Counter Strike Confederation - Firehawk

Staff Arbiter ------------------- I would like to support CSC in the background. I started as a PermFA a few seasons ago. In that season I was less active in CSC, but instead got the opportunity to see how different players acted and started to enjoy the community. Through the next seasons, I started as a caster, then became the designated observer within CSC, now filling a role as AGM. Arbiters by their nature help with checks and balances. I am not really eligible for player arbiter, as frankly even if my staff roles weren't a factor.... I'm not a player in CSC :). That said I think I can perform the role of arbiter well, and at the very least want to apply to set a standard to myself on what the level of an arbiter is. I would hate for a meme candidate for arbiter to go through purely because no staff wants the role. In terms of my personal reasons, it's a way to support the league that involves using text chat non immediacy, which is the core reason I am capable in this reason rather than as a moderator. I simply don't keep up with many CSC chats, but do pay attention to the ones relevant to my work. I'm up to date and take work seriously when I do take it on. And I do want to play a part in making sure that rules are enforced properly in a league I care about. Arbiting is the way I am qualified and motivated to do so."

3:59 AM

I don't have the ability to commit to being a mod as I am someone who isn't online consistently and when online am typically devoting a good portion towards work for media or YC if I'm paying any attention to CSC. That said, I do want to support upholding rules and maintaining balance of the rules properly, which is why the Arbiter Committee was created. The committee doesn't require real time awareness with low notice, which is the core reason why Mod committee doesn't work, but instead is a matter of taking a measured approach of looking at the context provided, looking at the decision that was made by mods/admins/etc. and deciding if that decision was fair in light of the rules and what was done. It does involve taking a human perspective, such that an admin asking someone to leak numbers, then banning them for breaking numbers rules isn't upheld, but someone going out to leak numbers to incite drama is.

What are your thoughts on the current arbiter community and how could they improve

do you think the arbiter process should be very cut and dry as in. Did someone break this rule? Yes, case closed. Or do you think it should be more open to discussion, arguing, and defending why they did said thing?

scraps changed the channel name: Firehawk - Staff 7/5/2022 8:10 PM

@TFR | 42Firehawk If mods want to make new precedent (interpretation of the rules) how do you view that change? For example, if in the past something was seen as okay but now mods decided it is not okay and we strike for that now. How do you think we should handle that? Should that player be let off that strike if they choose to appeal it?

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

What are your thoughts on the current arbiter community and how could they improve

Currently I don't see major issues with the arbiter community as is, my biggest concern is in size. In theory there should be a pool or arbiters no matter what the offense is, and who did it. In that sense I am just filling out a role of someone who has a different reason for recusal than other. Without playing a part in arbiting I can't say anywhere that could be improved, since I have yet to see any faults with arbiter decisions.

ATO | Assass1n

do you think the arbiter process should be very cut and dry as in. Did someone break this rule? Yes, case closed. Or do you think it should be more open to discussion, arguing, and defending why they did said thing?

I think it depends on the rule. If someone is racist, sexist, etc. I don't care why you did those things. At best, you did them on your own. At worst, there was someone else who was also breaking the rules that the arbitration would discover. But at the same time, rules around toxicity or other areas may be misinterpreted. If mods caught banter that's against the text of the rules, but caused no damage, I would certainly take that into consideration. So it does depend. (if you want better clarification I am happy to give it, I just think this makes my approach clear as is)

if you could pick one other candidate to work with whom would you choose and why?

step bro 🏆 🏆

@TFR | 42Firehawk If mods want to make new precedent (interpretation of the rules) how do you view that change? For example, if in the past something was seen as okay but now mods decided it is not okay and we strike for that now. How do you think we should handle that? Should that player be let off that strike if they choose to appeal it?

It depends. If there was no communication and it's a sudden change to the rules, I might provide leniency, depending on the rule. If there are 10 notices on the change, and it's approved by rules committee, then that's a change in policy that players should understand. Basically, the level of leniency on change in precedent depends on the level of notice about that change.

PFA | Crispy

if you could pick one other candidate to work with whom would you choose and why?

While it's to my own detriment: I respect Raaasck as a mod, and trusted their decisions therein, though we aren't compatible electionwise. So if I were to pick on other than raasck, it would be either iltemnc or kowalskey. I personally lean towards iltemnc because I enjoy the chill vibes and trust his level headedness

1

Hello, current arbiter here (I'm the scary one). What is the biggest change you want to see in the current arbiter committee?

SANTATRONIC 🏆

Hello, current arbiter here (I'm the scary one). What is the biggest change you want to see in the current arbiter committee?

I personally haven't seen any issues with arbiters as is. I am joining because I personally see myself as having a level head for performing the role of arbiter. To actually say any changes that I would want to happen I would need to interact with them. I haven't as a mod or in my time as staff other than understanding the process at a basic level and wanting to help with the workload.

TFR | 42Firehawk

It depends. If there was no communication and it's a sudden change to the rules, I might provide leniency, depending on the rule. If there are 10 notices on the change, and it's approved by rules committee, then that's a change in policy that players should understand. Basically, the level of leniency on change in precedent depends on the level of notice about that change.

Rules committee has 0 involvement in mod rules.

step bro 🏆 🏆

Rules committee has 0 involvement in mod rules.

Sorry for the imprecise language then. I was more referring to level of notice, where if in some case rules committee were to specifically weigh in on a rule (i.e. stating that rules already cover something in their meeting when mods are debating ruling from one season to the next). Or to state the scenario I was trying to state exactly in hypothetical: At the end of a season mods publicly announce that they would like a new rule/will interpret a rule to cover a new situation if a new rule isn't made. Rules committee meets and decides that the current rules already forbid something and mods simply haven't been enforcing it that way, and make a statement saying as such. Then mods make an announcement that the enforcement policy will change. That was the scenario I was trying to speak on, also if I have the bureaucracy wrong still, please let me know so that I can be slightly less wrong when making memes about my own stupidity :)

In your own words, what does being an arbiter mean and do?

5:33 PM

You are very involved in media (and do a lot of the heavy lifting lately), how will being an arbiter conflict or help with your current duties/roles?

If you were presented with a case that involved two friends, and A was struck for being toxic to B, in clear violation of the rules, but both A and B claim that it was an inside joke how would you rule/make a decision.

pecan50 🏆🏆

In your own words, what does being an arbiter mean and do?

Being an arbiter means to view decisions that mods took that the person struck by disagrees with. So this means that it's a role that takes a level head and discretion as the 2 major points. You have to be quiet about what cases you've seen, to avoid being a source of drama when the job is mainly reviewing drama. The other side of the role is to be a key balancing act against the mods, without also being antagonistic to a group that does a lot for CSC. In other words, arbiters verify the quality of decisions made by mods, serving that role, and insulate the decisions from elsewhere in CSC regardless of their value.

pecan50 🏆🏆

You are very involved in media (and do a lot of the heavy lifting lately), how will being an arbiter conflict or help with your current duties/roles?

Being an arbiter will have no impact on function as an arbiter positively. I am saying this because most of what an arbiter does shouldn't be talked about (what cases I've looked at, etc.). That said, it also won't negatively impact my role in media. As media work is something that I mostly do during match time, or when I have spare time to record highlights/misc work. Arbiter work functionally happens at a different time from media, and is separate in scope as well. At most the 2 would help me gain insight towards each other, but as an arbiter if at any point I may have bias from work as either AGM or Media, I will immediately recuse myself. (So any YC or media committee people, as well as if I have a personal bias from things learned in those roles)

GAS | Gindeht 🏆

If you were presented with a case that involved two friends, and A was struck for being toxic to B, in clear violation of the rules, but both A and B claim that it was an inside joke how would you rule/make a decision.

I personally would vary depending on severity of the rule broken. Racism as an inside joke is still racism. But if it's something like swearing towards someone I would provide more leniency, provided it's swears and not slurs. Generally, if an inside joke between two people could have an outside effect (Like an inside joke that could affect those not "in" on the joke), then I'll rule it as something where it being a joke doesn't matter, it's still wrong. But if it's something where it's calling someone a dumbass or whatever for something that they both laugh at, it's harmless to others as well so I would place some leniency. As with everything that arbiters do: It's all deep context on what mods need to pay quick attention to since spending 4 hours on figuring out context makes people mad, while arbiters can take plenty of time

@crudestpack "question for all candidates: if there is a rule you don’t agree with that’s been undeniably broken, should the arbiter committee be able to overturn the premise of a rule on a case by case bias" In regards to this question: I don't think that my role as arbiter is to decide if a rule is fair, but rather if a ruling is fair. So if the rule was clearly broken, but shouldn't be a rule, my job is to ask for a rule change through official channels, not to nullify it out of hand. Will this mean I am inevitably more lenient on that rule? I'm not sure. I'll try to hold each rule fairly, but I understand that I'm still human and unfortunately not a catgirl. Now I can say this opinion won't extend towards any rules that are.... flagrantly problems. By this I am referring to rules like "X franchise is not allowed to make playoffs, regardless of score" or "X franchise gets 1 game loss automatically, because screw them" or rules that are racist/sexist/etc.

TFR | 42Firehawk

I personally would vary depending on severity of the rule broken. Racism as an inside joke is still racism. But if it's something like swearing towards someone I would provide more leniency, provided it's swears and not slurs. Generally, if an inside joke between two people could have an outside effect (Like an inside joke that could affect those not "in" on the joke), then I'll rule it as something where it being a joke doesn't matter, it's still wrong. But if it's something where it's calling someone a dumbass or whatever for something that they both laugh at, it's harmless to others as well so I would place some leniency. As with everything that arbiters do: It's all deep context on what mods need to pay quick attention to since spending 4 hours on figuring out context makes people mad, while arbiters can take plenty of time

Also coming back to this a bit later having checked up on the rules for toxicity: I would read based on the toxicity rules that jokes between friends are ok, but if they do legitimately extend beyond language into toxicity.... that's a problem, just in general, since toxicity would be harmful outside of that as well. Just adding more context and thought to this now that I've read it more than once.

do you hold the same/similar beliefs as kowlaskey?

ATO | Assass1n

do you hold the same/similar beliefs as kowlaskey?

I think I've answered that question with my answer to gindehts question? if not I'll need you to clarify what you are asking so that I can give you a better answer

TFR | 42Firehawk

I think I've answered that question with my answer to gindehts question? if not I'll need you to clarify what you are asking so that I can give you a better answer

yea that answers it, thank you