Counter Strike Confederation

6:17 PM

Why do you want to be an Arbiter?

 I'm not sure that I'll be able to play CSC this season, but I would like to still be active in the community. In my last 3 seasons in CSC, moderation has sometimes been a contentious topic across the player community, and I think being an arbiter will help me understand the nuances of moderation and appeals, and ensure that strikes can be leveled equally for all players.

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

 I've participated in CSC for 3 seasons (going into my 4th with S12), and I've held staff positions (media) in 2 of those seasons. I've had good working relationships with the people in my committee, including working with the team to publish articles, lead power rankings, and help push for improvements to the main site. Having been a player in 3 tiers and a staff member, I feel that I have a good understanding of how the league operates at a public level, and I think that I can continue to help build a good reputation for the arbiter team if serving on this committee.

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?

 If player A receives a warning/timeout/ban for breaking rule 10 and appeals, I'd first ask Player A to list out their full case. I'd ask about the context of the comment, and whether this was their first time (or whether this player has a known history of breaking the same rule). I'd also go about asking the mod(s) why they felt this rule was broken, as rudeness can be interpreted in slightly different ways (e.g. is this banter between community members that know each other?).

Without knowing more details, I would not be able to give a generic recommendation. I think the whole point of being an arbiter is that each case / ticket is different, and a lot of strikes and appeals are going to be context dependent. My goal is to get all of the pertinent information, establish whether the rule was actually broken based on this context, and give a yes/no recommendation to the head arbiter. Ultimately, if Player A is not able to sufficiently substantiate a valid reason that speak otherwise to the initial strike, I would rule to uphold the strike.

Staff Nominator: @ATL | omA 🏆

@AVI | cando_ 🏆

Plus rep Cando, not as experienced as some of the others but have always had pleasant experiences with him on and off my team and see this as a good step for him to be more involved.

+rep cando, they've done some background staff stuff in previous seasons with media and has been involved in large discussions regarding the general league processes. i trust their judgement and would be very pleased if they were allowed to continue their involvement with CSC's staff

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?

Hey Saunce - I think trying to resolve an appeal will require clear and fast communication from both the appellant and the arbiter team. I think it'll be relatively straightforward to look at the rule, the mod's decision, and the appelant's initial defense. The complexity will always come from the discussion and the nuance of each case, and I think the best thing that I can do as an arbiter is make sure that any clarification questions are asked promptly so that I can give a recommendation to the head arbiter. I'm pretty confident that as long as the head arbiter sets up the necessary channels (i.e. evidence/appeal/discussion channel), there shouldn't be anything hindering me from looking over the case right away and trying to give a fair ruling to the case.

AVI | cando_ 🏆

Hey Saunce - I think trying to resolve an appeal will require clear and fast communication from both the appellant and the arbiter team. I think it'll be relatively straightforward to look at the rule, the mod's decision, and the appelant's initial defense. The complexity will always come from the discussion and the nuance of each case, and I think the best thing that I can do as an arbiter is make sure that any clarification questions are asked promptly so that I can give a recommendation to the head arbiter. I'm pretty confident that as long as the head arbiter sets up the necessary channels (i.e. evidence/appeal/discussion channel), there shouldn't be anything hindering me from looking over the case right away and trying to give a fair ruling to the case.

I appreciate your thought out response. Best of luck to you in the election.

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?

As I haven't held any positions as admin/mod/arbiter so far, it's hard for me to weigh in on exactly how past interactions have gone between the 3 parties (and how often these kinds of disagreements happen). I think it's always important for all three parties to work together and be polite, which does not necessarily mean admins/mods/arbiters all have to agree with each other. At the same time, my interpretation of the arbiter handbook is that arbiters ultimately must follow the rulebook/behavior guidelines, not serve the opinions of admins or mods. If I was an arbiter and my interpretation of the guidelines given further evidence/discussion do not align with the admins/mods, I feel that it is my responsibility to stand firm in my vote and disagree, even if it doesn't leave everybody happy. Since my vote would only be one of many that go to the head arbiter, I think the current system presents a happy medium between giving arbiters too much power vs. not enough power when weighing in on appeals. Lastly, I'm not one to go into something and start spouting changes without knowing how the current system works (or doesn't work). So for your question on whether I'd like to "find ways to bolster the arbiter's abilities": no, not currently. I think if I served a term as an arbiter and saw particular issues with the current system, I'd be in a much better position to suggest these changes as I'd have first-hand experience.

COW | Saunce

I appreciate your thought out response. Best of luck to you in the election.

no problem! good question

I don't think this belongs in this channel

these are meant to be serious

2:42 AM

please keep things on topic