Counter Strike Confederation

1:25 AM

Why do you want to be a player representative for Rules Committee?

Broadly speaking, I'd say I want to help improve how CSC as a whole runs, and being part of the rules committee seems like one of the more direct ways to do that. Besides that, I feel that my experience as an active player for the last 5 seasons (and team captain for 1) will help me effectively represent player's interests on RC. In the past I've voiced concerns about specific rules as well as the rulebook's general readability/formatting (and, by extension, its accessibility to the general player population). If elected, I'd like to increase transparency on the side of CSC staff, ease restrictions that result in forfeits and 4v5 matches, make the rulebook less of a wall of text, and other similar changes. While there's already a rules suggestion form, I would also try to make myself personally available to any rules questions, suggestions, etc. as I feel a player rep should.

@FA | ZyraReflex

how will you increase transparency on the side of CSC staff?

+rep zyra, has wanted to help the betterment of this league since I’ve been here, and I think rules is the perfect place for him to do so. prayge

4

3

Hi Zyra! Appreciate the application and the commitment to improving the community. I'm looking forward to the answers you provide, and I'm sure that you would be a positive force for the community within RC.

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

how will you increase transparency on the side of CSC staff?

to clarify, these are certainly not finalized ideas, and I don't think they should, could, or would be implemented in this state; I can't guarantee any actual changes, obviously, I just intend to raise them as questions in RC meetings and see how things pan out: more regular admin/staff communication is necessary imo. this doesn't totally fall under RC, but, if the staff isn't able/willing (usually the former) to communicate more, I think more of their actions should be public information. the specifics of this are hard to pin down; for example, admin meetings usually have privileged information and otherwise don't typically take place in a format that is conducive to being made public. while not a popular idea among staff (as far as I know), I think that public strike history for candidates might also be interesting. there's been some discussion on moderation records in general being public, and I think that's at least worth looking into. (edited)

Any rules that you specifically disagree with? Think are too vague or too specific?

I'll reply in a bit, the discussion time frame caught me at a point where I only have my phone on which to check rules and look at discord KEKWait

2

PFA | drummerboy

Any rules that you specifically disagree with? Think are too vague or too specific?

I take issue with some rules. Some examples might be eligibility requirements for things like admin, specifically the 2.5.2.1.1 requirement of support from 20% of the backer pool or 2.5.2.1.2 which requires participation in "at least one season of CSC" (but my issue with the latter is more the wording than anything else). I think there are quite a few rules that are redundant or not properly placed within the rulebook; for example, 1.1.1 is sort of a rephrased summary of the conduct guidelines all the way down at 3.1, which themselves read almost like an addendum for the behavior guidelines, which are a different document and written by a different group of people. as for vague/specific, I think some rules are more difficult to read than need be (see 6.1.3, map pool), and I might call those "too specific", but I don't think the rulebook suffers too much from vagueness or specificity per se.

1

6:57 PM

if I miss something in any of these questions just ping me again and I'll get it (edited)

FA | ZyraReflex

I take issue with some rules. Some examples might be eligibility requirements for things like admin, specifically the 2.5.2.1.1 requirement of support from 20% of the backer pool or 2.5.2.1.2 which requires participation in "at least one season of CSC" (but my issue with the latter is more the wording than anything else). I think there are quite a few rules that are redundant or not properly placed within the rulebook; for example, 1.1.1 is sort of a rephrased summary of the conduct guidelines all the way down at 3.1, which themselves read almost like an addendum for the behavior guidelines, which are a different document and written by a different group of people. as for vague/specific, I think some rules are more difficult to read than need be (see 6.1.3, map pool), and I might call those "too specific", but I don't think the rulebook suffers too much from vagueness or specificity per se.

Just out of curiosity, how would you want the admin requirements changed? Are they too loose or too strict?

I think those two requirements in particular are too loose, but I don’t feel that way about all of them.

Are there any specific "sections" of rules you see as having issues, or types of changes you want to make in rules? If not: what role do you see yourself as taking within RC discussions?

see above

yea, just giving the question in case you have issues that aren't specific to an individual rule or type that you wanted to address with a specific question ❤️

HG | andrew 🏆

Why do you want to be a player representative for Rules Committee?

Broadly speaking, I'd say I want to help improve how CSC as a whole runs, and being part of the rules committee seems like one of the more direct ways to do that. Besides that, I feel that my experience as an active player for the last 5 seasons (and team captain for 1) will help me effectively represent player's interests on RC. In the past I've voiced concerns about specific rules as well as the rulebook's general readability/formatting (and, by extension, its accessibility to the general player population). If elected, I'd like to increase transparency on the side of CSC staff, ease restrictions that result in forfeits and 4v5 matches, make the rulebook less of a wall of text, and other similar changes. While there's already a rules suggestion form, I would also try to make myself personally available to any rules questions, suggestions, etc. as I feel a player rep should.

like I mentioned here, I think a lot rules could do with a rewrite just for the sake of readability. besides that I think it's definitely worth taking a look at issues like whether substitution rules could be changed to prevent 4v5 matches or FFs. besides those (and whatever else I've mentioned above) I don't have any particular priority spots. I figure I'd have some ideas to toss out for consideration in RC meetings, but I think my most important role, as a player rep, would be to raise concerns about/suggest reworks for new rule proposals if I think they could be detrimental to the player experience.