Counter Strike Confederation - kowalskey

Player I would like to re-invigorate the arbiter committee to respond to tickets in a much more timely manner to allow players who have received longthy unwanted mutes to have their tickets processed in a priority queue rather than having them wait and have a decision of their strike being appealed after their mute has ended making it essentially useless. (edited)

"longthy"

HG | Dilly

"longthy"

it is essential to respond to tickets that are regarding longthy mutes as unfair longthy mutes to not deserve to be removed from the record AFTER the fact they have ended, essentially making arbiters useless in this field of arbitration.

4:29 PM

I have been through the arbitration process many times for mutes and want to lead the community in a new direction regarding managing mute refute tickets, whereas strike arbitration tickets can take as long as they need as its a record thing and not a time sensitive thing.

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

it is essential to respond to tickets that are regarding longthy mutes as unfair longthy mutes to not deserve to be removed from the record AFTER the fact they have ended, essentially making arbiters useless in this field of arbitration.

I'm fully with you I just think it's supposed to be lengthy

Would you consider yourself a legalist? Or, should rules be followed to the letter or is should there extraneous factors that influence your decisions.

I believe every situation is up for interpretation up to the discretion of the arbiters within a fine range of respecting the rules but not to the T, as different situations require different outlooks.

4:36 PM

I don't know what a legalist is.

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

I don't know what a legalist is.

Meaning rules should be followed absolutely. In that, everyone gets equal treatment because the rules can be applied equally to everyone and favoritism through discretion is not possible.

oM

Meaning rules should be followed absolutely. In that, everyone gets equal treatment because the rules can be applied equally to everyone and favoritism through discretion is not possible.

Yes that is optimal

So, interpret the rules strictly or use discretion based on different situations?

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

I believe every situation is up for interpretation up to the discretion of the arbiters within a fine range of respecting the rules but not to the T, as different situations require different outlooks.

See here

Yeah but you replied "that is optimal" when I said rules should be followed absolutely. (edited)

oM

Yeah but you replied "that is optimal" when I said rules should be followed absolutely. (edited)

They should, but up to arbiters discretion I feel in certain situations is optimal as it allows unique situations to be judged fairly, instead of handing out punishments for the sake of handing out punishments.

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?

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?

It should 100% up to discussion and arguing as some cases are not as cut and dry as others. For example a person posting an inappropriate gif should never be up for discussion unless said gif is on the border of being inappropriate, whereas a person saying something to another and them receiving it as hurtful could be up for debate as the intention of the person cannot be known unless further discussion is made

so would an example of your second point be something along the lines of two friends talking shit to each other and one getting struck for a rule 10? (edited)

ATO | Assass1n

so would an example of your second point be something along the lines of two friends talking shit to each other and one getting struck for a rule 10? (edited)

that is a great example, this is one of the many things moderators/admins need to stay out of which is friendly banter. But my example moreso relates to a person saying something and another receiving it as an insult/degradation and them reporting it where the initial person's intention may not have been hurtful but moreso jokeful.

scraps changed the channel name: kowalski - Player 7/5/2022 8:11 PM

scraps changed the channel name: kowalskey - Player 7/5/2022 8:13 PM

@FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆 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?

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

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

step bro 🏆 🏆

@FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆 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?

I believe that mods are up to interpret rules as they wish as its to their discretion, with this in mind arbiters can make a case with this interpretation in mind as long as it is not completely outrageous. Arbiters can handle it just as a normal case with a normal rule, however if a player decides to appeal a strike that is not longer considered punishable by the new interpretation, they should not exactly be let off the strike immediately but upon discussion about the strike at hand with old rules in mind and the context they were applied with the new interpretation in mind too.

PFA | Crispy

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

I'd like to work with an arbiter who has the integrity to leave bias out of decisions and who can respond in a timely manner to cases.

SANTATRONIC 🏆

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

The time response of cases in regards to unfair mutes and allowing players the chance to be unmuted before the mute is done in cases where it is not warranted in the slightest, instead of having a useless strike removed from their record 7 days after the fact to the point where they were essentially punished/muted for 0 reason

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

The time response of cases in regards to unfair mutes and allowing players the chance to be unmuted before the mute is done in cases where it is not warranted in the slightest, instead of having a useless strike removed from their record 7 days after the fact to the point where they were essentially punished/muted for 0 reason

out of curiosity, how would you implement this?

SANTATRONIC 🏆

out of curiosity, how would you implement this?

I for one work from home so I can actively do my part in preparing cases pretty fast and I am usually active in csc in the evenings, I'd encourage my fellow arbiters to be able to atleast check cases and make a decision once a day and perhaps implement a time limit to cases. Although this won't help with shorter mutes, it will definitely help with the longer mutes and could help with the shorter ones if all are active.

There is a time structure to arbitration matters

which currently takes far too long

It is based for discussion to happen

3:07 PM

Which sometimes takes a bit of time

Also the arbiters as a group dont set up/"prepare" cases. It is done by whoever is acting as head at the time (currently Mod Head) and the person setting up the cases does not vote unless a tie occurs.

3:42 PM

Which we have never had a tie thus far

FA | kowalskey 🏆🏆

I have been through the arbitration process many times for mutes and want to lead the community in a new direction regarding managing mute refute tickets, whereas strike arbitration tickets can take as long as they need as its a record thing and not a time sensitive thing.

in this message you suggest a separation of strikes and mutes in the arbiter process, do you think that punishments should be flexible from the rule book on a case by case bias?

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

5:35 PM

No offense to you or your character. Take this question to defend yourself. But, as a person with a history of infractions, what makes you qualified or well equipped to be an arbiter?

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.

crudestpack

in this message you suggest a separation of strikes and mutes in the arbiter process, do you think that punishments should be flexible from the rule book on a case by case bias?

yes

pecan50 🏆🏆

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

override unfair punishments

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.

depending on the severity of the violation of rules, something as harmless as minor toxicity like calling your friend dogshit should not be punished, but a violation of say a rule where you are degrading said person in an offensive way regarding race or anything as offensive should not be overruled

its not up to the mods to know which people are being toxic to their friends and which people are just being toxic

1

9:35 PM

its a general toxicity rule for a reason

9:37 PM

scraps

its a general toxicity rule for a reason

which is why they can appeal the punishment it wasn't their intention and the person did not receive as harmful

and arbiters will uphold it because it is still toxicity

9:56 PM

and they go based on the rulebook

9:56 PM

not based on if people are friends or not

its not about friends it's about the intention and how it's received

1

intent doesnt matter with toxicity

i believe it does, toxicity can be friendly and seen as banter

9:57 PM

mods don't need to intervene in alot of cases unless its reported imo

i dont think you realize that arbiters arent there to figure out whether someone meant something or not. they are there to say yes or no this person did or did not break a rule based on the rulebook

arbiters are here to debate and take away harsh punishments

no they are there to determine whether someone broke the rule or not

9:59 PM

the harshness of a punishment is based on the behavior guidelines. if someone is a repeat offender, based on the guidelines, means their strike is harsher. arbiters look at the guidelines and say "yes this person broke it, upheld" or "no they did not break it"

harsh punishments are only the result of repeated strikes, the maximum punishment for a first time offender is a 1 week mute and 3 map ban for the most serious offences generally that’s not an issue

I believe it is up for interpretation

the step system in behavior guidelines literally isnt up to interpretation

10:03 PM

Strike 1: results in this Strike 2: results in this Strike 3: results in this

10:03 PM

there is no interpreting it

I think we are seeing kowalskey and scraps have very different views on the role of arbiter from this, and frankly it's very good for seeing the approach kowalskey will have as an arbiter

1

to be quite frank i dont think there is good understanding on what an arbiter does

10:23 PM

we would have to rid the current system to allow what he is trying to do

10:24 PM

its not in the abilities of arbiters to interpret harshness of punishment (as this is not something that can be interpreted based on the strict structure of the guidelines that very clearly lays out the different steps for repeat offenders). it is only up to arbiters to decide whether they broke the rule or not