Dispute: Andrew Mee - Atari 2600 / VCS - Barnstorming - EMU - Game 1, Difficulty BB [Fastest Time] - - Player: Andrew Peter Peter Mee - Score: 32.94

Atari 2600 / VCS - Barnstorming - EMU - Game 1, Difficulty BB [Fastest Time] -
Score Track	https://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=23643
Rules	Default Settings
Player Name	Andrew Peter Peter Mee
Original Adjudication	N/A
Verification Method	Video
Verification Date	2003-05-13
Disputed Score	32.94 (Rank 6)
Disputed By	Barthax
Dispute Evidence / Rationale	Not disputed anything - just providing a glimpse into the past. I achieved the run on 6th December 2012 and this tiny piece of footage is all that was needed for my score to be verified. Falls short of modern standards but this was the early years of digital video evidence for TG. :)

I'm confused. You raised a dispute, just to provide video evidence of your score?

I recall Pete has a good reason for this, or he is just trying to confuse me.

I believe Jace has mentioned using the dispute system as a way to add evidence to an existing accepted score. (Or at least that's how I interpreted his words.) This newly submitted evidence will become part of the permanent record and help protect against future possible disputes. Is this an example of that? If so, what is recommended for voting purposes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DadsGlasses

I believe Jace has mentioned using the dispute system as a way to add evidence to an existing accepted score. (Or at least that's how I interpreted his words.) This newly submitted evidence will become part of the permanent record and help protect against future possible disputes. Is this an example of that? If so, what is recommended for voting purposes?

---

^^ exactly this. What I didn't want to do was test this advice out with a submission with a little more value... I don't understand the "not disputing" dispute method but this will serve as a good test to understand it. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barthax

^^ exactly this. What I didn't want to do was test this advice out with a submission with a little more value... I don't understand the "not disputing" dispute method but this will serve as a good test to understand it. :)

---

Very cool. I've been interested to see how this process will work. Thanks for testing it out. I am not going to cast any vote.

I would expect people can submit evidence that it needs to be removed if they want to, just like with any score. Until that happens, any votes will be met at first with a raised eyebrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hawksett

I would expect people can submit evidence that it needs to be removed if they want to, just like with any score. Until that happens, any votes will be met at first with a raised eyebrow.

---

Of course, any counter-evidence can be provided. :) As for the voting, I suppose this method can achieve a weight of "no" votes ahead of any counter-evidence (but I don't see that weight being large). Also, by starting a dispute method with positive information, it forces any counter-evidence to appear further down the conversation. Not sure if that's an advantage or not.

For the record this was achieved in PCAE v2.6 with its built-in AVI recording function.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barthax

Of course, any counter-evidence can be provided. :) As for the voting, I suppose this method can achieve a weight of "no" votes ahead of any counter-evidence (but I don't see that weight being large). Also, by starting a dispute method with positive information, it forces any counter-evidence to appear further down the conversation. Not sure if that's an advantage or not.

For the record this was achieved in PCAE v2.6 with its built-in AVI recording function.

---

My understanding is that a series of "No" votes would just mean that it remains open indefinitely. The only way a dispute "closes" is if the score is removed. But I may be wrong.