MyOwnWorstEnemy's Feed

Good post Sean!

I’ve lost a lot points from this user over the years and again yesterday.

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

1) The submission was accepted and than disputed due to video no longer available (YouTube). This valid dispute was affirmed by the acting Head Custodian in December 2017. However, the recent post indicates that this was cancelled by the submitter on 4/27/2020????

The dispute was accepted, but it failed to process on the back end at that time (which was in the more early stages of the dispute system). This kept the score on the leaderboard, while simultaneously maintaining an accepted dispute record on file. This unprocessed dispute oversight was pointed out by a member and has recently been addressed by our updated system (processed.)

2) The penalty for an incorrect vote is 5% of credibility at the time the vote was cast. My credibility rating was somewhere between 14,000 and 16,000 (from what I remember) at the end of 2017. I would expect a 700 to 800 drop. Unfortunately, the credibility hit that I took was based on yesterday's credibility of 20891 (5% = 1,045). My credibility dropped to 19,865 - approximately 1,045 (difference likely due to a few submission that I voted on and received 3 credibility. See below

I'm not sure it is supposed to work that way, but I will let @admin staff address this as they would know the correct answer.

3) How many of more of these 'blasts from the pasts' credibility hits from daddydick should I expected to see in the future? Is this it? Should there be a 'statue of limitations' on how long an accepted disputes sits in your queue and is not acted upon? At some point, administration needs to take some responsibility for shortfalls in processes they design and execute.

According to @admin staff there should be no other occurrences. @admin staff has stated that they have checked everything as of yesterday and they can find no other issues.

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

There is still a bunch of accepted scores from the same player that have lost their video evidence and are easily disputable. I feel bad for the people that in good faith voted on this and now they are gonna take a hit for something beyond their control. But I guess the more time passes, the bigger the hit will be, so I think it's better to dispute them now and be done with it.

I'll start the disputes later today.

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

Snowflake, nads liked this post

His "daddy" must be proud!

Pixe Sukola, MyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post

I've started the first dispute, I wanted to dispute all of them but apparently I can only dispute 1 score every 24 hours. Which means that it would take me 1 week to dispute these records and more than a month to dispute all of the Guitar Hero submissions that were entered wrongly by a referee.

Not cool, TG.

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/215723-Dispute-Daniel-Ocampo-PlayStation-2-Need-for-Speed-Underground-NTSC-Circuit-Mode-Atlantica-Reverse-Fastest-Lap-Player-ruven-zambrano-Score-47-65

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

Originally Posted by nads

Good post Sean!

I’ve lost a lot points from this user over the years and again yesterday.

Unfortunately - the curse of DD will haunt you and I a bit longer. There about another 1/2 dozen other accepted subs by this guy that no longer has video available to review.

A few years ago, I made the mistake of lending a helping hand to clear out some of the older 'lost in adjudication' submissions and keep the queue moving. About two hours of adjudicating and watching videos by a means allowed by TG at the time ends up costing me (and you) 1000s of credibiilty. No good deed goes unpunished. That was the last time I reviewed anything by the Roscoe Texas clan. More pain to come!

nads thanked this post

nads liked this post

Originally Posted by Pixe Sukola

I've started the first dispute, I wanted to dispute all of them but apparently I can only dispute 1 score every 24 hours. Which means that it would take me 1 week to dispute these records and more than a month to dispute all of the Guitar Hero submissions that were entered wrongly by a referee.

Not cool, TG.

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/215723-Dispute-Daniel-Ocampo-PlayStation-2-Need-for-Speed-Underground-NTSC-Circuit-Mode-Atlantica-Reverse-Fastest-Lap-Player-ruven-zambrano-Score-47-65

Wow - they are sure making this process as administrative and drawnout as much as possible. I voted yes on the submission your disputing.. another 1000 CR hit coming my way.. LOL I'm setting the over/under line at 14,000 CR when all the dust settles.

I used my 24 hours to dispute another one of Mr. Zambrano's - let's rip this band-aid off and let the pain begin.

Pixe Sukola liked this post

i'm not trying to make this another anti-rudy thread but when disputes were first discussed he mentioned he was gonna dispute all PSPs scores. it became obvious before the dispute system even launched safeguards were needed. the cred limit as well as a limit per day.

perhaps as abuse becomes less and less of a concern, and as the dispute system is now a stated reason for quicker adjudications, the 24 hour rule can be relaxed maybe?

i cant personally join this one. You know i would never allow personal feelings to have me vote the wrong way, but i would allow personal feelings to result in me abstaining. I dont feel comfortable taking action against jesse's circle of friends. I'll certainly help in simliar cases though where i dont have personal reasons to stay out of it

Originally Posted by Snowflake

i cant personally join this one. You know i would never allow personal feelings to have me vote the wrong way, but i would allow personal feelings to result in me abstaining. I dont feel comfortable taking action against jesse's circle of friends. I'll certainly help in simliar cases though where i dont have personal reasons to stay out of it

Hey Snowflake, I wasn't sure if you were responding to my comment about me deciding not to vote on any of the Roscoe clan's submission or the disputes being raised to clean-up the remaining daddydick submission with invalid video links.

If is the former, I'm not asking anyone to join in on my personal choice to not vote on submission coming from that group. I've been burned enough from voting on their submission only to get the rug pulled out from under me. I'm by no means advocating for some boycott or a light the torches and march toward Roscoe mentality. I just reached my limit trying to help those guys with their submission a couple of years ago. Maybe I'll change my mind over time their submission but I'm about to lose probably several 1000 CR more from voting in good faiths on their subs. While the quick plummet to zero credibility is interesting in a 'screw it all to hell' kinda way, I'd like to stay north to 10,000 CR as long as I can.

PS - There are more submission that were accepted with links to 3rd party video sharing sites. If I remember right, there was a period of 6 to 9 months where the only way to submit to this site was through Youtube. I know of one member whose links to Youtube are no longer valid. Its TG's wish to remove all these scores that were accepted through TGSAP and punish the adjudicators credibility. If I was in charge, this is not the way I'd go about it but.... if this is the direction than I say let's make sure we turn over every stone in which submission evidence is no longer available. No bias.. no personal feelings... just weeding out scores that no longer can be confirmed post adjudication.

nads liked this post

nope, no hidden meaning. i was gonna offer to join till i realized who it was, so explained why i wasnt joining but offering to help in simliar situations.

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

i got burned on a sub where techincal admin didnt contradict, but it felt very contradictory so i see where others like you and kyle feel screwed and i try to warn people before and after about the semantics where admin technically never contradicts


there was a sub whos video went missing before adjudiicatoin even finished. you better believe i voted no on a sub with no evidecne so yeah i complained that it went through and i lost cred. admin admonished me for voting no when i should've known by others yes votes that the sub was good. so first i was told vote based on the evidecne -- and the evidence was a clear no. then i was told i should've viewed others comments as evidence lol

something simliar happened with you hear. admin always told you that you could vote on subs offsite.. BUT we were also always warned if the video ever went missing and was disputed we'd lose cred. so yes, you were simultanesouly given advice but also warned that taking that advice would result in punishment.

back when only third party was possible, for that reason, i only voted on people i trusted so i wouldnt be in the scenario. at least one person i did trust though also removed his videos, so so much for that logic

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

MyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

i got burned on a sub where techincal admin didnt contradict, but it felt very contradictory so i see where others like you and kyle feel screwed and i try to warn people before and after about the semantics where admin technically never contradicts


there was a sub whos video went missing before adjudiicatoin even finished. you better believe i voted no on a sub with no evidecne so yeah i complained that it went through and i lost cred. admin admonished me for voting no when i should've known by others yes votes that the sub was good. so first i was told vote based on the evidecne -- and the evidence was a clear no. then i was told i should've viewed others comments as evidence lol

something simliar happened with you hear. admin always told you that you could vote on subs offsite.. BUT we were also always warned if the video ever went missing and was disputed we'd lose cred. so yes, you were simultanesouly given advice but also warned that taking that advice would result in punishment.

back when only third party was possible, for that reason, i only voted on people i trusted so i wouldnt be in the scenario. at least one person i did trust though also removed his videos, so so much for that logic

That pretty much sums it up.. The 1st submission I remember that I cast a wrong vote for was the zombie apocalypse game. Twin Galaxies pleaded for community member to adjudicate these submissions, Being a good community member I answered the call, did my best to match the performance with the rules and probably watched the video 2 or 3 times just to be sure. Sure enough... I missed something that those familiar with the game picked-up. I think I watched the video another two times after adjudication concluded and I still couldn't figure out what I missed. Lesson learned... stick to what I know.

Originally Posted by Jace Hall

The dispute was accepted, but it failed to process on the back end at that time (which was in the more early stages of the dispute system). This kept the score on the leaderboard, while simultaneously maintaining an accepted dispute record on file. This unprocessed dispute oversight was pointed out by a member and has recently been addressed by our updated system (processed.)

I'm not sure it is supposed to work that way, but I will let @admin staff address this as they would know the correct answer.

According to @admin staff there should be no other occurrences. @admin staff has stated that they have checked everything as of yesterday and they can find no other issues.

Thanks for the prompt response. Please let me (community) know what baseline is used to calculate the CR penalty when disputes are deemed valid. I looked through the policy and wiki pages but wasn't able to find any information. I thought I've seen this posted and discussed somewhere...

Anyway... at this point I'm just curious how far my credibility is going to drop. I was tying to do good and help a new member get his scores accepted. The evidence was avaliable at the time that I adjudicated; performances were valid. Evidence vanished right before or sometime after it was accepted via the adjudication process. It would be nice if this was handled in a different manner than a simple binary thought process with misplaced penalties. But it is what it is... just let me know what my 'good faith' in voting what I've seen with my own eyes is going to cost me and others.

If I recall Stella blue found the hit is based on not when the dispute goes through not on when you voted but rather on what your cred was when the sub was accepted

He said this 2018 in November. I know that month because I remember being in my hotel room on my honey moon catching up on tg. It’s weird how the mind remembers where you were when watching a show or reading something isn’t it anyway maybe the rule has since changed I don’t know

MyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post

nads liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

If I recall Stella blue found the hit is based on not when the dispute goes through not on when you voted but rather on what your cred was when the sub was accepted

He said this 2018 in November. I know that month because I remember being in my hotel room on my honey moon catching up on tg. It’s weird how the mind remembers where you were when watching a show or reading something isn’t it anyway maybe the rule has since changed I don’t know

Perhaps your superhero power is memory recall. Right after I responded to Jace's post, I found this on the Admins Wall. Its a response to a question from Duc. It pretty much confirms what you stated above except the calculation is based on submission date vs. acceptance date. The only question I have is whether or not this has changed since it was posted almost two years ago.

nads liked this post

Hmm I thought it was acceptable date submission date is yet another point though

I do not clearly remember that point what I remember thinking though was your vote is weighted by your cred at vote time and your penalty was a different point in time. So you could’ve been penalized based on a higher cred which had you voted with that cred you would’ve been on the winning side. Seems unfair to use one number for people cred when determine which side wins but use a different number for cred for determining penalty

Originally Posted by Snowflake

I remember being in my hotel room on my honey moon catching up on tg.

LMFAO. TG should give you a dedication award :)

john

.

MyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post

Originally Posted by lexmark

LMFAO. TG should give you a dedication award :)

john

.

oh whatever, i know it sounds, but be honest, every single one of us would do the same thing

lexmark liked this post

Good News - The credibility penalty for this submission was reduced from 1000ish to 400ish. Much appreciated to @admin staff and @Jace Hall for following up on the penalty calculation.