JJT_Defender's Feed

JJT_Defender
11-18-2021 at 07:14 AM
29 Comments
Rate this Entry

Jace Hall can you make a official rule on 2 player submissions for TG members when adjudicating

Twin Galaxies @Jace Hall make a Official Rule on 2 Player submissions one of two options: Then nothing has to be discussed ANYMORE, because it is in the Twin Galaxies rules on all 2 Player tracks PROBLEM SOLVED.

Option 1. When 1 of the players loses his or hers last man.

Option 2. When both players lose all their lives.

Then the final score is tallied up. Twin Galaxies can vote safely on a player submissions without worrying about taking a credibility hit.

Please do not say leave it to us that is BS, that is a crap shoot.

Jace Hall make official Rule on 2 player submissions FINALIZE this 2 player submissions. Then their never be anymore issues or debates on 2 player final scores.

Comments
  1. Barthax's Avatar
  2. JJT_Defender's Avatar
    <p>nothing was finalized just reply&#39;s on 2 player submissions on final scores. Nothing was resolved, just debating and talking. Getting Twin Galaxies owner Jace Hall tell Admin Staff to put one of these options IN EVERY TWO-PLAYER TRACKS RULES, THEN THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED, SIMPLE.</p><p>There has to be put in ALL TWO PLAYER TWIN GALAXIES TRACKS RULES EITHER</p><p>OPTION 1. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN 1 PLAYER LOSES ALL HIS OR HERS LIVES</p><p>OPTION 2. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN BOTH PLAYERS LOSE ALL THEIR LIVES.</p><p>[QUOTE=Barthax;bt75394]</p><p>Repeat of <a href="https://www.twingalaxies.com/jjtdefender/wall/9685/what-was-the-final-twin-galaxies-verdict-on-2-player-games-especially-all-the-mame">https://www.twingalaxies.com/jjtdefender/wall/9685/what-was-the-final-twin-galaxies-verdict-on-2-player-games-especially-all-the-mame</a></p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
    Updated 11-18-2021 at 08:09 AM by JJT_Defender
  3. thegamer1185's Avatar

    I've always understood that when one player dies, the run dies. If the track rules say otherwise, that's how I'm adjudicating them. If you are referring to the "Hook" submission, the track rule doesn't give a max number of lives and says "upon completion of the game". The completion of the game rule being added to me means they can continue playing until they beat the game.

    There are different advantages and disadvantages to this scenario. Some games produce more enemies based on the number of players, so there are more points to be earned. Some don't give more points, but increase enemy HP.

    Scenario 1. A great player could let player 2 die, and continue playing earning the maximum number of points on their own while the game would be more challenging. I would be all for this being allowed because it would show the skill of the player, but I believe that has never been allowed and it wouldn't be a 2 player game once the 2nd player dies.

    Scenario 2. A great player could let player 2 die, but the game accounts for this and lowers the number of enemies due to the removal of player 2. This scenario gives you far less points than scenario one. So you would need 2 great players to maximize the score compared to scenario 1. This is what I think 2 Player submissions should be

    Scenario 3. Take scenario 2, and add the stipulation that even though a player loses all their lives, they could steal the other players live to continue. Puts more pressure on the better player to not die, and it keeps it a 2 player game. Some games allow a player to die but respawn when the other player hits a certain check point as well, I would allow play to continue in games like this.

    The "Hook" submission in the queue has the added "completion of the game" rule, so that means it's adjudicated differently. For some games its beneficial to have one player distract/bait the enemy while the other attacks. One player would have a much higher score but they are still working as a team.

    Basically, a 2 player submission is exactly that. If people aren't playing at the same time, it's no longer a 2 player game and the run should end. Pending track rules of course. I would absolutely be all for allowing lives to be stolen from another player to have both players continue. That can only be done for so long and eventually the game would end.

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    LikesJJT_Defender liked this post
  4. Blackflag82's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185

    I've always understood that when one player dies, the run dies. If the track rules say otherwise, that's how I'm adjudicating them. If you are referring to the "Hook" submission, the track rule doesn't give a max number of lives and says "upon completion of the game". The completion of the game rule being added to me means they can continue playing until they beat the game.

    That has not historically been the case.

    I'm sure there was discussion around it long before, but around 2010ish Steve Sanders and his son were working to set a record on 2 player joust. Steve was a far superior player and it created a fair amount of controversy at the Tron-off because there was debate on when the the score should actually be taken (generally it was taken when both players were dead, but that allowed for one much better player to simply "carry" the game).

    When the last player dies is still the standard for a lot (possibly most) classic arcade games. The assumption of "if the track rules say otherwise..." is backwards based on TG history...It would be when both players have dies unless the track rules say otherwise

  5. Snowflake's Avatar

    It’s been a case of people replacing “should” with “is” other players believing that’s the rule others knowing it’s not but thinking it’s should as well so going for it and of course others disagreeing

    it’s a mess but I can see tg making a blanket rule and overruling the historical rules that varied

    if someone doesn’t like an old track they can always make a new one

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likesthegamer1185, JJT_Defender liked this post
  6. thegamer1185's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82


    That has not historically been the case.

    I'm sure there was discussion around it long before, but around 2010ish Steve Sanders and his son were working to set a record on 2 player joust. Steve was a far superior player and it created a fair amount of controversy at the Tron-off because there was debate on when the the score should actually be taken (generally it was taken when both players were dead, but that allowed for one much better player to simply "carry" the game).

    When the last player dies is still the standard for a lot (possibly most) classic arcade games. The assumption of "if the track rules say otherwise..." is backwards based on TG history...It would be when both players have dies unless the track rules say otherwise

    No kidding?! I suppose to be fair, since I've joined there hasn't exactly been many 2 player submissions. It's probably under 10 that I can even remember, and I remember this question always being asked. Huh, thanks for correcting me. I've always thought it was when 1st player died. The last 2p submissions I remember was Jackal, and they took the score after the first player died...I think? Either way, if the case has always been when both players died, that absolutely needs written somewhere so people know.

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    LikesJJT_Defender liked this post
  7. Blackflag82's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185


    No kidding?! I suppose to be fair, since I've joined there hasn't exactly been many 2 player submissions. It's probably under 10 that I can even remember, and I remember this question always being asked. Huh, thanks for correcting me. I've always thought it was when 1st player died. The last 2p submissions I remember was Jackal, and they took the score after the first player died...I think? Either way, if the case has always been when both players died, that absolutely needs written somewhere so people know.

    I'm not sure if it was ever written anywhere, hence a lot of the confusion. In the Steve Sanders example above, even the refs couldn't agree.

    What makes it hard is exactly what Snowflake mentioned, "is" & "should" get used interchangeably. Some games lend themselves well to the community making the adjustment in adjudication regardless to the rules, while other games might have unbeatable scores if played the way in which the score is taken when one player dies. It's possible there are some classic arcade games that did use the "score from the first death" rule, but again it was just unwritten, and so now we don't know. I'm not sure a blanket rule can reasonably be made that doesn;t cause more problems, but it does seem like there could be a process in place to submit rule adjustments to multi-player tracks and TG makes a case by case ruling.

    But the chance of Jace doing that seems unlikely to me...I think we're back in one of the absentee owner situations at the moment.

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likesthegamer1185, Snowflake, JJT_Defender liked this post
  8. thegamer1185's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82

    But the chance of Jace doing that seems unlikely to me...I think we're back in one of the absentee owner situations at the moment.

    You noticed that as well?

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    LikesJJT_Defender liked this post
  9. Rogerpoco's Avatar

    Hard to 'splain exactly what I want to say, I guess.

    I understand wanting resolution, I REALLY do.

    This issue has been brought up, as @Barthax mentioned, and has been empathatically(?)discussed, by many members.


    It is VERY clear-Admin is choosing not to address this, at the moment. It is their right to do whatever they choose, this is a free site.


    I suppose, at some point, wounds have to be reopened to actually be explored, but I simply do not understand your personal mission to spearhead issues that oftentimes you are not actually vested in, i.e., "playing the games".


    I understand, adjudication is important, but in life in general, if you spend your time attempting to get resolution for every single issue that bothers you, you will inevitably be let down.


    (I'm not meaning to be a jerk. My "reasons for being cranky in general" list is getting REALLY long right now).


    "We" don't need a representative, JJT, we just don't.

    Likesthegamer1185, Barthax, fredb999 liked this post
  10. Rev John's Avatar

    Here are some examples of rule text from a couple of different multi-player tracks:


    1/ "Special Rules: This is a 2 Player ONLY Variation! Both Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 2 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT permitted!"

    2/ "Special Rules: This is a 4 Player Only Variation! All Four Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 4 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT allowed!"

    3/ "Note: This is a 2-player only variation. Both players must start at the same time. When player 1 or player 2 loses their last life then the game is over! The other player must then end his / her game as well. Add both scores together and submit it online."


    The only point of contention for the first 2 examples is around the term "game completion". I feel most people would associate this with the bit in the game that says "Game Over". Most games do not stop when one player loses their last life, and in an arcade the surviving player would normally keep playing the game they dropped their coin into. Back in the day it would have been hard for a referee to catch the exact scores at the moment one player died out, and it would have been unnatural for the surviving player to not play on. This form of the rule seems clear to me. If the score is meant to be taken from the moment one player loses their last life then this is an additional requirement that should have been spelt out in the rules. Although if people want to interpret example 1 and 2 this way and submit a score lower than they may have achieved at Game Over, well, I'm OK with that. Their scores might not be as competitive as others where the surviving player 'continues to completion'.


    The 3rd example spells out that the game is over when a player loses their last life. The only point of contention here would be about any points that are unavoidably gained when the other player is in the process of ending their game. (Well we could argue that not everyone has a neat binary his/her gender that fits the rule <<< segue for anyone who wants to derail this thread). Although in this day an age it seems the prevailing process is to do a frame by frame analysis to catch that exact moment when the game is over (according to the when-a-player-loses-their-last-life rules). On that basis, this form of the rule seems clear to me.


    If people want to score a multi-player track a particular way then I would suggest a new track be created if needed with either the example 1/2 or example 3 variant of the rule being recorded. My 2c

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    LikesJJT_Defender, Snowflake liked this post
  11. Barthax's Avatar

    Great take from @Rogerpoco :D

    If the rules of a track stipulate a specific game termination point then the rules should be followed. Otherwise, the game determines the termination point. Start with two-players and game until the game says game over (or whatever it says at termination).

    ThanksRogerpoco thanked this post
    LikesRev John, Rogerpoco, Snowflake liked this post
  12. JJT_Defender's Avatar
    <p>Since Twin Galaxies owner Jace Hall and Admin Staff does not want to get involved or care to resolve with a simple rule for 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 player video game tracks.</p><p>Put 2-5 player games to a vote by Twin Galaxies members 200 or so that actively participating on Twin Galaxies site on a regular bases.</p><p>Andrew Peter Mee<br>- Today 09:30 AM<br>Great take from [MENTION=46272]Rogerpoco[/MENTION] :D<br>If the rules of a track stipulate a specific game termination point then the rules should be followed. Otherwise, the game determines the termination point. Start with two-players and game until the game says game over (or whatever it says at termination).</p><p>If people want to score a multi-player track a particular way then I would suggest a new track be created if needed with either the example 1/2 or example 3 variant of the rule being recorded. My 2c</p><p>Juan Torres<br>- Yesterday 04:00 PM<br>nothing was finalized just reply&#39;s on 2 player submissions on final scores. Nothing was resolved, just debating and talking. Getting Twin Galaxies owner Jace Hall tell Admin Staff to put one of these options IN EVERY TWO-PLAYER TRACKS RULES, THEN THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED, SIMPLE.<br><br>There has to be put in ALL TWO PLAYER TWIN GALAXIES TRACKS RULES EITHER<br>OPTION 1. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN 1 PLAYER LOSES ALL HIS OR HERS LIVES<br>OPTION 2. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN BOTH PLAYERS LOSE ALL THEIR LIVES.</p><p>John Eden<br>- Today 09:22 AM<br>Here are some examples of rule text from a couple of different multi-player tracks:<br>1/ &quot;Special Rules: This is a 2 Player ONLY Variation! Both Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 2 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT permitted!&quot;<br><br>2/ &quot;Special Rules: This is a 4 Player Only Variation! All Four Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 4 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT allowed!&quot;<br><br>3/ &quot;Note: This is a 2-player only variation. Both players must start at the same time. When player 1 or player 2 loses their last life then the game is over! The other player must then end his / her game as well. Add both scores together and submit it online.&quot;</p><p>Kyle Nelson<br>- Yesterday 05:32 PM<br>I&#39;ve always understood that when one player dies, the run dies. If the track rules say otherwise, that&#39;s how I&#39;m adjudicating them. If you are referring to the &quot;Hook&quot; submission, the track rule doesn&#39;t give a max number of lives and says &quot;upon completion of the game&quot;. The completion of the game rule being added to me means they can continue playing until they beat the game.<br><br>There are different advantages and disadvantages to this scenario. Some games produce more enemies based on the number of players, so there are more points to be earned. Some don&#39;t give more points, but increase enemy HP.<br><br>Scenario 1. A great player could let player 2 die, and continue playing earning the maximum number of points on their own while the game would be more challenging. I would be all for this being allowed because it would show the skill of the player, but I believe that has never been allowed and it wouldn&#39;t be a 2 player game once the 2nd player dies.<br><br>Scenario 2. A great player could let player 2 die, but the game accounts for this and lowers the number of enemies due to the removal of player 2. This scenario gives you far less points than scenario one. So you would need 2 great players to maximize the score compared to scenario 1. This is what I think 2 Player submissions should be<br><br>Scenario 3. Take scenario 2, and add the stipulation that even though a player loses all their lives, they could steal the other players live to continue. Puts more pressure on the better player to not die, and it keeps it a 2 player game. Some games allow a player to die but respawn when the other player hits a certain check point as well, I would allow play to continue in games like this.</p><p>[QUOTE=Rogerpoco;bt75408]</p><p>Hard to &#39;splain exactly what I want to say, I guess.</p><p>I understand wanting resolution, I REALLY do.</p><p>This issue has been brought up, as [MENTION=23976]Barthax[/MENTION] mentioned, and has been empathatically(?)discussed, by many members.</p><p>It is VERY clear-Admin is choosing not to address this, at the moment. It is their right to do whatever they choose, this is a free site.</p><p>I suppose, at some point, wounds have to be reopened to actually be explored, but I simply do not understand your personal mission to spearhead issues that oftentimes you are not actually vested in, i.e., &quot;playing the games&quot;.</p><p>I understand, adjudication is important, but in life in general, if you spend your time attempting to get resolution for every single issue that bothers you, you will inevitably be let down.</p><p>(I&#39;m not meaning to be a jerk. My &quot;reasons for being cranky in general&quot; list is getting REALLY long right now).</p><p>&quot;We&quot; don&#39;t need a representative, JJT, we just don&#39;t.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
  13. Barthax's Avatar

    I'd just like to pick up on the general idea that TG/Jace/Admin do not want to enforce a solution. The opposite is true and we have the enforced solution: community-lead freedom to implement however each disparate portion of the community wishes to enforce it. Just because you can't see the walls of your confinement doesn't mean it isn't working.

    LikesRogerpoco, Snowflake liked this post
    Updated 11-19-2021 at 07:36 AM by Barthax
  14. JJT_Defender's Avatar
    <p>That is VAGUE ,their is nothing in the rules unless specified on the track that says otherwise.</p><p>Then explain why months and for some of these multi player tracks have been in the que for almost a year because many Twin Galaxies members are not sure and their is no clear TWIN GALAXIES RULES whether</p><p>1. 1 player dies the final score is totaled up.</p><p>2. Both players dies then the final score is tabulated.</p><p>3. Or 3 to 5 players tracks the same if 1 player dies the final is totaled up or 3 to 5 players die then the score tabulated.</p><p>If Twin Galaxies rule is specified of the rules above on multi player tracks then their will be no confusion by Twin Galaxies members to adjudicate and then these video game submissions will not be sitting in the que for up to a year.</p><p>[QUOTE=Barthax;bt75429]</p><p>I&#39;d just like to pick up on the general idea that TG/Jace/Admin do not want to enforce a solution. The opposite is true and we have the enforced solution: community-lead freedom to implement however each disparate portion of the community wishes to enforce it.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
  15. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by JJT_Defender

    That is VAGUE ,their is nothing in the rules unless specified on the track that says otherwise.

    Yes, freedom to game how you want is vague - it is at the mercy of how the individual interprets.

    The rules exist to augment what the game already does for you. If you start a two-player game, does the game stop at the first player's death? If not, why should we artificially do so? There's no rule to enforce it unless the rule exists in the track. The answer is in the lack of rule: the game does it for you.

    LikesSnowflake liked this post
  16. JJT_Defender's Avatar
    <p>Twin Galaxies members another suggestion:</p><p>Ask Twin Galaxies staff [MENTION=32630]admin staff[/MENTION] [MENTION=31815]Jace Hall[/MENTION] to have these multi player tracks be amended to include 1 of these. </p><p>Have the Twin Galaxies members that play these Multi player tracks have the final say DECIDE which one they want in the Rules for each of these tracks.</p><p>1. 1 player dies the final score is totaled up.<br><br>2. Both players dies then the final score is tabulated.<br><br>3. Or 3 to 5 players tracks the same if 1 player dies the final is totaled up or 3 to 5 players die then the score tabulated.</p><p>There has to be put in ALL TWO PLAYER TWIN GALAXIES TRACKS RULES EITHER<br>OPTION 1. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN 1 PLAYER LOSES ALL HIS OR HERS LIVES<br>OPTION 2. 2-PLAYER FINAL SCORES IS FINALIZED WHEN BOTH PLAYERS LOSE ALL THEIR LIVES.<br>John Eden<br>- Today 09:22 AM<br>Here are some examples of rule text from a couple of different multi-player tracks:<br>1/ &quot;Special Rules: This is a 2 Player ONLY Variation! Both Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 2 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT permitted!&quot;<br><br>2/ &quot;Special Rules: This is a 4 Player Only Variation! All Four Players must start at the same time! The record is the sum of the 4 scores upon game completion. Continues are NOT allowed!&quot;<br><br>3/ &quot;Note: This is a 2-player only variation. Both players must start at the same time. When player 1 or player 2 loses their last life then the game is over! The other player must then end his / her game as well. Add both scores together and submit it online.&quot;</p><p>Kyle Nelson</p><p>Scenario 1. A great player could let player 2 die, and continue playing earning the maximum number of points on their own while the game would be more challenging. I would be all for this being allowed because it would show the skill of the player, but I believe that has never been allowed and it wouldn&#39;t be a 2 player game once the 2nd player dies.<br><br>Scenario 2. A great player could let player 2 die, but the game accounts for this and lowers the number of enemies due to the removal of player 2. This scenario gives you far less points than scenario one. So you would need 2 great players to maximize the score compared to scenario 1. This is what I think 2 Player submissions should be<br><br>Scenario 3. Take scenario 2, and add the stipulation that even though a player loses all their lives, they could steal the other players live to continue. Puts more pressure on the better player to not die, and it keeps it a 2 player game. Some games allow a player to die but respawn when the other player hits a certain check point as well, I would allow play to continue in games like this.</p>
    LikesBarthax liked this post
  17. JJT_Defender's Avatar
    <p>Roger: &quot;We&quot; don&#39;t need a representative, JJT, we just don&#39;t.</p><p>Answer I am not a representative.</p><p>Roger: It is VERY clear-Admin is choosing not to address this, at the moment. It is their right to do whatever they choose, this is a free site.</p><p>Answer I agree and so do majority of Twin Galaxies members.</p><p>Roger: you are not actually vested in, i.e., &quot;playing the games&quot;.</p><p>Answer: What do you mean by me not playing games I have recently submitted 27 and have 33 more plus 60 after and have a couple more different Tracks with 100 plus Wr&#39;s I JJT will be submitting in the future.</p><p>What kinds of games do you Roger want me to submit to?</p><p>splain explain</p><p> empathatically emphatically </p><p>your welcome</p><p>God Bless you and your family and friends.</p><p>[QUOTE=Rogerpoco;bt75408]</p><p>Hard to &#39;splain exactly what I want to say, I guess.</p><p>I understand wanting resolution, I REALLY do.</p><p>This issue has been brought up, as [MENTION=23976]Barthax[/MENTION] mentioned, and has been empathatically(?)discussed, by many members.</p><p>It is VERY clear-Admin is choosing not to address this, at the moment. It is their right to do whatever they choose, this is a free site.</p><p>I suppose, at some point, wounds have to be reopened to actually be explored, but I simply do not understand your personal mission to spearhead issues that oftentimes you are not actually vested in, i.e., &quot;playing the games&quot;.</p><p>I understand, adjudication is important, but in life in general, if you spend your time attempting to get resolution for every single issue that bothers you, you will inevitably be let down.</p><p>(I&#39;m not meaning to be a jerk. My &quot;reasons for being cranky in general&quot; list is getting REALLY long right now).</p><p>&quot;We&quot; don&#39;t need a representative, JJT, we just don&#39;t.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
  18. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by JJT_Defender

    Kyle Nelson

    Scenario 1. A great player could let player 2 die, and continue playing earning the maximum number of points on their own while the game would be more challenging. I would be all for this being allowed because it would show the skill of the player, but I believe that has never been allowed and it wouldn't be a 2 player game once the 2nd player dies.

    Scenario 2. A great player could let player 2 die, but the game accounts for this and lowers the number of enemies due to the removal of player 2. This scenario gives you far less points than scenario one. So you would need 2 great players to maximize the score compared to scenario 1. This is what I think 2 Player submissions should be

    Scenario 3. Take scenario 2, and add the stipulation that even though a player loses all their lives, they could steal the other players live to continue. Puts more pressure on the better player to not die, and it keeps it a 2 player game. Some games allow a player to die but respawn when the other player hits a certain check point as well, I would allow play to continue in games like this.


    This explains why we don't need the rule: the game determines the outcome & good players determine how best to play the game.

  19. Rogerpoco's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by JJT_Defender

    Roger: "We" don't need a representative, JJT, we just don't.

    Answer I am not a representative.

    Roger: It is VERY clear-Admin is choosing not to address this, at the moment. It is their right to do whatever they choose, this is a free site.

    Answer I agree and so do majority of Twin Galaxies members.

    Roger: you are not actually vested in, i.e., "playing the games".

    Answer: What do you mean by me not playing games I have recently submitted 27 and have 33 more plus 60 after and have a couple more different Tracks with 100 plus Wr's I JJT will be submitting in the future.

    What kinds of games do you Roger want me to submit to?

    splain explain

    empathatically emphatically

    your welcome

    God Bless you and your family and friends.



    OK, first off-I know you are as sensitive as I am, JTT. Do not mistake my willingness to speak my mind for anything other than it is, you are my Friend, and always will be, if left up to me.


    Again-it's difficult for me to put this exactly right. I KNOW it's in line with how many people feel, and some likely with harsher sentiments than mine.


    Are you planning to submit to any two player tracks?

    Obviously, easy to say yes, but I'm gonna assume, in reality, no.

    Well, people that play two player tracks have attempted to get resolution to this issue, many times, directly associated with their current game interest, with no results.

    So my thinking is if others have "tried and failed", and you are stepping in to attempt to get resolution yourself, then you are most certainly acting in a "representative" role, yes?


    The time you spend here is much appreciated, you know that.

    Oftentimes your approach is somewhat demanding, you have to know that can be off-putting, people don't generally respond well to that.


    I dunno. Like I said, a little cranky in general, mebbe I'm out of line, I just don't see why this particular issue has you losing sleep, we are not obligated to vote or have input on every single submission that comes to the site.

    LikesBarthax liked this post
  20. Snowflake's Avatar

    i actually on everyone's side here -- and i'll tell you how thats possible

    JJT i used to argue with you alot but dont anymore, and illl tell you why. theres nothing wrong with you asking for things. nothing. the problem is though you ask for things others dont want. at one point there was fear if we didnt argue admin would just do whatever you asked -- and those fears at one point were well based mind you. now though, thx to the "absentee" owner thats no longer a concern. you can ask whatever you want and i feel zero need to argue since i know it wont be implemented.

    barthax is right we dont need the rule. but hey since we're not getting it yay problem solved

    the "absentee" owner i'm happy stays out of it. by directly answering instead of handling things through the adjucidation sysem pressures people to argue and gives unfair advantage to the loudest. note, of course you have to speak to be heard of course. but at some point, if the same request keeps being remade and the same argument keeps happening, then should every side really need to restate their views if already stated? I'm not sure people realize how much argumentation has been removed precisely because of not directly granting requests like that.

    roger -- so sorry to hear theres things going on in your life making you snippy here. totally get you not wanting to get too specific but whatever it is, im sad for you, and i still agree with what you're saying i just feel bad, knowing how you prefer to be, that you're now pushed into this

    This is Twin Galaxies petty much all arguments start with concern over an actionable point, even the most personal off topic "toxic" arguments start as a concern over something that affects the scoreboard. Once it becomes clear something is going to affect the scoreboard, i know i sure find it alot easier at that point to not argue. And this is one of the cases the "absentee" owner has made clear through long enough abstention that this isnt going to affect anything.

    ThanksJJT_Defender, Rogerpoco thanked this post
    LikesRogerpoco liked this post
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us