thread

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

User Tag List

Is this a valid dispute?

You may not vote on this poll
    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. VERIFIED Honored Veteran Credibility: 27,310


    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    No' 'ere
    Posts
    20,179
    Thanks (Received)
    6544
    Likes (Received)
    6417
    Blog Entries
    133
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: barthax
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    48 Thread(s)
    Follows
    86
    Following
    78

    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 Trackhttp://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=23643
    RulesDefault Settings
    Player NameAndrew Peter Peter Mee
    Original AdjudicationN/A
    Verification MethodVideo
    Verification Date2003-05-13
    Disputed Score32.94 (Rank 6)
    Disputed ByBarthax
    Dispute Evidence / RationaleNot 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. :)
  2. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 3,352
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    1,200
    Thanks (Received)
    818
    Likes (Received)
    951
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    18 Thread(s)
    Follows
    16
    Following
    24
    I'm confused. You raised a dispute, just to provide video evidence of your score?
  3. VERIFIED COMMISSIONER Credibility: 8,000
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Leigh-On-Sea, UK
    Posts
    227
    Thanks (Received)
    251
    Likes (Received)
    441
    Blog Entries
    11
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Follows
    17
    Following
    6
    I recall Pete has a good reason for this, or he is just trying to confuse me.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  4. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 2,348
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    912
    Thanks (Received)
    571
    Likes (Received)
    1273
    Blog Entries
    58
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Follows
    28
    Following
    25
    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?
    Thanks Barthax thanked this post
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  5. VERIFIED Honored Veteran Credibility: 27,310


    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    No' 'ere
    Posts
    20,179
    Thanks (Received)
    6544
    Likes (Received)
    6417
    Blog Entries
    133
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: barthax
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    48 Thread(s)
    Follows
    86
    Following
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by DadsGlasses View Post
    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. :)

    Are you on my radar?
    I'd rather be last on every game than throw my time away chasing only one score.
    Thanks DadsGlasses thanked this post
    Likes DadsGlasses liked this post
  6. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 2,348
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    912
    Thanks (Received)
    571
    Likes (Received)
    1273
    Blog Entries
    58
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Follows
    28
    Following
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax View Post
    ^^ 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.
    Thanks Barthax thanked this post
  7. VERIFIED COMMISSIONER Credibility: 8,000
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Leigh-On-Sea, UK
    Posts
    227
    Thanks (Received)
    251
    Likes (Received)
    441
    Blog Entries
    11
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Follows
    17
    Following
    6
    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.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  8. VERIFIED Honored Veteran Credibility: 27,310


    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    No' 'ere
    Posts
    20,179
    Thanks (Received)
    6544
    Likes (Received)
    6417
    Blog Entries
    133
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: barthax
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    48 Thread(s)
    Follows
    86
    Following
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hawksett View Post
    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.

    Are you on my radar?
    I'd rather be last on every game than throw my time away chasing only one score.
  9. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 2,348
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    912
    Thanks (Received)
    571
    Likes (Received)
    1273
    Blog Entries
    58
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Follows
    28
    Following
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax View Post
    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.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
Join us