Barthax's Feed

Barthax: Nothing to see here... move along.
11-30-2019 at 04:21 AM
30 Comments
Rate this Entry

Tightening up the dispute system?

Mud sticks and TG really needs to start penalising people that create a dispute against a score with zero evidence. "That's impossible", "my friend can't achieve that", "my friend can only achieve that with TAs" and "I don't believe it" are reasons people have given for opening disputes. An opinion or someone else's lesser skills are not reasons to open a dispute & there should be penalties against those people that do so.

I get it - people want to make their opinions & observations known. Open a thread on the forum or make a wall post about it: fine - you are entitled to your opinion. However, TG's idea of a dispute thread is that you bring the evidence with you. If you fail to do that, you are the one at fault and should be penalised.

I acknowledge that some opinions are grey area: AD's interpretation of leeching, to him, means the Double Dragon scores are invalid. Those disputes are opinion on how the rules are interpreted & the dispute is a good test of the rule set. To me, that's a valid use of the dispute system: opinionable evidence that requires the rules of the track be tested for validity.

Once a valid dispute is open, TG's rules are that the dispute thread should remain on target. Plenty of us have banter in those threads that lends nothing to the thread. Where's the moderation of content that TG requires they be maintained on-target for the discussion. A significant portion of the negativity surrounding TG is brought into the public eye by the disputes (previously bubbling in dank corners). Once sores are opened, all manner of puss-filled garbage gets written into those dispute threads. Where's the moderation? I'm not talking deletion, just movement of content: leave a pointer to a "non-evidence" thread so that those interesting in bottom-feeding the Internet can do so but leaving the dispute thread with actual on-topic content.

Cue the trolls...

ThanksSiliconian, nads thanked this post
LikesBarra, Siliconian, EVN, nads, Emayl and 3 others liked this post
Comments
  1. RTM's Avatar

    There were scores over the years that were removed from the TG database without "evidence" in terms of hard documentation...they were removed by common sense alone and by testimonials from other players. This is not that different than what is happening right now although the purists will beg to differ.

    To feed the fodder, although these deletions had been documented repeatedly over the years pre-2007, here are a few that were at one time in the TG database but were subsequently removed accordingly...and a few that were re-instated (and why)

    REMOVED (NEVER RE-INSTATED)

    Joust (arcade) - 1.5M TGTS score by Brett Watt
    Reason - this one was widely decried by a number of people many years back...how a 15 year old, not even a year after release, could achieve a near-perfection performance which took the world's best modern era players many years to come close to and pass, just made no apparent sense, especially without using "hunting" techniques which were banned (i.e. pteradactyl). So this one was removed based on common sense alone. No one has contested that decision since.

    Frogger (arcade) - 4M+ by Mike Mann
    Reason - well before Pat Laffaye, Don Hayes and now others started setting record breaking scores, this one was at one point in the TG database and was removed I think pre-2001 by the time Walter released his first Book of Records. Quite simply, no one believed it then, especially with what gamers learned earlier from Pat and Don. No one has contested that decision since.

    Spectar (arcade) - 151K by ??
    Reason - back in the 2004-2005 range a few players came close or passed to the 100K mark, and I think the peak performance was around 115K. Based on what was learned at the time it was agreed upon that scores not much higher were only remotely possible (i.e. about 1 board further) and 3 boards further was flat out not do-able. No one contested that decision then, and no one has come even remotely close since.

    Lunar Lander (arcade)
    Reason - I forget the score, but it was nearly a thousand points beyond what the best players even today are capable of. Quite simply it was impossible between fuel consumption needed for perfect landings and the optimal landing to attempt each screen. No one has contested that decision since.

    Scramble (arcade) - 12 million by ??
    Reason - not likely in a limited life, non-pattern game. It was a consensus decision that no one would likely have played this particular title for 36 hours or more. No one has contested that decision since.

    Krull (arcade) - either 4M or 6M by Steve Harris
    Reason - a consensus decision was made that this score likely was achieved via usage of the banned "glaive trick". No one has contested that decision since.

    Marble Madness (arcade) - 187K by Stan Szypanski
    Reason - hopefully Mark Longridge sees this and can chime in accordingly, but there was major doubt over this score based on settings. Someone within the TG inner circle, possibly Mark or Dwayne, showed the times per stage based on two totally different settings, and the variance between the 187K score and the next highest was very close to the extra points differential due to extra seconds being awarded. So this one was removed and never re-instated. No one has contested that decision since.



    REMOVED (BUT LATER RE-INSTATED)

    Spy Hunter (arcade) - 9M by Paul Dean
    Reason - there was a known "trick" in the game which allowed for unlimited scoring, can't remember the exact details, but based on that and the fact that modern-era at the time (pre-2006) players could not reach the 1M mark lead to the decision being made for removal.

    Subsequent discussion with Paul Dean lead to the score being re-instated after he proved how he handled each of the major stumbling block-points within the game BUT this only came after Paul repeatedly rebuffed TG requests to partially recreate the performance (1-2M range requested only) citing physical handicaps precluding him from sitting for an extended period of time. Ironically, years after the reinstatement he marathoned arcade "Frenzy" which shot a hole in his earlier handicap claim, yet even so no further action was taken as a result.

    Star Wars (arcade-TGTS) - 31M by David Palmer
    Reason - while not absolutely impossible to pull off there was no documentation and no score ever submitted even remotely close. Walter managed to arranged for a conference call with David in which he explained to me his tactics and at that point I had zero reason to doubt his abilities which were clearly articulated. I knew that 4.5M per shield was do-able from prior experience, but it's no cakewalk. David knew exactly how to do what I had previously done mid-game many years prior, so his score was re-instated immediately and only once in the modern era did anyone remotely come close (approx 2/3 of what David did years prior)


    Updated 11-30-2019 at 09:05 PM by RTM (Added "Marble Madness")
  2. Desidious's Avatar

    Bringing up questions and disputes has more than helped me figure out things I normally wouldn't on my own. This blog is totally subjective and sometimes you have to crawl through the mud to find the answers. Put the trolls on ignore if you think their banter is worthless, it has worked for me so far.


    You literally can not click to view a comment if it is on a blog which makes this an invaluable tool.

    LikesMarcade liked this post
  3. datagod's Avatar

    nope. Is that a stick for poking ****?

    It is a weird way to start a sentence.

  4. datagod's Avatar

    Decisions made based on "common sense" are subjective. I am so glad we have TGSAP and the dispute system.

  5. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by datagod

    nope. Is that a stick for poking ****?

    It is a weird way to start a sentence.


    Perhaps it's colloquial but when an accusation is made it is sometimes referred to as "mud thrown" and if that "mud" gets repeated a lot without any evidence then the "mud sticks".

  6. Barthax's Avatar

    So, on topic.

    The reason I pointed out AD's Double Dragon disputes in the OP is that he brought evidence with him to the dispute: an interpretation of the rules which had some sense in English. In those disputes there was no other evidence in the OPs (from memory, haven't checked every single one!).

    That's the first point I'm trying to make: bring evidence. If there's no evidence but only opinion like "someone can't" (that, after all, is part & parcel of a scoreboard), then open a thread to muse over it like the TI-99 Parsec discussion: https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/209844-TI-99-Questionable-Scores?p=1060161 - bubble the thoughts in a corner as there's zero evidence (yet).

  7. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Desidious

    Bringing up questions and disputes has more than helped me figure out things I normally wouldn't on my own. This blog is totally subjective and sometimes you have to crawl through the mud to find the answers. Put the trolls on ignore if you think their banter is worthless, it has worked for me so far.


    You literally can not click to view a comment if it is on a blog which makes this an invaluable tool.


    I'd rather know what everyone is saying because I've learned people change over time and even the biggest sweary loudmouth has good things to say. ;)

  8. EVN's Avatar

    So disputes seem to have a voting threshold before there's enough merit that Jace acknowledges them. It would be cool to have a separate status for that. Basically make a dispute like a submission that can be voted accepted or rejected. Rejected disputes should not leave an asterisk on a person's score.

    Likessdwyer138, Marcade liked this post
  9. Snowflake's Avatar

    even though this has been said before something about a rewording makes me understand the other sides view a little better.

    the short counter thats always been given is the same reason why disputes stay open forever is exactly whyi its not a matter of "mud sticking" yet ironically instead of being seen that way its seen opposite. people can bash scores anywhere and realy throw the mud. yet a centralized place gives a defense. keeping the dispute open forever makes sure that the defense isnt forgoetn. think of the scores rtm says were removed and then readded. whats stopping them from being challenged again when noone remembers the defense? really, they should be challenged right now just so the defense can be attached

    to that end, i wonder, would people be less upset about an asterix if the wording was "view defense" instead of "view dispute". every score with an asterix is still a score and not removed. a dispute and a defense are one and the same from different point of views. the fact you can see the asterix means the score is still there and the facts its still there means the corresponding write up has the defense winning.

    LikesGarrett Holland liked this post
  10. francoisadt's Avatar

    in layman terms: a dispute will only be valid and ground to be looked at WITH evidence.

    Those disputes are only an opinion of people and will not be evaluated by TG to be valid.

    So I do not understand your problem here, Barthax? because "a no evidence dispute" is just

    "empty words" and clutter up the dispute thread.

    But, those "no evidence disputes" could spawn others to contribute and gather evidence if the case

    do have valid grounds.




    LikesBarthax liked this post
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Join us