Dispute: Garrett Holland - Intellivision - Pitfall! - NTSC/PAL - Default Settings - Player: Brian Segel - Score: 104,981

Is this a valid dispute?

    This poll is closed
This poll is closed
  1. Dispute: Garrett Holland - Intellivision - Pitfall! - NTSC/PAL - Default Settings - Player: Brian Segel - Score: 104,981

    06-14-2019, 03:47 PM
    Intellivision - Pitfall! - NTSC/PAL - Default Settings
    Score Track
    https://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=3260
    Rules
    This variation is for both NTSC and PAL as there is no difference between the two on the Intellivision Video Game Console.


    Player Name
    Brian Segel
    Original Adjudication
    N/A
    Verification Method
    Referee
    Verification Date
    1983-12-02
    Disputed Score
    104,981 (Rank 4)
    Disputed By
    Garrett Holland
    Dispute Evidence / Rationale
    Same circumstances and evidence as THIS dispute.
    In summation:


    1. This score and dozens of others were published in this 1983 magazine.


    2. This magazine is the only source on the planet that reports these scores.


    3. The magazine admits on page 16 that they required no proof other than the score written on a piece of paper.


    4. The magazine doesn't reveal which variation the scores were achieved on.


    5. There is no evidence that this player or any other player listed in that magazine even exists.


    6. A TG staffer simply read the magazine and put the scores in our database.


    7. These scores were never even submitted to TGIS by the alleged player, nor by any affiliate of TG, nor by anyone else other than the TG official who read the magazine and typed in the scores. This is proven by the index numbers of the score entries being sequential, meaning, someone entered them into our database in the exact order they are listed in the magazine, top to bottom, regardless of what the "verified date" our database insists the date of "verification" was. See THIS DISPUTE that reveals this has been an on-going problem, and that the verification dates of aged scores are to not be trusted, and mean something just short of nothing.


    8. These scores have never been reviewed, adjudicated by, witnessed, analyzed, or even contemplated by any TG official, or any other human for that matter.


    9. The only scores in this magazine that are not currently in our database just so happen to be on tracks wherein the putative score leader at time of entry was a TG referee, meaning they were intentionally omitted or intentionally removed by a former TG official... and for good reason, as these scores should have never been included to begin with. If these scores didn't deserve inclusion for tracks that TG referees were the leaders in, then they don't deserve inclusion for tracks that TG refs did *not* participate in.


    10. These entries do not even reach the lowest standards for acceptance that TG has ever had since its inception, much less today's standards.


    11. Some of these scores are not even realistic, such as the Atari 2600 932K Pac-Man score.


    12. These scores do not belong anywhere near a legitimate high-score database, much less the planet's official standard-bearer for video game high score record books, TwinGalaxies, whether the scores are unrealistic or pathetically realistic.


    13. Historically, TG has done the right thing by mass-removing magazine scores, which were likely even more legitimate (which isn't saying much) than this group of scores, so the precedent has already been set, as acknowledged by Barthax in Comment #82 of THIS DISPUTE.


    This is a no-brainer. It's patently clear what went on here. Time to clean these scores out ... not moved to another track ... REMOVED.
Results 1 to 1 of 1
Join us