Multiple people asked me to react, so the following will be my (edited) official statement as a member of the audit panel:
I can already see that is likely going to be case for the audit panel. Given the ongoing discussion, it's already clear now that no matter which decision is taken, people will want to amend it. Since Cowboy is in Masters, it may be appropriate that an independent body takes a look at this, but I have since been told that he will not take the decision (alone).
If this case were to end up at the audit panel, I would prefer the following structure. To avoid an overload of repeat discussion, can we bundle the evidence and arguments. Ideally, there'd be 4 "reports" on this case:
- One by the people taking the actual decision in which they explain their arguments for this ruling.
- One in which all arguments in favour of giving Masters the spot of Apprentice are summarized (focus on objective arguments and the rules, not flavour or subjective pro-Masters bias).
- One in which all arguments against giving Masters the spot of Apprentice are summarized (focus on objective arguments and the rules, not flavour or subjective anti-Masters bias).
- One by people who were around and involved in the writing of this rule detailed the process and reasoning of the rule and why and how it was applied in the past, this should not include a preference for a ruling in this case but inform the audit panel on the nature of precedents and earlier interpretation.
For the second and third report, people giving arguments in this topic best agree on someone who can summarize and collect the relevant information.
For the fourth report, this information has reached me already.
If necessary, the audit panel (me+Styxie) will have a look at these reports.
This post was edited to make it clear that I no way intend to pull this matter towards audit panel or that I believe audit panel should take the decision. This is and remains the responsability of the organisers or a panel appointed by them. (i.e. Cowboy, CL panel or an appropriately appointed panel such as Ethics) Audit panel will only be involved in people believe they did not follow the rules or fair judgement in their decision process.Hence, the original post was made with the tone in this topic in mind. I perceive it to be very likely that there will be complaints afterwards and the audit panel will sadly have to be involved. Do note that I would actually prefer that this will not happen as I value my free time. If I had a lot of spare time for things like this, Clan Cup would still be up and running!
Consequently, you can ignore the instructions above for now (and hopefully they will not be needed).
For my personal opinion:
I don't know enough about it yet to have a strong opinion, but I find it hard to read through some of the reactions and general tone of discussion in this topic.
All I can say: if this is important for you, take the steps proposed above and present your arguments like a respectful reasonable adult. If it's not important, don't lose your sleep over it and don't behave like a troll bot, we have enough of those elsewhere on the internet.
Edited 4/9/2020 16:39:07