Counter Strike Confederation

6:18 PM

Why do you want to be an Arbiter?

 I've spent a lot of time in CSC and have gotten so much enjoyment and some incredible friends from it. I think it's time I start doing a little more to help the place run well and grow while maintaining the quality experience we are used to. I believe this is a great way to start doing that while not overcommitting myself to something that I wouldn't really be able to handle.

What experience do you have, if any, that would help you in the position of Arbiter?

 I don't think I have any real experience, about the only thing that could be similar is when I worked as an RA in college. Of course, part of the job was policy enforcement and determining if a rule was violated in a particular incident and if so what rule. Obviously the arbiter position is a little different, but operating in this kind of environment I believe gives you a certain understanding of how sanctioning and appeals processing works. It also gives you the ability to tell whether a particular sanction will be effective in addressing the situation with the offender in a productive manner or not. Both things I think would be good qualities of an arbiter.

If Player A is struck for being rude (Rule 10) to Player B, but claims that it was a joke, how would you rule this case and why?

 The first thing to do would be to examine the evidence. Go back through the logs if it's in a text channel, or interview both players (frankly I would try to get statements from both no matter what) and any additional individuals present if it was in a voice channel. If the offending message was in a series of what to a reasonable person is clearly friendly ribbing or something similar, and this one message was suddenly offensive to player B, then maybe a quick "hey, clearly you thought one thing but it was taken another way, probably don't go that far with player A again" kind of talk might be enough and the strike could be removed. But if it is maybe more out of the blue or is clearly a little more aggressive even in context, then in that case I would uphold the strike.

Staff Nominator: @NAN | GREG0ROVITCH 🏆

@NAN | GREG0ROVITCH 🏆

Plus rep Greg, longtime player and agm respected by me at least, def someone I would feel comfortable having as an arbiter

1

Fun fact: Arbiters have 7 days to make a decision once the appealant has made their initial claims, however time sensitive punishments like mutes and MD bans can affect a players ability to play in matches and events. With that in mind, there can be some pressure to make decisions faster than others may feel comfortable doing so. How confident are you in your abilities to analyze and address provided evidence in a timely manner while still feeling that enough due diligence was done?

As a former arbiter, I understand that there are times where the mods and admins might disagree with how the arbiters are approaching a case. If elected, do you plan on finding ways to better meet in the middle with the other parties or do you want to stick to your own opinions on cases? Are you wanting to find ways bolster the arbiter's abilities and suggest changes to the committee and/or the mods' behavior guidelines since you rule based on those guidelines?

COW | Saunce

Fun fact: Arbiters have 7 days to make a decision once the appealant has made their initial claims, however time sensitive punishments like mutes and MD bans can affect a players ability to play in matches and events. With that in mind, there can be some pressure to make decisions faster than others may feel comfortable doing so. How confident are you in your abilities to analyze and address provided evidence in a timely manner while still feeling that enough due diligence was done?

Absolutely a good thing to acknowledge, we owe our players timely decisions so that they are not punished by inaction on our part. I am very confident in my ability to take decisive action while still carefully considering context/evidence should it be required of me, and I would hope my fellow arbiters are each able to step into that role as well. Looking at the other applicants, I'm confident they will be. I may be straying from your original question a bit here so feel free to ask a follow up if you don't feel I quite answered it, but I believe that in cases like these there should be a way for the appellant to request a faster decision then seven days, maybe something additional they fill out or specific language they are required to have in their initial appeal. When their ability to play in especially official matches is put at risk by the punishment that had been handed down, a decision should be required from us by (and this is just a proposal to get the conversation started) 15 minutes before the sub deadline. Obviously, we are only able to examine what evidence is in front of us and in accelerated cases like this that amount of evidence may be very slim indeed. So it's definitely on the appellant to make sure that the process gets started ASAP. But when that deadline does start approaching, I think that's where the decisiveness and due diligence that you're asking about comes into play. A specific time should be set for a vote to be taken by the arbiters, and then whoever responds as present immediately prior to the vote (and is not required to recuse themselves for reasons stated in the handbook) will then cast their vote and a decision will be reached. Obviously this is not a perfect system, but I hope it shows that I would like to work on finding a way to address the issue of time sensitive bans from CSC participation. And maybe this gets that discussion off to a solid start. (edited)

ATL | omA 🏆

As a former arbiter, I understand that there are times where the mods and admins might disagree with how the arbiters are approaching a case. If elected, do you plan on finding ways to better meet in the middle with the other parties or do you want to stick to your own opinions on cases? Are you wanting to find ways bolster the arbiter's abilities and suggest changes to the committee and/or the mods' behavior guidelines since you rule based on those guidelines?

This does seem like a leading question a little bit, especially coming from an admin. Regardless: For your first question, I am absolutely open to dialogue between mods/admins and arbiters. That being said, I see the relationship between arbiters and mods/admins similar to that of our (the U.S.) justice system. When the admins/mods as the executive and executive enforcement respectively hand down a punishment (i know technically admins don't, just for simplicity of language here), that's it. That's their part done. Now it is up to the courts (arbiters) to rule on that, once an appeal is made of course. It is not the admins/mods place to overrule the arbiters decisions. That would eliminate the point of arbiters and be a clear example of the abuse that I believe it is on us to help prevent. They may be asked for testimony in particular cases and arbiters will listen to and weigh that testimony, and if the admins and mods have been good at their jobs then a good/fair reputation holds a lot of weight. But again, it is not the job of an arbiter to submit to an admin/mods desire. So yes I will have dialogue with admins/mods, but I will not allow them to dictate our decisions. For the second part of your question: As this is my first time running for arbiter and I've never had a strike so I have no experience from the appellant side of things either, I won't say that I am familiar enough with the extent of an arbiter's abilities to suggest changes or new guidelines yet. I'd love to explore the pros and cons of making changes and would be more than willing to discuss specific changes if you have something in mind. But as of now, no, my goal is not to come in and make changes, it's to come in and fairly represent both players and administration in disputed cases to the best of my ability.