Dispute: Peter Nadalin - Atari 2600 / VCS - M*A*S*H - NTSC - Game 5, Difficulty BB [Cease Fire] - Player: Roger Blair Edwin Blair 111 - Score: 999

Is this a valid dispute?

    This poll is closed
This poll is closed
  1. 07-30-2017, 07:00 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock View Post
    Actually, my question was about why his submission was accepted, with so few votes, while other submissions have to garner more votes.

    Oh, I see.

    For what it's worth, a number of yesterday's completed submissions fared almost as poorly, at least in terms of voting activity.

    The July 29-30 numbers, from 8:00 AM to 8:00 AM (EDT):

    A total of 48 submissions completed the review process ( 45 Accepted and 3 Rejected ).

    A total of 75 adjudicators voted on at least one of the completed submissions.

    A total of 473 votes were cast ( 472 Correct and 1 Incorrect ).

    Average number of votes per submission = 9.85

    The average for accepted submissions is probably a bit higher, but not by much. I don't know which of the 3 rejections (if any) were canceled items. Canceled submissions tend to deflate the voting stats, for 3 main reasons:

    • When a submission is canceled, new voters are immediately locked out
    • Until recently, attempting to switch a vote from "Yes" to "No" resulted in the vote being removed entirely
    • Submissions that are canceled early (due to obvious errors) receive very few votes, possibly 2 or less



    Thanks HugDD, JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes HugDD, JJT_Defender liked this post
  2. 07-31-2017, 10:17 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock View Post
    I also observed the sitewide malfunction, for a few minutes.

    I saw some things, which I definitely should not have seen.

    Now that we all know it takes only 15 votes to complete adjudication, things might get a little ridiculous .6.9.
    Vote count display is not how adjudication completes. What you saw is a throwback from vBulletin. The "15" is not accurate since voter weighting is fractional. Additionally, voter weighting is only one factor.

    So don't worry, nothing critical was exposed. All good.
    @stella_blue does some interesting analysis based on the observable data available. It's not entirely comprehensive and internally we've gone back and forth in regard to whether or not to continue to allow it.

    We've historically decided to not interfere with what Stella_Blue is doing since the collation and organizing of the data we publicly make available is not against the rules and people seem to enjoy it. The specific analysis that Stella does can not be directly predictive of adjudication outcomes (which is the most important thing to remain secure.)

    Also, while what Stella does is interesting to those that are academically interested in trying to figure out exactly how TGSAP functions, that concern really is beside the point of TG, which is just focused on trying to adjudicate and recognize score performances.

    With the dispute system now in place and starting to function we now have a fairly complete system that will start to scrub the database for error and self balance over time. There will be documentation along the way, which has been the most important thing to make sure of. Lack of documentation in the past is what has caused TG a lot of problems!

    On we go.
    Thanks HugDD, JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes HugDD, JJT_Defender liked this post
  3. 07-31-2017, 01:49 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    With the dispute system now in place and starting to function we now have a fairly complete system
    Jace, it's been brought to my attention that the rejected submissions so far don't have a mechanism to challenge. Is that on the to do list. I want my Dig Dug cred points back :).

    john

    .
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes JJT_Defender liked this post
  4. 07-31-2017, 04:28 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    stella_blue does some interesting analysis based on the observable data available. It's not entirely comprehensive and internally we've gone back and forth in regard to whether or not to continue to allow it.

    We've historically decided to not interfere with what Stella_Blue is doing since the collation and organizing of the data we publicly make available is not against the rules and people seem to enjoy it. The specific analysis that Stella does can not be directly predictive of adjudication outcomes (which is the most important thing to remain secure.)

    Also, while what Stella does is interesting to those that are academically interested in trying to figure out exactly how TGSAP functions, that concern really is beside the point of TG, which is just focused on trying to adjudicate and recognize score performances.

    Hey Jace,

    I should probably explain what motivates the ongoing submission and credibility analysis.

    My primary interest is the amount of community involvement with the TGSAP system. I have been trying to determine how many individuals are participating, and to what extent. From what I have observed thus far, it seems that a relatively small group of highly active adjudicators (roughly 50 or so) are doing most of the heavy lifting.

    The summary statistics (e.g., the average number of votes per submission) are really just a by-product of my daily processing routine, while the occasional poll results for individual submissions are little more than isolated curiosity experiments.

    For the month of August, I have considered posting a daily report of the Top 25 most active adjudicators. The CR leader board is useful for cumulative information, but it doesn't adequately summarize the most recent data. I would like to recognize the leading participants for each 24-hour period.

    If such content is inappropriate, just say the word and I shall abandon the project.


    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes nads, JJT_Defender liked this post
  5. 07-31-2017, 05:35 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by stella_blue View Post

    Hey Jace,

    I should probably explain what motivates the ongoing submission and credibility analysis.

    My primary interest is the amount of community involvement with the TGSAP system. I have been trying to determine how many individuals are participating, and to what extent. From what I have observed thus far, it seems that a relatively small group of highly active adjudicators (roughly 50 or so) are doing most of the heavy lifting.

    The summary statistics (e.g., the average number of votes per submission) are really just a by-product of my daily processing routine, while the occasional poll results for individual submissions are little more than isolated curiosity experiments.

    For the month of August, I have considered posting a daily report of the Top 25 most active adjudicators. The CR leader board is useful for cumulative information, but it doesn't adequately summarize the most recent data. I would like to recognize the leading participants for each 24-hour period.

    If such content is inappropriate, just say the word and I shall abandon the project.


    Hey Stella,

    Your analysis is fair game since you are using the publicly available data. There is no direct issue at this time.

    One thing to keep in mind is that your Top 25 list may draw public attention to adjudicators that would rather not have it. You may want to consider asking people if it is ok before you publish their compiled adjudication activity on a daily basis.

    We specifically made the member leaderboards not display the kind of information that you tend to reveal out of consideration of members privacy. Obviously it would be very easy for us to create daily reports and etc.

    Again, you are not doing anything wrong, as you are using the freely available data - but you may want to consider that it is really not that different from someone sitting outside your house and making note of how many times you went in/out, turned lights on/off, counted how many visitors you had, etc. - and then compiled daily reports summarizing that data. All that data is public of course, but you may feel a bit exposed by it.

    Anyway, food for thought.
    Jace Hall
    Head Custodian
    www.TwinGalaxies.com
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes JasonV91, JJT_Defender liked this post
  6. 08-01-2017, 02:47 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    Hey Stella,

    Your analysis is fair game since you are using the publicly available data. There is no direct issue at this time.

    One thing to keep in mind is that your Top 25 list may draw public attention to adjudicators that would rather not have it. You may want to consider asking people if it is ok before you publish their compiled adjudication activity on a daily basis.

    We specifically made the member leaderboards not display the kind of information that you tend to reveal out of consideration of members privacy. Obviously it would be very easy for us to create daily reports and etc.

    Again, you are not doing anything wrong, as you are using the freely available data - but you may want to consider that it is really not that different from someone sitting outside your house and making note of how many times you went in/out, turned lights on/off, counted how many visitors you had, etc. - and then compiled daily reports summarizing that data. All that data is public of course, but you may feel a bit exposed by it.

    Anyway, food for thought.

    Valid points.

    Privacy considerations are why I generally report my findings as high-level summaries (with names omitted).

    An example from 2 weeks ago:

    Name:  TG Data Summary 2017-07-14.jpg
Views: 54
Size:  65.7 KB

    I shall NOT move forward with the daily CR reports.

    Some community members might be interested in the information, but others will view the tracking results as intrusive. I don't want to publish anything that could generate unwanted attention and/or cause resentment.

    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes HugDD, JJT_Defender liked this post
  7. 08-03-2017, 06:19 AM
    It is obvious that this was submitted under the wrong track. Thanks to all who voted here. This dispute is accepted.
    Thanks Rogerpoco thanked this post
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Join us