency of the AC (Arbitration Committee) - nonsense (flood/trolling, zero benefit) 2) Voting on resolving situations - I'm in favor (the opinions of new AC members are interesting, their "fair" decisions) 3) Explanation of the vote - as in point 2 4) Rules - change them by a general vote, not just the AC members playing by these rules (and what does the AC have to do with it?!)
HellLighT
11 years ago
Auto-translated
changing the rules through a general vote leads to complete chaos and headaches; 30% of the forum don't even understand the meaning of most of the rules, which means there will be a large element of randomness, which cannot be said about decisions made by competent people (who, by the way, were elected by those same players, thereby entrusting them with their votes). It's all simple and logical... the same goes for separating moderation and membership in the Arbitration Committee; we really don't have that many people who have experience in "judging" and who won't be tempted to use it for personal gain... I didn't expect such rambling "masterpieces" from Vik, you need to express your thoughts clearly, not shout as if you've gone wild; it immediately brings to mind Navalny, be careful not to accumulate penalty points ;)
Changing the rules through a general vote is complete chaos and a headache. 30% of the forum don't even understand the meaning of most of the rules, which means there will be a large element of randomness, which cannot be said about decisions made by competent people (who, by the way, were elected by those very players, thereby entrusting them with their votes). It's all simple and logical... the same goes for separating moderation and membership in the Arbitration Committee. We really don't have that many people who have experience in "judging" and who won't be tempted to use it for personal gain... I didn't expect such lengthy "masterpieces" from Vika; you need to express your thoughts clearly, not shout as if you've gone wild. It immediately brings to mind Navalny; be careful not to accumulate penalty points ;)
I agree with everything except the 30% - it's not 30%, it's 80% :cool: Regarding Vika, before even proposing any practical ideas or solutions, you need to understand what you're talking about, and you can only understand it by having practical experience in these very controversial issues, for example ;)
Javdet
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Please rename the topic to "trolling AK and others".
It's a pity that Vik wasn't chosen; I always read his statements – he always has a well-considered, logical, and well-argued position...
That's not in vogue. What's in vogue is "closeness to the people," fading stability, and conservatism.
Dirty_Player
11 years ago
Auto-translated
As for the HeroesWorld rules, at the moment Pit for LM is in charge of them. Sometimes he consults with AK about changes, and sometimes he conducts polls on the forum. I see nothing wrong with the rules being managed by a single person who understands them.
