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. 12-08-2019, 01:46 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Tyler View Post
    Mr. Hall,

    I wish to say that I hope I did not come off the wrong way at all. While there are those who are intent on attacking you for whatever reasons and purposes, I was genuinely concerned about this whole thing. I understand that you and the other administrators of Twin Galaxies did the best you could to come to a reasonable agreement on what to do, and you did what you had to.

    Unfortunately, there is never any way to please everyone. There will always be people who disagree, and some of them will take things 'up to eleven.' It's just the way it is.

    I was not intent on sounding sarcastic in any way nor was I intent on mocking you at all. I was just simply offering some personal commentary.
    Thank you.

    I understand and appreciate your note, as well as your overall participation here.

    Please know that I never perceived any type of negative goal from you at all.

    And while yes there are people who seem to want to attack me from time to time, and they can get pretty outrageous sometimes, I do just try to answer them back without malice because in the end I believe they wouldn’t feel the need to attack me if they didn’t actually care, or if it didn’t actually matter to them - and I consider perhaps they may just have difficulty expressing themselves or maybe their life at the moment isn’t so great and perhaps I’m a good release target for other frustrations. My job seems to be that sometimes I must bear the brunt of that and allow those feelings/sentiments to be expressed within reason.

    I do try to listen to the core points they are presenting. I look for the value and consider their perspective despite the insults or accusations because my goal is for both myself and TG to be the best versions possible. Nothing is perfect and I have no problem admitting that.

    Anyway,

    All good and thank you and everyone else who continue to participate with passion - it’s part of why TG is a special place that matters!
    Thanks Lauren Tyler thanked this post
    Likes Lauren Tyler liked this post
  2. 12-08-2019, 02:06 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    Well @ersatz_cats,


    Anyway, thank you for your feedback. It has all been duly noted and I will try to be better for you and the whole community. If I missed any of your questions it was not intentional, it is only because of how much there is to address. If you break out any specific question I missed that you want answered in a separate post I would be happy to answer it.

    since the whole community is listed in this, i have a point i'd like to see you adress that i brought up earlier. You've made the point that earlier tg made the miss -- a point i agree with. however, can you truly distance yourself from that when it was your administration that handed out "legendary member" and "honored veteran" status to banned members? Doesnt that mean you yourself made the decision that these members really are at a higher status, and so doesnt any mess those members created in some way reflect on your decision to hand out such titles? also in lieue of 2 legendary members and 1 honored veteran having all their scores stripped, it would sure appear to me you disproportianately handed out such accolades to those least worthy. in sight of dispute decisions and banning to you see how these titles elevating some gamers above other is problematic, do you intend to change such titles, and could you elaborate on what critieria you used to hand out such titles in the first place
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
    Likes ersatz_cats liked this post
  3. 12-08-2019, 03:57 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    since the whole community is listed in this, i have a point i'd like to see you adress that i brought up earlier. You've made the point that earlier tg made the miss -- a point i agree with. however, can you truly distance yourself from that when it was your administration that handed out "legendary member" and "honored veteran" status to banned members? Doesnt that mean you yourself made the decision that these members really are at a higher status, and so doesnt any mess those members created in some way reflect on your decision to hand out such titles? also in lieue of 2 legendary members and 1 honored veteran having all their scores stripped, it would sure appear to me you disproportianately handed out such accolades to those least worthy. in sight of dispute decisions and banning to you see how these titles elevating some gamers above other is problematic, do you intend to change such titles, and could you elaborate on what critieria you used to hand out such titles in the first place
    Sorry. I guess I missed what you brought up earlier. Let me answer now -

    Firstly, I've never intended to project that I am ever trying to "distance myself" from TG's past mistakes, if I have come across that way at times, I apologize. To accept TG, is to accept the whole of it - both the good and the bad - and I do that wholeheartedly and believe that its mega-history is part of why it is so special.

    The "distancing" you may be perceiving from me is not supposed to be from "TG's history", but only from how the previous ownership chose to structure and manage TG processes and decisions.

    What I try to do, is remind people that a lot of the historical problems that I'm trying to deal with, were not the result of decisions I was responsible for. Therefore they should afford me the benefit of the doubt and understand that my motivation in the various matters are likely not going to be the same as the people who generated the problem in the first place.

    I'll give you an example: At one point there was an assumption and community pre-disposition that I would somehow automatically have a personal interest in "protecting" certain individuals from objective scrutinizing processes just simply based on who they are. The foundation of that assumption was legitimately rooted in historical TG ownership behavior.

    I would try to attempt to illustrate that I was not that previous ownership and therefore the assumption that I would have a similar predisposition as that of the previous ownership was in total error. To that end, I can see the notion of "distancing" but it was only intended to be within that kind of context.

    however, can you truly distance yourself from that when it was your administration that handed out "legendary member" and "honored veteran" status to banned members? Doesnt that mean you yourself made the decision that these members really are at a higher status, and so doesnt any mess those members created in some way reflect on your decision to hand out such titles? also in lieue of 2 legendary members and 1 honored veteran having all their scores stripped, it would sure appear to me you disproportianately handed out such accolades to those least worthy.
    This is very easy for me to answer.

    When I put "legendary member" or "honored veteran" into people's "status" it was very much random and not systematic or thought through in any meaningful way. This mostly took place earlier in the new TG era and frankly I forgot about it (haven't done it in a looong time) and I personally didn't think much of the moniker beyond it being similar to someone's signature block text at the bottom of their post (which can be anything a person wants.)

    There is no current "TG specific system" hierarchal structure to the "status" feature of the profile other than what was built in to the original web site software we based the site on, which I think uses account existence time or number of posts or something like that to "elevate" status.

    Anyway, in trying to think back as to why I did that for some people initially (and randomly, probably due to an interaction with them at that moment) I believe it was just based on either my early perception of their total historical contribution to Twin Galaxies before I arrived, or maybe I saw they've been a registered member of the site for a very long period of time and the site used a default status text to describe it and I thought it sounded lame.

    Bottom line, until right now - I really did not think much about it at all. I never even thought of the "status" as carrying any true verifiable meaning. No one until you has ever directly said anything to me about it that I've noticed so I had no idea that anyone actually attributed much meaning to the status title either and i assumed it was more of "signature line" type of thing. No one that I can remember even messaged me requesting that I change their "status" to anything, which would help organically clue me in to it having meaning for people on the site, so I guess my point is it was always below my radar as a point of concern.

    With that being said, after now having my attention specifically put on it in a manner in which I recognize the possible perceived significance of it, I agree it was / is a problem and should not have been done at all without there being a clear system of how it actually works put in place.

    My error. Complete apology from me.

    I honestly can't remember who else I may have changed the status of over these years. I assure you it is all random momentary happenstance in terms of why someone had theirs change. Like filling out name tags at a party. If you could point them out to me I will remove any alterations I made back to default (whatever it is.) That is what should be done in my opinion, now that I realize.

    Also, now that you got me on the subject, I think the "status" line could be something interesting, other than what default titles are. I'm open to suggestions to make the site more fun and interesting in this area. When we get more resources perhaps we can add ideas there.

    Not sure if that was the kind of answer you were hoping for, but that definitely is the truth!
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
    Likes datagod liked this post
  4. 12-08-2019, 04:06 PM
    that answer works. honestly, i assumed the criteria was "anyone you'd remember from a movie". I know nibbler marathoner tim is legendary, jjt_defender is honored veteran, RTM's new account (remember he was banned before you got the place) is legendary, i'm not sure but i think dwayne richard might also be legendary

    as for your question on suggestions how such a title should work, i just think it should be something equally open to all. If for example it comes from being in a movie, find and good, but make the rule count for future movies as well. If it comes from contributions tg wants to highlight (simliar to 'founder' status) also understood, but state that and then maybe others can try to earn the accolade. accolades mean more when we know how they're earned and what they represent. its also more "fun" if we all have a chance of being equally honored. by the way, i recognize there should be some rule for opinion and not "absolute rules" on such honors, but it would be nice to have some general guidelines on it
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
    Likes datagod liked this post
  5. 12-08-2019, 04:10 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    that answer works. honestly, i assumed the criteria was "anyone you'd remember from a movie". I know nibbler marathoner tim is legendary, jjt_defender is honored veteran, RTM's new account (remember he was banned before you got the place) is legendary, i'm not sure but i think dwayne richard might also be legendary

    as for your question on suggestions how such a title should work, i just think it should be something equally open to all. If for example it comes from being in a movie, find and good, but make the rule count for future movies as well. If it comes from contributions tg wants to highlight (simliar to 'founder' status) also understood, but state that and then maybe others can try to earn the accolade. accolades mean more when we know how they're earned and what they represent. its also more "fun" if we all have a chance of being equally honored. by the way, i recognize there should be some rule for opinion and not "absolute rules" on such honors, but it would be nice to have some general guidelines on it
    Hmm... What about the idea that you could "buy" fun status titles with submission points?
    Jace Hall
    Head Custodian
    www.TwinGalaxies.com
    Likes Marcade, Snowflake, datagod, GibGirl liked this post
  6. 12-08-2019, 04:15 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    Hmm... What about the idea that you could "buy" fun status titles with submission points?
    Do it !!!

    For some, that would be like handing over the pigeon to the cat !!!
    Likes Snowflake liked this post
  7. 12-08-2019, 04:16 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    Hmm... What about the idea that you could "buy" fun status titles with submission points?
    ha my first instinct was you were joking as i can see complaints about "pay to play". but sub points are earned by helping the community. and using them up on that prevents them being used an overloaded queue with subs. i dont know, maybe that would be a good idea.

    i honestly never much thought how i would've prefereed see it, just noticed the issues. maybe this should get its own post? i certainly cant speak for the whole community and others might have really good ideas
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
    Likes datagod liked this post
  8. 12-08-2019, 04:30 PM
    I like the idea of customizable status or whatever it is. using submission points purchase them makes sense. But there's also something more interesting when a system or a group of people decide what the status or moniker is. for example if I change mine to say best video game player ever it's going to be rather meaningless. But if Franny was to change it to say drama king then I might laugh and have a good time.


    founder gold star member, photographer of the century, Raspberry Pi salesman, humorous that's good. of course no matter what you do someone will complain someone's feelings will be hurt someone will be offended.
    Help me beat Snowflake at the "Like Game"
    Creator of Arcade Retro Clock


  9. 12-08-2019, 04:43 PM
    Can we pay to have someone's legendary member status removed? Asking for a friend.
    Likes Marcade, Snowflake, Garrett Holland liked this post
  10. 12-08-2019, 10:01 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by datagod View Post
    I like the idea of customizable status or whatever it is


    RTM REPLY - no idea why my own status indicates what it does...I did not choose it myself.


    One site started out forum post status using a "cherry" and worked your way up the "Ms Pacman" fruit line depending on quantity of posts, but only forum admins and mods received custom designations. Bottom line was there was no customization, initially.

    A "customizable" status can quickly get out of hand and generate bad feelings, bickering and/or animosity depending on the verbiage selected.

    Consider someone who creates the moniker of "Legend Killer" (and yes, I am referring to golden age wrestler Larry Zybysko) and basing this on their involvement with taking down scores attributed to a gamer in the TG community. Or consider a gamer who chooses a moniker to suit their personal agenda. Like I said....negative outcomes could be the result.

    Ebay has a simple system (see below) which is impartially based on feedback ratings. At best a "Top Seller" status is co-appended to your feedback rating based on additional metrics. Perhaps a combination of quantity of posts coupled with some TG-specific metrics could be the solution rather than self-selection which could easily get out of control ?

    StarFeedback Rating
    Gold star10 to 49
    Blue star50 to 99
    Turquoise star100 to 499
    Purple star500 to 999
    Red star1000 to 4999
    Green star5000 to 9999
    Gold shooting star10,000 to 24,999
    Turquoise shooting star25,000 to 49,999
    Purple shooting star50,000 to 99,999
    Red shooting star100,000 and higher
    Likes datagod, Ninglendo liked this post
Page 18 of 27 FirstFirst ... 8 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 261
Page 18 of 27 FirstFirst ... 8 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast
Join us