Dispute: Simon Leitch - PlayStation 2 - Need for Speed Underground - NTSC - Circuit Mode - Inner City [Fastest Lap] - Player: ruven zambrano - Score: 47.08

Is this a valid dispute?

    This poll is closed
This poll is closed
  1. 12-06-2017, 10:52 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by The Evener View Post
    Seems like TG should ban external links to evidence to avoid burning members who adjudicated in good faith.
    Not ban the tool but the users(group) that get rid of their evidence after the fact, wether in protest(Jesse) or to hide their tactics.
    "Unable to scream
    Lips like keroscene"
    Likes datagod, Marcade liked this post
  2. 12-06-2017, 11:24 AM
    This will no doubt eventually go through, but its my understanding this dispute like this will be delayed until the uploader issues are resolved. I recently uploaded my lode runner marathon, the uploader appear to upload, and even encode, but now the video is still unplayable. So if TG considers the upload problem solved I would ask them to reconsider.
    Lode Runner Champion
  3. 12-06-2017, 11:37 AM
    When I learned that Jessie is in control of more than one account (possibly 15?) I decided to stop adjudicating on ANY of his submissions, or any of his friends in the circle square. Too much collusion for me, thanks.
    Your friend, datagod

    ~~Raspberry Pi Enthusiast~~
    Likes Riatoju liked this post
  4. 12-06-2017, 03:18 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcade View Post
    I didnt adjudicate this one...So are we saying that this video was suddenly deleted PRIOR, to the acceptance? (During pending status)
    If so, I agree with you.

    AD, if you could find it, can you please link that TG statement you are refering to. I was not familiar it was a policy, and would help with the dispute.
    The 2 I just lost CR for were deleted prior to acceptance
  5. 12-06-2017, 05:03 PM
    Despite Twin Galaxies statement of 'Adjudicators Beware' of 3rd Party hosting, I hope the Commissioner / Head Custodian does the right thing. I adjudicated most of his videos as it fits my console and genre preference (racing). I reviewed the videos, which were open to public viewing at the time, and voting to accept. This guy blocks / removes his video from his YouTube account and I and everyone else who voted to Accept are responsible / accountable for his selfish actions!

    As I said before in another thread about how unbalanced the system of rewards / punishments between the adjudicator and submitter. This is another great example. At a 5% credibility degradation and the dozen or more submission that will be overturned via the dispute system, my credibility will drop nearly 5000 points!!!!! Does that seem an appropriate penalty to adjudicate based on what I reviewed and do the actions of a A$$hat submitter, my 'credibility' is demolished. I think Twin Galaxies credibility is also on the line. All I ask is that you do the right thing and hold those accountable for turning the adjudication process into a mockery. Your choice - please make the right decision rather than the convenient decision.
    “Politicians are people that get sworn in and then cursed out”
    ~AEN
    Likes Marcade, Desidious, HugDD liked this post
  6. 12-06-2017, 05:18 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by MyOwnWorstEnemy View Post
    Despite Twin Galaxies statement of 'Adjudicators Beware' of 3rd Party hosting, I hope the Commissioner / Head Custodian does the right thing. I adjudicated most of his videos as it fits my console and genre preference (racing). I reviewed the videos, which were open to public viewing at the time, and voting to accept. This guy blocks / removes his video from his YouTube account and I and everyone else who voted to Accept are responsible / accountable for his selfish actions!

    As I said before in another thread about how unbalanced the system of rewards / punishments between the adjudicator and submitter. This is another great example. At a 5% credibility degradation and the dozen or more submission that will be overturned via the dispute system, my credibility will drop nearly 5000 points!!!!! Does that seem an appropriate penalty to adjudicate based on what I reviewed and do the actions of a A$$hat submitter, my 'credibility' is demolished. I think Twin Galaxies credibility is also on the line. All I ask is that you do the right thing and hold those accountable for turning the adjudication process into a mockery. Your choice - please make the right decision rather than the convenient decision.
    Never vote on youtube...lesson kearbed.gimme my CR back
    Likes D.B. Cooper liked this post
  7. 12-06-2017, 05:20 PM
    Am drunk ...sorry but I should not be dinged either...I voted correctly...no video equals an easy reject
    Likes sdwyer138, D.B. Cooper liked this post
  8. 12-06-2017, 05:41 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by CWK View Post
    Am drunk ...sorry but I should not be dinged either...I voted correctly...no video equals an easy reject
    I'm not casting any blame on the adjudicators that voted No. If there wasn't a video when I reviewed the submission thread, I would have voted No too. The problem is there was a video for most of the adjudication period that was used to cast a YES vote. So and others voted correctly (Yes) based on evidenced reviewed at the time, and you and others voted correctly (No) based on no evidence reviewed at the time of adjudication. The adjudicators (pre or post) video removal are punished for this guys actions. The adjudicators credibility should not be penalized, its the submitter credibility that should be damaged. The submitter is the one being unscrupulous in this scenario. The adjudicators are passive participants subject to credibility loss at the whim of a submitter.

    The credibility rating is less about 'credibility' and more a measurement of how many times you've been screwed over by a submitter pulling the rug out from under you.

    An since this is a dispute thread, I agree the score should be removed as the video evidence no longer exists. The credibility bloodbath will soon follow and unless Twin Galaxies steps up and holds the appropriate parties accountable for video removal instead of adjudicators doing the work of voting on submission appropriately in the queue, you're just going to stir-up a lot of unnecessary negativity.
    “Politicians are people that get sworn in and then cursed out”
    ~AEN
    Likes Marcade, Desidious, CWK, HugDD liked this post
  9. 12-06-2017, 05:55 PM
    This should really be a special case where, either way an adjudicator innocently voted during the open period process, they SHOULD NOT be penalized! Only the submitter himself should be!!! BANNED from TG actually!!!

    Also, again sometimes a Youtube video evidence has to join together along with the direct upload, if videos are broken up.
    TG only accepts one upload file per submission instead of multiple ones, that they used to support. (Unless I am not seeing the proper way of doing it)
    Thanks Desidious thanked this post
    Likes MyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post
  10. 12-06-2017, 06:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by MyOwnWorstEnemy View Post
    I'm not casting any blame on the adjudicators that voted No. If there wasn't a video when I reviewed the submission thread, I would have voted No too. The problem is there was a video for most of the adjudication period that was used to cast a YES vote. So and others voted correctly (Yes) based on evidenced reviewed at the time, and you and others voted correctly (No) based on no evidence reviewed at the time of adjudication. The adjudicators (pre or post) video removal are punished for this guys actions. The adjudicators credibility should not be penalized, its the submitter credibility that should be damaged. The submitter is the one being unscrupulous in this scenario. The adjudicators are passive participants subject to credibility loss at the whim of a submitter.

    The credibility rating is less about 'credibility' and more a measurement of how many times you've been screwed over by a submitter pulling the rug out from under you

    An since this is a dispute thread, I agree the score should be removed as the video evidence no longer exists. The credibility bloodbath will soon follow and unless Twin Galaxies steps up and holds the appropriate parties accountable for video removal instead of adjudicators doing the work of voting on submission appropriately in the queue, you're just going to stir-up a lot of unnecessary negativity.
    Not a single point I can argue with here
    Likes MyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post
Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 151
Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Join us