Garrett Holland's Feed

Garrett Holland
09-23-2019 at 07:17 PM
33 Comments
Rate this Entry

Wall Entry at 09-23-2019 09:17 PM

Finally! For the first time since I've joined, there are less than 1,000 submissions in the adjudication queue! Let's see if we can get it down to 700 by the end of the week XD

ThanksMarcade thanked this post
Comments
  1. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Unless Jared Oswald has another thousand submissions up his sleeve, that just might happen

    LikesGarrett Holland, EVN, ILLSeaBass liked this post
  2. Rogerpoco's Avatar

    Lol, I was just gearing up for a massive run on cheesy stuff...

    :D


    I am voting a LOT more than usual myself, for sure!

    LikesGarrett Holland liked this post
  3. GibGirl's Avatar

    As soon as I decide to spend the rest of the points to add the Smash Bros Ultimate Home Run tracks, I'll be ready to submit about 75 scores for that. :)

    Likesreidman445, Garrett Holland, datagod liked this post
  4. thegamer1185's Avatar

    As some of you already know, I'm playing Hyrule Warriors Legends for the 3DS. Basically a thousand subs right there. Thanks for your voting in advance :)

    LikesGarrett Holland, datagod, Barthax liked this post
  5. EVN's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock

    Unless Jared Oswald has another thousand submissions up his sleeve, that just might happen


    Over 33% of the queue is still his though....

    Thanksdatagod thanked this post
    Likesdatagod, Marcade liked this post
  6. Garrett Holland's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by EVN



    Over 33% of the queue is still his though....

    Considering over 70% was his about a month ago, that is a good number. I have no issue with people with a bunch of submissions, though. Heck ... they earned the sub points, more power to 'em ;-) (just make the subs easy for adjudicators <<wink wink>>)

    Likesdatagod, Rogerpoco liked this post
  7. thegamer1185's Avatar

    Took me awhile to get Jared to time stamp his runs. Man that was a bee-otch to adjudicate his Guitar Hero/Rock Band stuff without them.

    LikesGarrett Holland liked this post
  8. Garrett Holland's Avatar

    Well the good news is I made a deal with Jared @trivia212005 ... he honored his end, and my end of the bargain was to time stamp the rest of his submissions, which I am doing now, slowly but surely. I'm going back to all his old submissions in the queue (most of which I already voted on months ago LOL) and time stamping all of them if they aren't already time stamped (or if the time stamp given is inaccurate by >15 seconds). That might be one reason why several hundred of them have been accepted in the past week or two ;-)

    ThanksMyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post
    Likesdatagod, Rogerpoco liked this post
  9. EVN's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett Holland


    Considering over 70% was his about a month ago, that is a good number. I have no issue with people with a bunch of submissions, though. Heck ... they earned the sub points, more power to 'em ;-) (just make the subs easy for adjudicators <<wink wink>>)


    Earned the sub points you reckon?

    Guy has over 24,000 correct votes and 5300 credibility. With that many votes, one wouldn't even need to be that accurate to have over 50,000 credibility if they were "earning" SP.

  10. Garrett Holland's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by EVN



    Earned the sub points you reckon?

    Guy has over 24,000 correct votes and 5300 credibility. With that many votes, one wouldn't even need to be that accurate to have over 50,000 credibility if they were "earning" SP.


    It's merely conjecture, but I have a feeling that anyone with a high submission acceptance number with a disproportionately low cred rating mustve gotten dinged a few times voting yes on an ultimately rejected submission (I voted YES on one of my submissions that I actually asked people to vote no on, and never changed my vote over LOL) I lost about 150 cred for that one sub alone. Imagine the Top Dog, @Almighty Dreadlock voting wrong on just one sub ... he'd lose over 3,000 cred for that single wrong vote. Do that a few times, and wind up in the middle of the pack with the rest of us. That may explain the disproportionate rating.

    Updated 09-23-2019 at 11:02 PM by Garrett Holland (My crappy spelling)
  11. EVN's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett Holland

    It's merely conjecture, but I have a feeling that anyone with a high submission acceptance number with a disproportionately low cred rating mustve gotten dinged a few times voting yes on an ultimately rejected submission (I voted YES on one of my submissions that I actually asked people to vote no on, and never changed my vote over LOL) I lost about 150 cred for that one sub alone. Imagine the Top Dog, @Almighty Dreadlock voting wrong on just one sub ... he'd lose over 3,000 cred for that single wrong vote. Do that a few times, and wind up in the middle of the pack with the rest of us. That may explain the disproportionate rating.


    Or as with this individual in question, just accepts everything blindly. It's pretty obvious when you submit a 50+ minute submission and he's commenting "Accepted" 2 minutes after it has been uploaded.

    LikesFly, Marcade, Snowflake liked this post
  12. Marcade's Avatar

    Personally, I think submitters should be restricted to 3 per every 24 hours. That would solve the problem for the massive queue. (Afterall, quality over quantity, as this IS a competitive high score site, yes?)

    OR...

    Lower the vote requirement for approval. Its obvious that several heavy CR rated adjudicators have departed the site, thus now, a longer wait time.

    Updated 09-24-2019 at 09:55 AM by Marcade
  13. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcade
    Personally, I think submitters should be restricted to 3 per every 24 hours. That would solve the problem for the massive queue. (Afterall, quality over quantity, as this IS a competitive high score site, yes?)

    OR...

    Lower the vote requirement for approval. Its obvious that several heavy CR rated adjudicators have departed the site, thus now, a longer wait time.
    .

    I'm against restricting members' activity, and doubt very much that doing so would have a significant effect on the size of the submissions queue. The size of the queue isn't a "problem", so there's no need to address it. Reducing its size won't necessarily drive up the quality of submissions, either.

    Toning down the weight and number of votes needed to accept a submission would likely result in more bad acceptances, such as this.

    What we adjudicators need is a couple of new "thread tools". The first would be a "push", with which we nominate a submission for immediate acceptance, giving reasons (eg: clear acceptability + excessive age). The second would be a "freeze", with which we pause adjudication of a submission, stating reasons (eg: likelihood of many 'yes' votes + good reason to vote 'no' has been pointed out).

    Admin could oversee the use of these "thread tools", instead of doing its usual nothing.

    Updated 09-25-2019 at 01:54 AM by Almighty Dreadlock
  14. Snowflake's Avatar

    i have to agree that just limits on submissions wouldnt solve anything at least not if the limits are done in a time frame fashion. people will still have all the same submissions, the submissions wil just be delayed. Increasing submission point cost could work, as that would truly result in less ability to submit, not just delayed abilty, though i suspect that would just encourage more blind voting for those submission points.

    as long as blind voting is a motivator (and honestly i dont know the best way to stop it), combined with tracking mini games (and i dont think we should stop tracking mini games) then theres probably not much that can be done.

    filtering would be good. others have said names, i wont, but i will say (without getting specific) just as we can choose to selectively view submissions from one person in particular, i think we should also be able to select to view evertying EXCEPT one person or EXCEPT one console.

    right now its everything, or one specific thing. increasing filter options to multiple items, or excluded items would go a long way. I dont feel the need to stop others from doing their thing, I just dont want to see the clutter.

    LikesBlackflag82 liked this post
  15. Garrett Holland's Avatar

    I agree with nearly all of it, however, the minigames sit in queue for a mere 4 or 5 days before the TGSAP is complete, so I don't even see that as a factor. In my personal observation, there has been only one issue that has caused the queue to become bloated, and that issue was resolved due to a deal I made with the member. Due to the volume, it won't happen overnight, but it is being whittled down, and I will assume it will remain that way unless the quality of evidence decreases again ... which I'm sure he wont revert back to that practice ... at least I hope he doesn't.

    Updated 09-24-2019 at 11:16 AM by Garrett Holland (typos)
  16. sdwyer138's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett Holland

    Well the good news is I made a deal with Jared @trivia212005 ... he honored his end, and my end of the bargain was to time stamp the rest of his submissions, which I am doing now, slowly but surely. I'm going back to all his old submissions in the queue (most of which I already voted on months ago LOL) and time stamping all of them if they aren't already time stamped (or if the time stamp given is inaccurate by >15 seconds). That might be one reason why several hundred of them have been accepted in the past week or two ;-)


    You agreed to time stamp his submissions.... what did he agree to do?

  17. Garrett Holland's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by sdwyer138



    You agreed to time stamp his submissions.... what did he agree to do?

    Initially, I didn't want to disclose his end of the bargain out of respect for him, however, after thinking about it, I'm sure he wouldn't care if I shared, so I'll do so.

    In one of his submissions, I bitched about a couple of things:

    1. Lack of time stamps, in conjunction with:
    2. Submitting videos that are as much as 5+ hours long, which causes adjudicators to have to sift through 5 hours of footage for 4 minutes worth of relevant gameplay.

    He acknowledged it was problematic, so I offered him a deal: If he were to go back and timestamp all 100 or so of his at-the-time "recent" submissions, I'll time stamp the rest. He immediately went back and did just that, so now I am doing my best to hold up my end of the bargain, and so far, it's been quite effective, thus, this post ;-)

  18. trivia212005's Avatar

    Well, thank you for the comments. I will start time stamps for future Guitar Her/Rock Band submissions. I'm currently playing "Rock Band Country Track Pack" for the Nintendo Wii and I have other "Rock Band" track submissions ready. Wish me luck.

    ThanksGarrett Holland thanked this post
    LikesGarrett Holland, Barthax liked this post
  19. GibGirl's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by trivia212005

    Well, thank you for the comments. I will start time stamps for future Guitar Her/Rock Band submissions. I'm currently playing "Rock Band Country Track Pack" for the Nintendo Wii and I have other "Rock Band" track submissions ready. Wish me luck.

    I'd like to offer a little advice - break up your submissions into smaller groups. I don't mind doing a couple at a time, but when I see two pages worth all in a row, I'm gonna skip most of them. It's also why I try and pick out a couple at a time to adjudicate and comment on, to break up the group.

    Thankstrivia212005 thanked this post
    Likestrivia212005 liked this post
  20. Marcade's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock



    What we adjudicators need is a couple of new "thread tools". The first would be a "push", with which we nominate a submission for immediate acceptance, giving reasons (eg: clear acceptability + excessive age). The second would be a "freeze", with which we pause adjudication of a submission, stating reasons (eg: likelihood of many 'yes' votes + good reason to vote 'no' has been pointed out).

    Admin could oversee the use of these "thread tools", instead of doing its usual nothing.


    I am all for that. And its a good idea too!

    It should be noted... I am much more in favor of "lowering" the vote approval criteria, than restricting ones submission volume.

    As (in my own example) there is no hiding, that I have many simple non-controversial submissions sitting in the queue for over 4-6 months now. I Cannot fault the current adjudicators, because I know who (more or less) constantly watches and votes for my videos. (And I do appreciate it, many thanks) Who I DO fault, are the ones that can ACTUALLY do something about it, (management), but its obviously not a priority to them, as they are more focused on a more recent, single 35 year old video game controversy filled with pathetic smoke and mirrors.

    Why should one (myself and others) sit pending for 4-6 months on a majority of simple and legit scores, when others get approved 4-6 days in theirs?

    What I, nor others, nor TG cant control, are the gamers who I used to directly compete with, as they either recently left the site, or on a very long hiatus. Therefore, with lack of interest in my genre/platform, I outright lose their weighted votes. Just sayin'. It is what it is. (and sometimes it just sucks)




    Updated 09-24-2019 at 11:47 AM by Marcade
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us