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. 12-06-2019, 11:34 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Ninglendo View Post
    What platform though? Something like MAME that the performance could be sent via email? We are talking about VHS tapes here that had to be sent through the mail.
    Yes, Glen, I was talking about MAME.

    I concede that mailed submissions MAY have been treated differently. I doubt it though. Why would there be a difference? For example.....if there is an interesting submission in the pile of tapes received, if I were a ref under pressure(and they were) I'd pick the interesting ones to adjudicate. Once again, who cares about the 40th place Centipede score!


    Likes datagod liked this post
  2. 12-07-2019, 02:54 AM
    Wow, did Jace p*ss on your cereal or what.
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
    Likes datagod, thegamer1185, Marcade, Snowflake liked this post
  3. 12-07-2019, 03:21 AM
    Well, a lot has been discussed in this post-dispute thread. I'll try and start from the top and try not to reiterate what has already been discussed. Most of the reasons for and against the official decision have already been discussed between @Jace Hall and @thegamer1185 . As for summing up the dispute in it's entirety I think @ersatz_catz did a pretty good job of that in the Reddit post albeit in a very direct manner in which many people might not want to hear. The bottom line is that the dispute was a bit of a roller coaster in nature with many highs and lows that probably ultimately dragged on a bit too long.

    Highs: 1) The general consensus is that the correct decision was made despite it taking 4 and a half months.
    2) This dispute, in particular, created a unique situation such that the final ruling and circumstances surrounding it add to the
    cumulative knowledge base of TG disputes moving forward.
    3) Discussions of the old "referee" system further proved that there were flaws in how things might have been handled then.
    4) The recruitment of new members like @fcoughlin and @cantaloupeme . I can't speak for the experience that either of these
    have had and I don't want to speculate if they will or won't stay around.

    Lows: 1) I think most would agree it took a little too long for a decision to be made
    2) Unnecessary stakes were added to the decision (e.g if you like a post and put your career on the line maybe he will release the tape)
    3) Poor behavior throughout the process by the accused, who by virtue of being at the top of the leaderboards, should have set a
    better example or just kept quiet throughout the entirety of the dispute
    4) The dispute threatened to go off the rails on several occasions due to diverging viewpoints and in some cases poor behavior in

    As for finding a rationale for how this dispute ended and Rodrigo's behavior and actions throughout I can only think of only 1 line of reasoning that makes sense. I think after revealing he was in possession of the "legit submission" he gambled thinking he was only going to get the specified time length ban and removal of the non-TGSAP scores after which he could simply return in a few years albeit under a dark cloud and continue operating business as usual. I don't think for a single, solitary second he ever thought about putting that run out for the experts to scrutinize as it would have been ripped apart in a matter of minutes. I think he felt he "held the cards" in this situation and as long as the experts were not able to definitively prove any foul play then he wins in the end which ties into what @thegamer1185 mentioned about the "protected" nature of these old "verified" submissions. This line of reasoning of course assumes that the submission is indeed a fraud which I think it was in order to account for these behaviors and actions. I think Rodrigo must have been pretty surprised when this all backfired on him and resulted in him gambling away his career down the toilet. Most of the time in real life (and in Zelda) you will lose if you gamble.

    As far as the question pertaining to the verification/referee that debate could probably go on forever. @Barthax , @rtm, and @lexmark have provided testimonials as to what the atmosphere was like to be a referee back in this submission's era and all 3 make good points. In general, most referees seem to have been overloaded and do not remember every detail of every submission that may have passed by them. However, I do find it somewhat strange that no one can remember anything about this submission when you consider the magnitude of the accomplishment. No announcement was made, as had been the standard with this game in the past. No confirmation that RTM ever received the submission. No other referees coming forward during this dispute to say 'Yeah I was the one who saw it.' No comment or help from Team Metroid. It was as if the submission was a "ghost." The general lack of finding anything on that front leads me to believe that it may have just been entered into the database by someone who had access to it as a raw "time" and not been viewed by anyone. If that is the case then there is a good chance that the preceding 25 or so minutes of that submission does not really exist and what is seen in the "final moments" could have resulted from a casual playthrough of the game up until level 9 followed by repeated use of save/retry and/or resetting of the console in order to produce a level 9 which might have been considered "optimal" for the time period. Unfortunately, that means the multitude of people in this thread that hope to eventually see this run in it's entirety might want to ask Santa for something different for Christmas this year.

    Comparing this dispute to some of the other high profile disputes brings up a few similarities as well as things that make it unique. The main thing with this dispute that seemed different compared to the others was the general one-sided nature of the evidence. From post #1 of this dispute it was just a steady stream of evidence (both objective and subjective) against the accused with basically no response. In "Dragster" and "Donkey Kong" you occasionally had people coming to the defense of the accused in those disputes. Even if Rodrigo had made the conscious decision to not say a word or even mention he had the "legit submission" still no one would have come to his defense. Even after Jace came in after 3 months and things really ratcheted up there was still no defense. An overwhelming amount of evidence does not necessarily prove guilt but a lack of a defense at all does not help the case for the accused either. Looking at how this dispute fits into the context of TG history I think it to be pretty unlikely that there will be a dispute that carries the stakes and impact like this one had. People putting their careers on the line, outside communities coming in, terms of punishment being changed, and the accused withholding evidence all created a situation that is unlikely to be repeated. I think this was bigger than "Donkey Kong" or "Dragster." However, the experience and knowledge gained by those who actually went through this could be valuable for the future.

    As another dispute comes to a close, I think it appropriate to thank all of those who have been involved in a proactive way with these disputes over the past few years. A large portion of the scoreboard has been cleaned up thanks to the efforts of many but there is still a ways to go. However, although I think sifting through the scoreboard to determine potential invalid and/or fraudulent scores should be a top priority I think there is a more far reaching problem as it relates to this site and the scoreboard in general and at the conclusion of this dispute it is probably appropriate to bring that up. That problem, as I touched on a little earlier, is member recruitment and retention into the future. In order for the website and community to grow it has to be able to recruit new members. Many people that were here even before Jace came on board can attest to this. There are huge communities of serious gamers out there that TG is not reaching right now. What's happened over the past decade is that tons of communities have popped up and in many cases they center around a single game or sometimes a collection of games. The Tetris community, Mario64, and Goldeneye 007 communities are 3 of the biggest. Right now they probably have hundreds and in some cases thousands of members that compete against each other. Some of the players in these communities used to be here but no longer are here even though tracks exist for all of these games in the database. Members such as @Tompa and @starcrytas who have gone back and forth between some of these communities and TG over the past 10 years can verify these facts as well. Notwithstanding the 3 communities mentioned above there are quite a few others as well. Consider the following hypothetical example: Let's say that in a given week 100 significant video game achievements are achieved and archived on the internet within these communities. How many of those achievements are actually going through TGSAP? Maybe 1-2 or maybe even 0. History seems to be happening but TG seems to be in the background while it is happening. To note Jace's response from an earlier post you can't give the recognition of a TG record to someone unless it goes through the scrutiny of TGSAP. You also can't force people to sign up or submit here. The website should not just contain "data." I get that. However, if even 10-15% of people from these communities could be recruited then it would be a huge increase to the user base as well as adding more competition and higher level game play in some titles that haven't been competed on in a while. I know that "what's going on with TG" should be the main focus rather than "what's going on with other communities" but there's a large number of talented gamers out there that could be useful to this site. However, knowing the fact that most of these gamers have the ability to monetize their twitch channels, be promoted within that "other" community, and have the ability to participate in that community by creating tracks, verifying etc. it makes it that much less likely that they will take the time and jump through the hoops to join TG. In a nutshell even if every dispute eventually gets resolved and the scoreboard is viewed as credible again there's still the problem of recruiting and retaining a significant user base into the future. I assume the member numbers have increased since Jace came on board but chances are there are lot if improvements that could still be made in that regard. Thanks for reading.
  4. 12-07-2019, 06:02 AM
    One thing I seem to be missing. There are references to a Metroid Team or Team Metroid. Who was part of this team?
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
    Likes datagod liked this post
  5. 12-07-2019, 06:07 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ersatz_cats View Post

    Jace Hall is consistently dishonest with his motivations, whatever the situation.
    Some of these statements are very "conpiracy-esque" so there is no way for me to respond to the whole mass of it other than to say is that most of what you have presented as it relates to what I think, or why I have done something is not the reality.

    I'm wondering, before making all these sweeping assumptions about me and my motivations or whatever it is you have decided I have done or didn't do, did it ever occur to you to perhaps just ask me directly about the items? Have I ever been non-responsive to you? Maybe you would have believed my answers, maybe you wouldn't have, but it might have been a good starting point.

    I do understand that as head of TG I'm going to have to deal with people talking about me or whatever, but good lord this is next level.

    Let me be clear so that there can be no misunderstanding.

    1.) I don't have anything to hide. You want to know something, I'm happy to tell you the answer. Not a big deal.
    2.) There are no magical plans or secret agendas. There are no conspiracies to find - at least none that I know of.
    3.) The whole concept of me having some kind of issue with disputes, or "protecting people" or whatever it is that is theorized is ridiculous. I am the person who actually had the dispute system built for the very purpose that it is being used for. No other TG ownership would ever have done this, and they didn't! There would not even be a conversation about this subject right now without my efforts on it. It makes no sense that I would build such a system only to prevent it from working. It's far easier to just remove it, which is something I can do.

    Of course believe what you want but consider just this one small set of facts (out of many more I could present):

    1.) Every score dispute you reference is based on a score that I had nothing to do with putting in the database.
    2.) Every score dispute you reference was not started by me or any TG admin.

    I didn't make any of these problems. i didn't approve any of the scores you mention and I don't have a huge personal stake in these referee verified scores. This is why I laugh when people think I had interest in "protecting" Todd or anyone else. I'm just focused on the dispute claim evidence and circumstance. Scores can stay, they can go - but if they go, we need to be sure its the right thing to do. There's really nothing more to it. I don't get all the conspiracy thought.

    I'm just the poor fool who has to ultimately make the final decisions with TG Admin staff on disputes that users initiated and endure all of the incoming accusation and commentary. I have to tolerate character assassination, economic burden, threat of legal action or other challenges only to be told now that apparently I'm "dishonest" and that all the efforts toward increasing scoreboard integrity are useless - because obviously whatever my motivation is, it's not what I say it is, according to you.

    I'm not sure why you would think I have some kind of motivation other than trying to clean up the database. I'm guessing that you have some theory on what my motivation is but I can't imagine what it must be.

    The truth is things are much more simple and straightforward than you are constructing.

    For instance -
    My note asking permission to transfer the post you made on my wall to your wall, was just what it was and nothing more. Had you declined, I simply would have deleted the post off my wall - but since your post was lengthy, thoughtful and substantial I thought I was being courteous by reaching out to you. I didn't want to just trash all your work. (You're the creator!)

    As you can see in my follow up response to your response, what I am saying above is consistent with what you see below. My intention was that I just didn't want you to lose your work by my deletion. No other reason to contact you. I can delete anything off my wall for whatever reason I want to, without contacting you - I was legitimately just trying to be courteous, and I did not know that you had already placed that same post on your own wall previous to me even contacting you.

    Further, you can see that I kept a reference link to your post along with complete description still completely on my wall. Not trying to hide anything from anyone.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2019-12-07 at 6.30.23 AM.png
Views: 146
Size:  97.4 KB

    So in answer to your question:

    So why not just say 'On second thought, it's not really appropriate on my wall. Can we move it to yours?' Or how about 'I have to take it down from my wall, but I hope you choose to put it up on yours'
    I did not say those things because that is not why I was asking you. Why would I say either of those things? Your post is still clearly on my wall as a primary post! Behold!
    Name:  Screen Shot 2019-12-07 at 6.56.08 AM.png
Views: 148
Size:  105.9 KB
    Here's the link:

    Perhaps I should have just deleted it without reaching out to you - but I'm reasonably sure that if I did that you still would be able to find some way for that to fit your current narrative. Lose-lose either way for me I guess!

    Anyway, I'm always happy to answer any specific questions you have, if you actually care to ask them.
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
    Likes datagod liked this post
  6. 12-07-2019, 06:54 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ersatz_cats View Post
    I'm not the fun police. You all can do your thing. But as far as general scoreboard credibility, it will never be had under Jace Hall. Never. This is who he is.

    Jace can defend himself just fine, he doesn't need me -- but that is the biggest crock of shite I have ever seen post here at Twin Galaxies. Under TGSAP we have scoreboard integrity and credibility. We have the mechanisms in place to ensure all evidence is preserved and is publicly available. We have the means to discuss the submissions during the adjudication process. If for any reason a score is suspected as being fraudulent or was accepted in error we have the means to open a dispute and discuss further.

    You got called out for your off-site rant plain and simple. Free world, go nutz. But keep it off site. Nobody needs your brand of Cat-Despira-fueled anti-TG hysteria.
    Your friend, datagod

    ~~Raspberry Pi Enthusiast~~
    Likes thegamer1185 liked this post
  7. 12-07-2019, 07:45 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ersatz_cats View Post
    That hope is done. This site, this organization, is Jace's sandbox. If he feels like kicking a cheater like Billy to the curb, he'll do it, and if he doesn't, he won't. I don't mean this with any sort of bitter tone, because ultimately it really doesn't matter to me. It is what it is. As for site activities, forums and submissions and stuff, again, I'm not the fun police. You all can do your thing. But as far as general scoreboard credibility, it will never be had under Jace Hall. Never. This is who he is.
    Your observation about the power of TG administration to do what they want holds true for every era. The main difference for me is that the high profile disputes you referenced would never have happened under previous ownership despite community agitation to have them addressed. I suppose one could argue that any decision to exclude or include a dispute process is arbitrary, but I do think there's a qualitative and quantitative difference to include a formal, community initiated process. Of course one can find how disputes are managed as lacking or frustrating (arbitrary) at times, and I understand that can reflect on one's overall view of the site but my own personal metric is to take in what the community was able to discuss/share and the subsequent dispute result. I can be deeply critical about how each dispute was managed, but in my own view it hasn't reached the threshold where I felt that the decision was an arbitrary whimsical decision. I do believe that in every dispute objective evidence has been presented and compelled TG admin to accept disputes, even in those that took some twisty/unnecessary turns along the way, and I do believe that these archived disputes will continue to serve as an important account/repository of evidence for those that care to care in the future. Yes, primary evidence can get crowded out as disputes can quickly get off track with "non-technical" discussions. I'm trying to learn myself how to be a more constructive member - I have tried (and failed) to limit my posts, or at least focus them and make them more on point, and while I've seen criticism of how unwieldy the dispute threads can get, I think moderating them would be a real nightmare, and only invite accusations from those with disputed scores (and their supporters) that the admin is arbitrary/selectively removing exonerating evidence. There are things that I still don't understand about each dispute, but I'm inclined to view it was a learning experience for a site that didn't have any history with a public, evidence-based dispute process. YMMV
    Thanks Jace Hall, datagod thanked this post
  8. 12-07-2019, 10:20 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by lexmark View Post
    Yes, Glen, I was talking about MAME.

    I concede that mailed submissions MAY have been treated differently. I doubt it though. Why would there be a difference?

    Because the mail system takes time. It can take upwards to weeks mailing something from one country to another. It's not a hard concept to understand.
  9. 12-07-2019, 11:24 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by datagod View Post

    Jace can defend himself just fine, he doesn't need me -- but that is the biggest crock of shite I have ever seen post here at Twin Galaxies.
    I don't know, you have had some pretty irrelevant posts on here. So have I, so have many others where we posted and it literally had nothing to do with anything other than to be a dick, haha. While his opinion can viewed many different ways depending on the person, at least he is pointing out why he feels that way and that isn't shite. Just how he feels. You just don't agree with it. Which is completely fine.

    I mean, @Snowflake , @RTM , @Marcade are having a really elaborate back and forth in another thread that seems to be full of good tid bits shite in it. Not going to lie, I thinks it's funny. Some good old **** talk is good IMO can lead to some people mending their differences because it usually leads to more joking than actual insulting.
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
    Likes Marcade, datagod, Snowflake liked this post
  10. 12-07-2019, 11:30 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by thegamer1185 View Post
    I mean, @Doh-FAKE , @A certain somebody , @MarCRAP are having a really elaborate back and forth in another thread that seems to be full of good tid bits shite in it. Not going to lie, I thinks it's funny. Some good old **** talk is good IMO can lead to some people mending their differences because it usually leads to more joking than actual insulting.
    What can I say? Nothing really... I can only add CORRUPT LIKES to the humor!
    Likes Snowflake, datagod liked this post
Page 14 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 256
Page 14 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 ... LastLast
Join us