Post Verdict Dispute Discussion:Dispute: Angela Stefanski - NES / FAMICOM / DISK - The Legend of Zelda - NTSC - Fastest Completion [1st Quest] - Player: Rodrigo Lopes - Score: 31:37.0

  1. 12-04-2019, 07:01 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    i've got two related follow up questions
    1. Will TG make any effort to find their copy of the tape?
    2. if tg finds the tape, either by accident, or intentionaly searching, will the time be taken to analyze or upload it?
    1) No. There is no administrative reason to do so.

    2) If the tape is randomly found once we are able to go through the tapes we have, yes we will make it available - assuming we can identify it as his tape. Otherwise it would likely by uploaded as nameless (if at all) and people can make up their own minds...
  2. 12-04-2019, 07:05 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Ragequit View Post
    Keep in mind this isn't the only one of rodrigo's old scores that was disputed. Does anyone think his taz score is legit? Or even possible?
    Is it possible? Sure... With a TAS program. Or playing at a VERY slow frame rate you choose, anyone can score 1 million.
    Is it legit? Go back to my prior statement.
    Likes Snowflake, Ragequit liked this post
  3. 12-04-2019, 11:02 PM
    These posts are from page 14-29 of the Dragster dispute. Lots of talk about not needing to re-prove a score and needing consistency..oh yeah, and that definitive proof stuff I was talking about for having a score removed.
    Name:  Screenshot (188).png
Views: 155
Size:  280.8 KB

    Innocent until proven guilty. Supporting claims with definitive proof, not "highly improbable" proof.

    Name:  Screenshot (189).png
Views: 154
Size:  386.2 KB

    Each score is it's own individual score. Hard to do pre-TGSAP, you cheat one score it just has to be assumed they are all cheated because of lack of evidence being present. However, in the now TGSAP era this statement is as accurate as you can get, it's just not enforced apparently.

    Name:  Screenshot (190).png
Views: 154
Size:  400.1 KB

    So had Rodrigo not kept his video this statement protects him. Since Rodrigo has the evidence, this statement no longer applies? We just change the criteria per score apparently? That seems consistent.

    Name:  Screenshot (191).png
Views: 153
Size:  426.5 KB

    So now Rodrigo DOESN'T have to submit his evidence because the submissions was already accepted, however it WAS held against him? Didn't you basically flip the responsibility on Rodrigo to defend his already accepted score because of "highly improbable" evidence?

    Name:  Screenshot (192).png
Views: 157
Size:  296.1 KB

    I believe this may be why Rodrigo never submitted his tape. I know I would have used this statement as to why I wouldn't have HAD I taken that path. And the claim was supported with "highly probably" evidence, not "DEFINITIVE" nail in the coffin evidence.

    Name:  Screenshot (193).png
Views: 153
Size:  453.8 KB

    Now this is some ironic **** here. Omnigamer was given **** for hidden evidence and only sharing his final results as the accuser's evidence, and then Rodrigo actually does show his final moments and hides the rest even though he didn't have too and he was given **** for it. Yep, I realize this evidence of Rodrigo's is what brought on the spawn concern and the back tracking evidence. I get that, however, still not definitive proof and still not impossible to achieve the time even having the back tracking.

    Name:  Screenshot (194).png
Views: 152
Size:  534.4 KB

    The first sentence is what the focus is. Definitive evidence is what removes scores. I must not understand "definitive" from "highly improbable".

    Name:  Screenshot (195).png
Views: 156
Size:  424.1 KB

    Definitive evidence again has been the "consistent" message in the Dragster dispute. "Highly improbable" must have been the consensus in the Zelda dispute. Again, I must not understand the difference between "definitive" and "highly improbable".

    Name:  Screenshot (196).png
Views: 154
Size:  452.2 KB

    A flaw was identified in the Zelda video, but it still wasn't "definitive" to prove the score wrong. So instead of finding out how the score couldn't be "possible", it was said to be "highly improbable" and removed based on that. Consistency can be a tricky thing!!

    Name:  Screenshot (197).png
Views: 156
Size:  336.0 KB

    Just for your information, I really liked this post. "Times change. Methods change." Um yeah, apparently "definitive evidence" has now become "highly improbable" evidence. If you don't want to that's ok, but at least be consistent! :)

    Name:  Screenshot (198).png
Views: 151
Size:  458.4 KB

    Well, which one is it? Are all scores individually treated or are they all treated in the same manner?? I believe that was the premise behind my question of "What exactly is the criteria for banning and all score removal"? Contra 3 dispute; didn't share tactics and essentially taunted we just couldn't figure it out, time it took to achieve the score is "highly improbable", score is still possible to achieve. Remains open for disputing. Rodrigo didn't have to share his video according to one the posts above, then the criteria was changed mid dispute and he was given an ultimatum to share it or else, the time is "highly improbable" to be achieved, score is still possible. All scores removed. Consistency at it's best. Clearly all scores are not treated equally as mentioned above. All scores with missing youtube links that were submitted prior to mandatory uploading are now being removed and disputed. So old TG scores remain with no evidence, youtube videos submitted under TGSAP that are no longer viewable are removed. I really don't feel like my question of "What exactly is the criteria for banning and all score removal" is all that crazy to ask.

    Name:  Screenshot (199).png
Views: 154
Size:  485.8 KB

    Weren't to dispassionate with Rodrigo in your judgement if you ask me. His whole behavior and all being brought up. That is why I say a persons character should never be considered, because of this post right here. And again, a score is valid until definitively proven otherwise. I didn't see "definitive" proof, I saw "highly improbable". I guess I should say this, I interpret "highly improbable" as in 1 in (insert any number), meaning there is a chance. I interpret "definitive" as there is no other option, it either can or can't be.

    Name:  Screenshot (200).png
Views: 152
Size:  289.6 KB

    Kind of poking the bear here if you ask me, but I understand the logic of it. You were pushing Omnigamer to check his research further and open it to the public. I guess you did that with Rodrigo also, except an ultimatum was used. At any rate, at least that is consistent.

    So what did I miss? In 2 years, Jace goes from consistency, scores don't need to be re-proven or have any evidence added to defend them, it's all on the accuser to provide DEFINITIVE proof to validate a dispute, to "highly improbable" evidence is now good enough, a persons character can be used against them, and the accused doesn't have to defend their score now has to defend their score? I am not out of line by finding this wrong.

    I'll say it again, I was with all of you in thinking he had something to hide by not showing the full video, I don't think anyone could not think that way, and the evidence definitely helped support that thought. However, it was NOT a smoking gun "you didn't do it" evidence. It wasn't. I can't believe so many people are thinking it was. However he did say he would show it if it was removed. I still have faith that happens.

    And trust me, I have read, re-read, and re-re-read your judgement statement and I don't see anywhere where it says this score is impossible. I do not understand his character or former employment at TG even being considered. The fact he has the "answer" does not matter. All those messages I have posted above proves that. He DID NOT have to post that tape. It WAS NOT his dispute to disprove, it was the ACCUSERS claim to prove. That's what you said. They did not PROVE his score is impossible. Do you know how many "highly improbable" things happen every day? You have completely back tracked on your words from the Dragster dispute. You completely flipped the dispute process on to the accused or else his score is gone. That is what happened. If you say anything to the contrary then you are saying "definitive" evidence is no longer the requirement for score removal.

    Of course I'm all for an accurate scoreboard, but now not only have you changed your views on how a dispute is handled - you have - but you have now made this Zelda dispute the first score to officially be removed without "definitive" evidence. I believe this is what @Barthax was talking about and has talked about many times in adjudication threads. Once a precedent has been set, that then becomes the rule. TG has now set the "rule" for how disputes are handled from this point forward. No longer is "definitive" proof needed, just "highly improbable" proof. Is that really a step forward for the dispute system? I will say, that will make removing scores a **** load easier if that is the case. You even said it in the Dragster dispute, "Why does this decision need to be rushed? TG needs to make sure they get it right." Paraphrasing but that's essentially what you said.

    So what is now the criteria for banning and score removal? It was definitive evidence, but now it's not. Again, everyone seems to be OK with this?? Scoreboard integrity has actually been lost with this decision. I'm not being negative, I'm not being positive. I'm being dispassionate. This concerns me. Sorry, I just don't get the mindset reversal. Zelda dispute only had 41 pages of posts and "highly improbable" evidence, Dragster had 271 pages of posts and "impossible" evidence. Each score is most definitely handled differently.

    Edit note: For some reason there is an attachment beneath this post but I can't see it or remove it when I try to remove it. It has nothing to do with the above.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by thegamer1185; 12-05-2019 at 12:11 AM.
    Likes nads, Barthax liked this post
  4. 12-04-2019, 11:39 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by GibGirl View Post
    Remember, it's not *just* about a questionable score. It's also that he claimed over and over to have the evidence needed to evaluate the score, to the point of taunting everyone about having it but not sharing. He attacked anyone that questioned the score as his "haters". And all that as a former referee for Twin Galaxies. And even when Jace pretty much made clear that without evidence, Rodrigo would be banned, he STILL refused to share evidence, but instead made a threat that he'd only show afterwards that the ruling was wrong.

    We lacked the evidence to *prove* if he cheated or not, and he knew it. Jace had to set a precedent for this kind of behavior for the future. And I agree with his choice.
    So now the precedent is the rule. Just deny you have any proof of your score. Welp, guess I dodged that precedent and my score is protected under TG rules of "innocent until proven definitively guilty". Oooopppps, my mistake. I guess precedents are made to be broken? Exactly, the evidence was lacking to prove it. Isn't that the whole point of disputing a score? Of course he knew it, Jace set that precedent in the Dragster dispute as I have mentioned in my post above.

    Is how Rodrigo really handled it all that baffling to everyone? Read my post above, it says everything there needs to be said about why Rodrigo didn't have to do a thing, evidence or no evidence in hand. His score was not proven definitively impossible. Rodrigo was right. In any court system, he's innocent. I know it, this isn't a court room. Just doesn't feel right removing ANY score without definitive proof. I guess you are all okay with it. Nothing I can do about it. I'm going to take @Desidious advice and just play games. Keeping a level head about things is just to much work on here. I think TG got this one wrong.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  5. 12-05-2019, 01:32 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185 View Post
    So now the precedent is the rule. Just deny you have any proof of your score. Welp, guess I dodged that precedent and my score is protected under TG rules of "innocent until proven definitively guilty". Oooopppps, my mistake. I guess precedents are made to be broken? Exactly, the evidence was lacking to prove it. Isn't that the whole point of disputing a score? Of course he knew it, Jace set that precedent in the Dragster dispute as I have mentioned in my post above.

    Is how Rodrigo really handled it all that baffling to everyone? Read my post above, it says everything there needs to be said about why Rodrigo didn't have to do a thing, evidence or no evidence in hand. His score was not proven definitively impossible. Rodrigo was right. In any court system, he's innocent. I know it, this isn't a court room. Just doesn't feel right removing ANY score without definitive proof. I guess you are all okay with it. Nothing I can do about it. I'm going to take @Desidious advice and just play games. Keeping a level head about things is just to much work on here. I think TG got this one wrong.
    Why am I not surprised by your messages on this thread Kyle; no offence but you always seem to take the "minority" side in arguments on this site. It seems like a hobby of yours...where was this "passion" during the actual dispute thread?

    The desicion was correct, and you don't need to write an essay to realise that.
    Thanks thegamer1185 thanked this post
  6. 12-05-2019, 02:38 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185 View Post
    So now the precedent is the rule. Just deny you have any proof of your score. Welp, guess I dodged that precedent and my score is protected under TG rules of "innocent until proven definitively guilty". Oooopppps, my mistake. I guess precedents are made to be broken? Exactly, the evidence was lacking to prove it. Isn't that the whole point of disputing a score? Of course he knew it, Jace set that precedent in the Dragster dispute as I have mentioned in my post above.

    Is how Rodrigo really handled it all that baffling to everyone? Read my post above, it says everything there needs to be said about why Rodrigo didn't have to do a thing, evidence or no evidence in hand. His score was not proven definitively impossible. Rodrigo was right. In any court system, he's innocent. I know it, this isn't a court room. Just doesn't feel right removing ANY score without definitive proof. I guess you are all okay with it. Nothing I can do about it. I'm going to take @Desidious advice and just play games. Keeping a level head about things is just to much work on here. I think TG got this one wrong.
    I will try to explain this once again.

    1.) Definitive evidence of a score being invalid will get a score removed. That is correct.

    2.) Rodrigo's performance was shown to be highly improbable, but not proven to be definitively scientifically impossible. That is correct.

    3.) Rodrigo was under no obligation to re-prove his performance. That is correct.

    4.) Yes there are general guidelines. That is correct. However, as stated numerous times (which you seem to ignore) is that ALL disputes are handled on an individualized case-by-case basis. How other disputes are handled is irrelevant. They are all unique. The circumstances surrounding one score has very little to do with the specific circumstances surrounding another. This must be accounted for.

    5.) You keep mentioning "precedents" as a reference. Considering that all disputes are handled uniquely, your desire for precedents to carry significant weight and overriding relevancy compared to actual desired goal function may be misplaced.

    6.) While Rodrigo was under no obligation to re-prove his performance or supply a tape, he made the personal and unprompted choice to clearly establish that he was in possession of the performance as an attempted method of abating members dispute claim assertions. You are ignoring this personal choice that was made by Rodrigo and not considering the significance and responsibility it generated.

    7.) You are mistaken to think that if this was a court case, innocence would be found purely on the basis of the inability to produce absolute definitive evidence of transgression. In fact, very rarely are verdicts of innocence reached purely and only on that basis. Most of the time if the evidence is absolutely definitive, the case does not even go to court and the accused just immediately pleads guilty. It is the absence of definitive evidence that prompts the necessity of a trial so all factors can be uniquely weighed and examined.

    You keep asserting that Rodrigo "didn't have to do a thing, evidence or no evidence in hand" - and that is correct. He did not have to do a thing. However, somehow you make an assumptive leap of logic that the fact that "he has evidence in hand" and the circumstances that surround the nature of that evidence possession should not have a direct impact on the analysis or decision making process. That assumption is in error.

    Again, you are correct, Rodrigo did not have to do a thing. Specifically, he did not have to tell everyone he had a tape of his performance - but he did, and he did so for some very specific reasons.

    Remember, Rodrigo went out of his way voluntarily to let everyone know he had the evidence, but would not share it. He would wave it in the faces of people in various ways, but not actually provide all that was needed. Deliberately. That is an import factor that was considered., but you are ignoring it, and instead focusing more on dogmatic concerns.

    At the core, TG is trying to get to the truth of a dispute claim. In many cases it may not be able to just due to the non-existence of the original evidence. That just is what it is. However, in this dispute claim, the evidence exists, but it is being withheld.

    If TG is trying to stand up for the veracity of your score, spending time and resources on it, and you can't help - that's ok. However, if TG is trying to stand up for the veracity of your score, spending time and resources on it, and you announce that you CAN help, but you won't, and instead you choose to antagonize the people raising legitimate questions only to let TG bear the brunt of the increased outrage and frustration you created, that's not going to be acceptable.
    Jace Hall
    Head Custodian
    www.TwinGalaxies.com
    Likes John73, Lauren Tyler liked this post
  7. 12-05-2019, 03:59 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185 View Post
    And trust me, I have read, re-read, and re-re-read your judgement statement and I don't see anywhere where it says this score is impossible. I do not understand his character or former employment at TG even being considered. The fact he has the "answer" does not matter. All those messages I have posted above proves that. He DID NOT have to post that tape. It WAS NOT his dispute to disprove, it was the ACCUSERS claim to prove. That's what you said. They did not PROVE his score is impossible. Do you know how many "highly improbable" things happen every day? You have completely back tracked on your words from the Dragster dispute. You completely flipped the dispute process on to the accused or else his score is gone. That is what happened. If you say anything to the contrary then you are saying "definitive" evidence is no longer the requirement for score removal.

    Of course I'm all for an accurate scoreboard, but now not only have you changed your views on how a dispute is handled - you have - but you have now made this Zelda dispute the first score to officially be removed without "definitive" evidence. I believe this is what @Barthax was talking about and has talked about many times in adjudication threads. Once a precedent has been set, that then becomes the rule. TG has now set the "rule" for how disputes are handled from this point forward. No longer is "definitive" proof needed, just "highly improbable" proof. Is that really a step forward for the dispute system? I will say, that will make removing scores a **** load easier if that is the case. You even said it in the Dragster dispute, "Why does this decision need to be rushed? TG needs to make sure they get it right." Paraphrasing but that's essentially what you said.

    So what is now the criteria for banning and score removal? It was definitive evidence, but now it's not. Again, everyone seems to be OK with this?? Scoreboard integrity has actually been lost with this decision. I'm not being negative, I'm not being positive. I'm being dispassionate. This concerns me. Sorry, I just don't get the mindset reversal. Zelda dispute only had 41 pages of posts and "highly improbable" evidence, Dragster had 271 pages of posts and "impossible" evidence. Each score is most definitely handled differently.

    Edit note: For some reason there is an attachment beneath this post but I can't see it or remove it when I try to remove it. It has nothing to do with the above.
    A few points, in no particular order:

    1) A score does not have to be deemed "impossible" to be removed. Impossibility is only one possible criteria that could lead to a score removal. In the case of the high profile dispute involving Donkey Kong, no one claimed that the disputed scores were a human impossibility as grounds for removal because they weren't; rather, the evidence pointed to (to put it politely) a past submission that was "misrepresented" as being played on authentic original unmodified arcade PCB. Even in the case of Zelda, we saw Cantaloupeme post a faster time. The focus was a run that was misrepresented - Level 9 spawns that demonstrated a second entry onto the level, a tactic that added time to the run, a counterintuitive proposition in a WR speedrun.

    2) On the discussion of precedent, if one's inclined to look for one, *please* don't use the Dragster dispute as a "precedent." I don't think anyone on planet earth felt that the dispute required 271 pages of discussion as an example. So if you want to find precedent, let's look at each any every dispute review cumulatively providing a "learning process" for TG administration.

    For me personally, previous disputes have had "precedents" that I felt should have been acknowledged, but weren't cited in the findings/determination. There seems to be some discomfort around behaviour as grounds for consideration, but I felt that in the case of Dragster when Rogers brazenly submitted falsified evidence - namely, a Photoshopped "World Class Dragster Club" certificate that cited an Activision-vetted time of 5.51 seconds - the dispute should have ended right then and there with a decision to remove his score. Submitting falsified evidence was designed to buttress a claimed time where no video footage existed and ultimately undermine or foil the dispute review process. Therefore, when I see Lopes trying to subvert the dispute review process by highlighting exculpatory evidence that he won't share through a hamfisted attempt to create conditions for a "technical" disqualification of the dispute review claims (eg. I can claim to have evidence that exonerates me, but because I am not required to participate in a dispute, I'll participate only up to claiming I have it, but not share it), I am heartened that behaviour was (finally) acknowledged as an element of consideration in decision making and that TG will look unfavourably upon attempts to subvert the process.

    3) Whether scoreboard integrity being lost or not, I suspect that will continue to be a subject of debate. As a point of reflection, it bears remembering that under past TG administrations, players could contest or dispute a score, which at one time required the gamer with the disputed score to *replay* their game - there was a sliding scale over time about what percentage of the original gameplay they would have to replicate (75% of original performance, then increasingly a greater percentage). Now perhaps you found that practice meant that scoreboard integrity was also lost, but we can acknowledge that each TG era was trying to find the right way to support scoreboard integrity.
    Last edited by The Evener; 12-05-2019 at 04:14 AM.
    Likes thegamer1185, ersatz_cats liked this post
  8. 12-05-2019, 09:04 AM
    We should also remember that the Todd Rogers Dragster dispute was also the *first* high-profile dispute with the new system. OF COURSE Jace would be more careful and more deliberate, as he's learning how best to manage the process, how to deal with evidence, how people perceive it, etc. And OF COURSE each dispute's process will change and evolve over time to not only fit the individual circumstances, but to take into account things learned over previous disputes.

    If each one was done exactly the same as the first, that would actually be worse, as it means things aren't improving.
    Likes thegamer1185, Snowflake liked this post
  9. 12-05-2019, 09:06 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Joonas View Post
    Why am I not surprised by your messages on this thread Kyle; no offence but you always seem to take the "minority" side in arguments on this site. It seems like a hobby of yours...where was this "passion" during the actual dispute thread?

    The desicion was correct, and you don't need to write an essay to realise that.
    Why would I be offended? As I said I was dispassionate. And I believe I was the only one in the dispute stating it still doesn't prove he couldn't do it or at least asking questions as to why it's not possible. I was again told by the "majority" that I'm not reading what others are saying, which is not correct at all. See, that's how mobs get their way is by silencing and picking on the lone person who doesn't agree with them. Usually with anger, sarcasm, or how they don't know what they are talking about. I've received a lot of that from a lot of people lately because I guess I'm in the minority. When you are in the minority, you have to explain your answer. If you are in the majority, you don't have to explain **** because you already agree with what everyone else is saying.

    That's the thing about debating, everybody has already chosen a side and nobody will budge from it. I'm in the minority again, but I don't care. Jace, I am not ignoring what Rodrigo was doing. I know what he was doing. Yes, he was kind of being a dick about it. I also understand the evidence, I'm not ignoring that either. Again though, his submission was already verified and approved by a Twin Galaxies referee. The "answer" was already given that his submission was valid. The fact Rodrigo has the "answer" in his hands has already been received by Twin Galaxies years ago. Are you ignoring that fact? A score was just removed for being "highly improbable" and it appears to me that you/TG were kind of upset he wouldn't just solve the problem for you by submitting that tape. That doesn't seem very dispassionate. It wasn't his job to answer it for you. Sorry, I can't reference other disputes as to why I'm taking the side I'm taking.

    Did he act like a dick about it. No question he did...huh, guess I'm not always in the minority but what do I know I've only stated I agree with you guys on a lot of your posts. Was how he handled the evidence justifiable based on what you have said regarding how a dispute process works? YES. I know, the response to all of this is "I'm choosing to ignore this, or that, and each score is unique and handled on a case by case basis." It's wrong. It's just wrong. Score is possible and removed...it's just wrong.

    I'm sorry for the essay.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  10. 12-05-2019, 09:12 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185 View Post
    Why would I be offended? As I said I was dispassionate. And I believe I was the only one in the dispute stating it still doesn't prove he couldn't do it or at least asking questions as to why it's not possible. I was again told by the "majority" that I'm not reading what others are saying, which is not correct at all. See, that's how mobs get their way is by silencing and picking on the lone person who doesn't agree with them. Usually with anger, sarcasm, or how they don't know what they are talking about. I've received a lot of that from a lot of people lately because I guess I'm in the minority. When you are in the minority, you have to explain your answer. If you are in the majority, you don't have to explain **** because you already agree with what everyone else is saying.

    That's the thing about debating, everybody has already chosen a side and nobody will budge from it. I'm in the minority again, but I don't care. Jace, I am not ignoring what Rodrigo was doing. I know what he was doing. Yes, he was kind of being a dick about it. I also understand the evidence, I'm not ignoring that either. Again though, his submission was already verified and approved by a Twin Galaxies referee. The "answer" was already given that his submission was valid. The fact Rodrigo has the "answer" in his hands has already been received by Twin Galaxies years ago. Are you ignoring that fact? A score was just removed for being "highly improbable" and it appears to me that you/TG were kind of upset he wouldn't just solve the problem for you by submitting that tape. That doesn't seem very dispassionate. It wasn't his job to answer it for you. Sorry, I can't reference other disputes as to why I'm taking the side I'm taking.

    Did he act like a dick about it. No question he did...huh, guess I'm not always in the minority but what do I know I've only stated I agree with you guys on a lot of your posts. Was how he handled the evidence justifiable based on what you have said regarding how a dispute process works? YES. I know, the response to all of this is "I'm choosing to ignore this, or that, and each score is unique and handled on a case by case basis." It's wrong. It's just wrong. Score is possible and removed...it's just wrong.

    I'm sorry for the essay.
    I agree with pretty much everything but you are, at this point, banging your head against a brick wall... but you're not alone in the way you think. :D
    I'd rather be last on every game than throw my time away chasing only one score.
    Thanks thegamer1185 thanked this post
    Likes thegamer1185 liked this post
Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 261
Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 ... LastLast
Join us