homerwannabee's Feed

homerwannabee
04-08-2018 at 06:49 AM
31 Comments
Rate this Entry

Make credibility more specialized

A new idea for the TG cred system. There is a problem with the cred system, and I think I have a solution to it. Of course the people with 20k or higher in cred are not going to like it, but here it goes.
The credibility system needs to be more specialized. What I mean is this. A person who has 20,000 cred from just reviewing android phone scores has a much stronger voting power than the person who has a 2500 cred score from reviewing just Atari 2600 scores. The problem arises is that the 20,000 cred person can outweigh in vote the 2500 cred person on an Atari 2600 submission even if that person has never reviewed a single Atari 2600 game in their lives.
It's obvious the person who has 2500 cred in just Atari 2600 games has a much more knowledgeable opinion on Atari 2600 games then the person with 20,000 cred on just android phone games. Unfortunately the system strongly favors the person with the 20,000 cred in the Atari 2600 submission.

So my solution is this. A person should get cred on the system for which the games they review. This credibility should not extend outside that system. So in this way, the person with the 2500 cred in just Atari 2600 games outweighs the person with 20,000 cred in Android submissions when it comes to reviewing Atari 2600 games.
By making credibility more specialized you eliminate this problem.
Likesgavv, John73 liked this post
Comments
  1. Retro-Shark's Avatar
    Sounds interesting. Maybe so the ones with a high amount of cred don't take such a hard blow, maybe have a two category system. One for each specific platform and the second an overall cred score of all games reviewed. The overall cred score would be the one seen on your profile as is now and the first platform specific cred score would be something only you would see (or public if you want) and the would also be the cred score that the website would most favor when reviewing submissions.
    Likeshomerwannabee liked this post
  2. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar
    This extremely poor suggestion makes your 'Donkey Kong lovers should have the most Donkey Kong submission voting power' attitude obvious.

    Despite your protestations to the contrary, it's clear that you've taken the rejection of your DK submission very much to heart. This, despite the impartial clarity of the arguments against accepting your submission. Also, that you regard my mentioning the possibility of having to dispute the acceptance of your submission as a [I]threat [/I][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3].[/SIZE][/FONT][COLOR=#ffffff][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]6[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3].[/SIZE][/FONT][COLOR=#ffffff][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]9[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]. [/SIZE][/FONT]well, that just borders on paranoia.
    Updated 04-08-2018 at 10:24 AM by Almighty Dreadlock
  3. homerwannabee's Avatar
    Threat doesn't always have to be something damaging. For instance, "The mom threatened to take away her son's allowance for continued bad behavior." So threat doesn't always have the scary undertones.
    As far as my suggestion I said system, I didn't say game. So under this rule it would be Arcade players, and not Donkey Kong players who would decide on a score like mine. So I might very well still have the same result. In fact you have Arcade experience yourself. So this rule wouldn't effect you because I presume that you have verified a decent amount of Arcade submissions.
    No matter what you say there is a problem with a person with huge cred having a huge sway in vote on a system they don't know much about.
  4. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar
    My interest lies primarily in arcade games, so I enjoy adjudicating arcade and MAME submissions most. Nevertheless, the bulk of the adjudication I do is on 'phone and racing car games, the majority of which I consider garbage. That's why I think your suggestion is no good.

    And I'm curious to know why you think all these DKFers know more about DK than TG members. If they knew so much, why did their site have Mitchell's fake scores on its boards, for so long? The vast majority of DKFers had [I]nothing [/I]to do with the exposure of Mitchell's fraud, and the ones who actually figured out how to prove the fraud took [I]years [/I]to finally get their acts together.

    DKFers would do well to show a bit more humility, and a little less "easy accept" arrogance. They certainly got shown the door, with the outcome of your DK submission, despite blatantly trying to dictate TG procedure. I've seen DKFers run roughshod over TG policy, before. Those days are evidently over.
    Updated 04-08-2018 at 11:16 AM by Almighty Dreadlock
  5. datagod's Avatar
    There already is a solution to the problem of a person with low credibility wishing they had more: adjudicate more

    The basic skill set is the same. Watch the performance, ask questions for clarifications, then accept or reject.
    LikesDesidious liked this post
  6. danman1234's Avatar
    Considering now one really knows how credibility works how can you say what matters where? There should always be a max of influence 1 vote has and if not the cred system is broken. 1 vote should not weigh as much a 10000 other votes regardless of how much adjudication you have done or not. Anyone who thinks that is a good system is full of it and you know this. Also AD its pretty much all DKF'ers who did the billy mitchell thing are you really this obtuse? Who do you think "exposed" Billy? The dispute itself is from the DKF guy. Anyway keep on gloating :D
  7. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar
    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20525]There should always be a max of influence 1 vote has and if not the cred system is broken. 1 vote should not weigh as much a 10000 other votes regardless of how much adjudication you have done or not. Anyone who thinks that is a good system is full of it and you know this.[/QUOTE]Your opinion makes no sense. TG members who give more time to adjudication deserve stronger votes, so they can make more powerful statements, when voting on principle (eg: when "easy accept" muppets try to dictate the result of a poll).

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20525]Also AD its pretty much all DKF'ers who did the billy mitchell thing are you really this obtuse?[/QUOTE][I]One [/I]DKFer [I]finally [/I]manages to pull his thumb out, after how many ever years, and you think [I]every [/I]DKFer deserves credit? [B][LOL.][/B] Refusing to believe that garbage is not obtusity, on my part. I simply refuse to be as gullible as you.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20525]Who do you think "exposed" Billy?[/QUOTE]Dwayne Richard, whose documentaries I saw, years ago. Years during which the DKF was glorifying Mitchell.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20525]The dispute itself is from the DKF guy. Anyway keep on gloating[/QUOTE]Yeh, and you keep on bawling like a little girl. Everybody knows that I'm the furthest thing from a TG champion, advocate or ambassador. Yet even I can see that TG's investigation of Mitchell is ten times better than DKF's [I]so called [/I]exposé. Take your pathetically self serving narrative back to your DKF safe space, and finish crying over your spilt TG credibility milk.
    Updated 04-08-2018 at 07:55 PM by Almighty Dreadlock
  8. Snowflake's Avatar
    ok, i do kinda like the granularity of by the system, however, its not that big a deal and i'll tell you why. People with high cred, say, just from android, well if they only vote on android then you dont have to worry about them going somewhere else. people get high cred by making sure to only vote on things they know about, it doesnt just show they know the game it also shows they have a history of knowing when not to vote and knowing what their limitation are. people with high cred had to avoid voting on things they'd get wrong, otehrwise there cred would've been hit long ago.

    i also have to suspect the timing of your request cant be a coincidence. if you're submission went through would you still want cred to work differently?

    finally as far the "dkfers" they do get credit for what they did. I dont believe TG would've gotten mitchel, at least not until years later, without the dkfs contributions. However, consider this, billy himself caught steve cheating. Does that mean since billy caught a cheater, his word is now perfect and anything he says should be trusted? of course not. So then why is it that since dkf caught billy it means their word is infinite and doesnt require corraborating evidence? The dkf has proven themselves here, xelnia in particular but others as well. But they proved themselves by providing evidence. As long as they continue to provide evidence i'll continue to look at the evidence. When the evidence dries up, sorry, but billy taught us that just because someone caught a cheater thats no reason to believe the catcher of the cheater is automatically right about everyting else
    Likesdatagod liked this post
  9. francoisadt's Avatar
    On top of this: This mean when one view on your own profile the credibility points - then we need a breakdown summary total per platform for those platforms you did vote on, one can view your credibility breakdown per platform?

    Also such like also ESI? ESI is one figure for all platforms but should als breakdown ESI for all platforms one has getting scores one?.
    Updated 04-09-2018 at 12:15 AM by francoisadt
  10. WCopeland's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock
    Years during which the DKF was glorifying Mitchell.
    DKF is not a homogeneous group. Your characterization of DKF as such is false.
  11. Snowflake's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by WCopeland
    DKF is not a homogeneous group. Your characterization of DKF as such is false.
    i agree with this. I mean, the group is a little more friendly and close knit than TG is, but yes you're all individuals. This is why i didnt really accept "all the experts agree". One, two, even 4 dkf members coming and verifying the score, that doesnt mean everyone else there agreed. For all I know, some dkf members rejected the score in silence. The only people in attendance who i can view as witnesses are those who spoke up and said "Yes i saw the score it was valid". To just assume everyone in attendance was a witness in favor of the score assumes some sort of group think which just isnt the case.
  12. danman1234's Avatar
    Who exactly are you trying to impress? All I see is your massively pompous ego that you constantly try and flex here so I guess you want everyone at TG to think your awesome? (I just find it ever so cute). Its apparent that you live for nothing more than to cause angst and love to belittle everyone you dont agree with. I'm saying people who give more time voting deserve a stronger vote but no one deserves to have a vote that is 10x stronger or a 1000x times stronger because it does nothing but make the voting process worthless. If all it takes is 4 or 5 people to vote one way and that decides the outcome of the vote then the system here is hugely flawed and ive said that from the very beginning so no surprises.

    Its ok apparently you have some huge issue with DKF so one of them must have taken your last pudding pop or something for you to be this angry. The fact that you threaten to dispute every little thing you dont like is something that should be stopped immediately by TG. Using the dispute system to sway votes is disgusting and I think it has no place in a submission thread.

    None of this is that important in the grand scheme of life. Ohmmmmmmmm

    \ n
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock
    Your opinion makes no sense. TG members who give more time to adjudication deserve stronger votes, so they can make more powerful statements, when voting on principle (eg: when "easy accept" muppets try to dictate the result of a poll).

    One DKFer finally manages to pull his thumb out, after how many ever years, and you think every DKFer deserves credit? [LOL.] Refusing to believe that garbage is not obtusity, on my part. I simply refuse to be as gullible as you.

    Dwayne Richard, whose documentaries I saw, years ago. Years during which the DKF was glorifying Mitchell.

    Yeh, and you keep on bawling like a little girl. Everybody knows that I'm the furthest thing from a TG champion, advocate or ambassador. Yet even I can see that TG's investigation of Mitchell is ten times better than DKF's so called exposé. Take your pathetically self serving narrative back to your DKF safe space, and finish crying over your spilt TG credibility milk.
  13. Snowflake's Avatar
    man this is so awkward, cause i was on the "reject/no" right there with A.D. so I do agree we have to decide for ourselves and not just let dkf dictate. But i really need to distance myself from his insults. I do see where you "dkfers" are coming from. I disagree very very strongly but I also dont want this to lead to a split of "us versus them".
    Likesdanman1234, datagod liked this post
  14. Rogerpoco's Avatar
    I do think there is something in this conversation that could, mebbe should be implemented, and I don't think it's quite what was suggested here-
    I think my opinion on Vectrex and NDS should matter a little more than my opinion on, say, Fairchild or Colecovision, as I have never played the systems.

    So even within the already weighted system, that is an element I think would be a good idea, I have often relied on people I feel sure know about the system/games I am playing for guidance, and I think their knowledge(based on rankings on the system)could easily be carried over to the adjudication process.
    It would probably speed things up around here.
    :P
  15. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar
    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599]Who exactly are you trying to impress? All I see is your massively pompous ego that you constantly try and flex here so I guess you want everyone at TG to think your awesome?[/QUOTE]You see what you want to see, which is why you can't grasp the fact that I don't care what "everyone at TG" thinks. I'd ask who you're trying to impress, but I already know.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599](I just find it ever so cute). Its apparent that you live for nothing more than to cause angst and love to belittle everyone you dont agree with.[/QUOTE]Your "ever so cute" line is a good stab at belittling me, so it looks like you love one of the things you think I love. Time for some introspection, then. Which should be easy for you to get into, since you're currently going through so much angst.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599]I'm saying people who give more time voting deserve a stronger vote but no one deserves to have a vote that is 10x stronger or a 1000x times stronger because it does nothing but make the voting process worthless. If all it takes is 4 or 5 people to vote one way and that decides the outcome of the vote then the system here is hugely flawed and ive said that from the very beginning so no surprises.[/QUOTE]Nobody has a TGCR of 1,000,000, so your point is worthless, not the voting process. No voting system is perfect, everybody knows that. But TG put in the dispute system to deal with its voting system's shortcomings, and that is good. Thus, should a bad DK submission ever get voted into a record, a dispute could then get it wiped into a non record. You don't like that? Too bad.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599] Its ok apparently you have some huge issue with DKF so one of them must have taken your last pudding pop or something for you to be this angry.[/QUOTE]Surely I've not been mysterious about why I think the DKF is despicable, but I'll clarify it for you. That website was a major promoter of the Mitchell fraud, for many years. Everybody except me thinks that its recent cessation of said promotion absolves it of all responsibility, but that won't stop me from holding it responsible for its sordid history. Also, I find it curious that, when it comes to sharing the credit for exposing the Mitchell fraud, DKFers are one big happy family; but, when it comes to sharing the blame for not having done so, sooner, DKFers suddenly metamorphose into a disparate group of nonassociable individuals. Must be a bunch of shapeshifters, over there at the DKF.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599]The fact that you threaten to dispute every little thing you dont like is something that should be stopped immediately by TG. Using the dispute system to sway votes is disgusting and I think it has no place in a submission thread.[/QUOTE]So, you also think that the possibility of incorrect acceptances' being disputed is a threat, eh? Well, then, you may consider me the most threatening person at TG, because I vow to dispute [I]every single [/I]DK submission put into the records without sufficient evidence. So, be afraid, easy accepters, be very afraid.

    Ominous threats aside, I would like to clarify something. The dispute system is [I]not applicable to rejected submissions.[/I] Thus, when DKFers were recently sent back to their beloved forum, with their tails between their legs, this was due to the power of a [I]voting outcome[/I], [I]not [/I]a dispute.

    [QUOTE=danman1234;bt20599]None of this is that important in the grand scheme of life. Ohmmmmmmmm[/QUOTE]Well, there's one thing we can agree on. Since we all have such a healthy perspecitve, you can stop screaming, now.
    Updated 04-09-2018 at 11:02 AM by Almighty Dreadlock
  16. Snowflake's Avatar
    preemptively declaring an intention to challenge every dk score with insufficient evidence makes me ask two question
    1. is it only dk scores in particular you'll be doing this with?
    2. would you mind saying how you determine "insufficient" evidence. I happed to agree with you on the most recent score dispute, but my entire issue with letting dkf just decide whats sufficient makes me also have an issue with you unilaterally deciding whats "sufficient". Shouldnt the community as a whole decide whats sufficient?
  17. WCopeland's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock
    That website was a major promoter of the Mitchell fraud, for many years. Everybody except me thinks that its recent cessation of said promotion absolves it of all responsibility, but that won't stop me from holding it responsible for its sordid history. Also, I find it curious that, when it comes to sharing the credit for exposing the Mitchell fraud, DKFers are one big happy family; but, when it comes to sharing the blame for not having done so, sooner, DKFers suddenly metamorphose into a disparate group of nonassociable individuals. Must be a bunch of shapeshifters, over there at the DKF.
    I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I'm genuinely curious why you believe this to be the case.

    The only promotion of Billy done at DKF to my knowledge was the fact his DK and DKJr scores were on our leaderboards. DKF does not host the Kong Off events (which DO promote Billy); those are done by Richie Knucklez who has recently shown disdain for DKF and many of its members for outing his friend.

    The evidence against Billy was compiled by Jeremy Young, DKF referee, and discovered by another DKF member who has chosen to remain anonymous. I would think if DKF as a group had a stance of being pro-Billy, this would've been kept under wraps.
    Likesdatagod liked this post
  18. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar
    [QUOTE=WCopeland;bt20619]The only promotion of Billy done at DKF to my knowledge was the fact his DK and DKJr scores were on our leaderboards.[/QUOTE]You need to go expand your knowledge, then. The "Donkey Kong Milestone Achievements" section of the DKF [I]still [/I]gives Mitchell undeserved credit, and its context goes beyond just publishing a score.

    [QUOTE=WCopeland;bt20619] DKF does not host the Kong Off events (which [I]DO[/I] promote Billy); those are done by Richie Knucklez who has recently shown disdain for DKF and many of its members for outing his friend.[/QUOTE]The DKF website has an extensive section, dedicated to that tournament, and it is in no way adversarial. Thus, it is complicit in the promotion engaged in by the tournament and its organisers. Disdain or no disdain, if the DKF would like to distance itself from that particular tournament, then perhaps [I]it should actually do so[/I]. I doubt that's the case, though.

    [QUOTE=WCopeland;bt20619] The evidence against Billy was compiled by Jeremy Young, DKF referee, and discovered by another DKF member who has chosen to remain anonymous. I would think if DKF as a group had a stance of being pro-Billy, this would've been kept under wraps.[/QUOTE]Dwayne Richard is the one who exposed Mitchell as a fraud, and he did [I]not [/I]do so anonymously. So, by my reckoning, DKFers deserve nil credit for initiating the exposé. Contrary to what you may think, I give credit to everyone who contributed to moving it forward.
  19. Snowflake's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock
    ... if the DKF would like to distance itself from that particular tournament, then perhaps it should actually do so. I doubt that's the case, though.
    ....
    you do realize plenty of them did boycott the tournament right? plenty also showed up. though i would agree that the tournament has earned the shade on it. last time i made a comment along those lines it was misinterperted to mean i was disparaging eveyone who attended. not the case. the tournament itself, not the participants, is my issue. When the tournament organizer actually claimed at his own tournament cheating happened but he kept quiet and only spoke up in revenge, well, that speaks volumes. If he was lying about the cheating, then how can I trust anything else he says? If he was telling the truth about the cheating that went unnoticed, welll then thats shows why we need video and cant trust the results. Big mistake to claim you knew of cheating at your tournament for years and then only bring it up out of revenge.

    note, lat time i brought this he told me i had it wrong and we "have a problem" if i said it again, too bad, i like the guy and want to be his friend, but he done screwed up on that one. although he deleted the original facebook post, enough of us saw it that theres no backtracking
  20. bensweeneyonbass's Avatar
    Sheesh! I came here to see an active discussion about credibility subdivisions and such. I'm just going to turn around and walk out.
    LikesRogerpoco, Retro-Shark liked this post
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us