Dispute: Brandon Finton - Nintendo Switch - Puyo Puyo Tetris - Sprint Mode - Player: Maxwell Gorley - Score: 50.83

Is this a valid dispute?

    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
You may not vote on this poll
  1. Dispute: Brandon Finton - Nintendo Switch - Puyo Puyo Tetris - Sprint Mode - Player: Maxwell Gorley - Score: 50.83

    01-14-2020, 09:29 PM
    Nintendo Switch - Puyo Puyo Tetris - Sprint Mode
    Score Track
    https://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=209243
    Rules
    From The Solo Arcade, the player must pick the Challenge area and then Sprint Mode.
    The player is free to pick any character to play as.

    Player Name
    Maxwell Gorley
    Original Adjudication
    https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php?t=202814
    Verification Method
    TGSAP
    Verification Date
    2019-05-06
    Disputed Score
    50.83 (Rank 1)
    Disputed By
    Desidious
    Dispute Evidence / Rationale
    Replays should not be allowed. It sets a bad precedence but am open to discussion. This score should start the debate at least.
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes JJT_Defender liked this post
  2. 01-15-2020, 12:27 AM
    I'm going to comment on this to help guide the conversation and provide a perspective.

    I think replays should be allowed as long as the replay file is provided as evidence along with the video submission.

    If the file can not be obtained due the a platform or application obscuring the data from the user, then that is too bad, they will not be able to submit a replay.

    Essentially a replay is exactly the same thing as a MAME submission.

    We can not accept a MAME submission without the INP, since we know that the playback (replay) of just a MAME video performance could be altered.

    Same thing for any replay.

    So my thinking is that as long as the input file of a replay is provided (and an ability to verify its data exists) then accepting a replay would be fine.

    In this particular dispute case, there is not replay input file provided, so this record would need to be rejected under the policy if we make it.

    Please feel free to share your thoughts on this matter.
    Jace Hall
    Head Custodian
    www.TwinGalaxies.com
  3. 01-15-2020, 04:47 AM
    Haha. It is the modus operandi of TG to accept wr runs that break word of mouth rules written absolutely nowhere, then decline later runs for breaking those same rules. The site then covers its butt by pulling the original run (that shouldn't, per the rules) after it's enjoyed significant time as the wr.

    Of course none of that second part would happen if it weren't at the expense of neophytes getting screwed over (my case certainly being worse than Joe's, who at least was nowhere near the wr).
  4. 01-15-2020, 08:00 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by SallowDay View Post
    Haha. It is the modus operandi of TG to accept wr runs that break word of mouth rules written absolutely nowhere, then decline later runs for breaking those same rules. The site then covers its butt by pulling the original run (that shouldn't, per the rules) after it's enjoyed significant time as the wr.

    Of course none of that second part would happen if it weren't at the expense of neophytes getting screwed over (my case certainly being worse than Joe's, who at least was nowhere near the wr).
    Please keep this dispute on topic. If you want to keep crying about your pause scenario, keep it to your submission or possibly the dispute that might follow. This is about replays.

    Let us keep this moving forward in the right direction.
  5. 01-15-2020, 09:59 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by SallowDay View Post
    Haha. It is the modus operandi of TG to accept wr runs that break word of mouth rules written absolutely nowhere, then decline later runs for breaking those same rules. The site then covers its butt by pulling the original run (that shouldn't, per the rules) after it's enjoyed significant time as the wr.

    Of course none of that second part would happen if it weren't at the expense of neophytes getting screwed over (my case certainly being worse than Joe's, who at least was nowhere near the wr).
    the problem is TG is set up pretty well for regular user, but not for new or one time submitters. Theres a huge overhead to learning everything. that overhead doesnt matter if you plan on submitting dozens of scores, but if you only submit one or two then yeah, its a problem. TG accidentally (i hope its not intentional) tailors to mass submitters and not specialists.

    i wouldnt call it the "modus operandi" as other times things are caught. i'd call it more "mistakes happen and try to be corrected", however i think you're following the other threads that are now discussing blind voting, and yes, i do think the problem is getting worse as the blind voters amass more and more cred, but really, stick around, i think overall you'll like it here. its not corrupt. mistakes happen -- alot of mistakes, then arguments follow, but at the end of it all the right thing usually winds up being done.
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
    Likes The Evener, Garrett Holland liked this post
  6. 01-15-2020, 11:20 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    the problem is TG is set up pretty well for regular user, but not for new or one time submitters. Theres a huge overhead to learning everything. that overhead doesnt matter if you plan on submitting dozens of scores, but if you only submit one or two then yeah, its a problem. TG accidentally (i hope its not intentional) tailors to mass submitters and not specialists.

    i wouldnt call it the "modus operandi" as other times things are caught. i'd call it more "mistakes happen and try to be corrected", however i think you're following the other threads that are now discussing blind voting, and yes, i do think the problem is getting worse as the blind voters amass more and more cred, but really, stick around, i think overall you'll like it here. its not corrupt. mistakes happen -- alot of mistakes, then arguments follow, but at the end of it all the right thing usually winds up being done.
    This has nothing to do with the dispute, it might have been accepted through blind voting but I would prefer to center the discussion to why or why not replays should be allowed. I'm sure all your semantics will be of better use in their respective threads.
  7. 01-15-2020, 11:36 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Desidious View Post
    This has nothing to do with the dispute, it might have been accepted through blind voting but I would prefer to center the discussion to why or why not replays should be allowed. I'm sure all your semantics will be of better use in their respective threads.
    as for the dispute itself -- invalid because jace has come in and change the rules

    brandon, sorry bro, you get to launch a dispute but you're not an admin and you dont get to control what others contribute. just because you were the first to dispute it doesnt mean you own the dispute. in my opinion this is all relevant, n your opinion its not and thats fine. we can disagree. but just a heads up, telling me what to do never succeeds.
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
  8. 01-15-2020, 11:37 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall View Post
    I'm going to comment on this to help guide the conversation and provide a perspective.

    I think replays should be allowed as long as the replay file is provided as evidence along with the video submission.

    If the file can not be obtained due the a platform or application obscuring the data from the user, then that is too bad, they will not be able to submit a replay.

    Essentially a replay is exactly the same thing as a MAME submission.

    We can not accept a MAME submission without the INP, since we know that the playback (replay) of just a MAME video performance could be altered.

    Same thing for any replay.

    So my thinking is that as long as the input file of a replay is provided (and an ability to verify its data exists) then accepting a replay would be fine.

    In this particular dispute case, there is not replay input file provided, so this record would need to be rejected under the policy if we make it.

    Please feel free to share your thoughts on this matter.
    My biggest concern here is that we don't know how each individual game handles their creation of replay files. MAME had WolfMAME created specifically to give us some trustworthy .inp files. But other games, well, we don't know what various user inputs and actions go into replays. If someone were to abuse repeated pausing, for example, will the replay file give us what we need to determine that? Are there glitches that can be abused but get "sanitized" somehow in the replay? What about games where the replays can be edited? (See videos for "Super Monkey Ball TAS" or "F-Zero GX TAS" for what can be done in extreme cases)

    I'd rather err on the side of not trusting replays from a specific game until they're blessed, instead of accepting them until proven broken.
    Likes Snowflake liked this post
  9. 01-15-2020, 11:39 AM
    oops my bad i read the last comment without re-reviewing the whole thread. thought this was the pause thread.

    yeah as far as replays, i'll still say jace summed it up, though in this case it would go to a reject

    i'm gonna abstain on the dispute. i dont think the issues of replays are as simple as people make it out to be and i'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on the matter.
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
    Likes The Evener liked this post
  10. 01-15-2020, 11:51 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    oops my bad i read the last comment without re-reviewing the whole thread. thought this was the pause thread.

    yeah as far as replays, i'll still say jace summed it up, though in this case it would go to a reject

    i'm gonna abstain on the dispute. i dont think the issues of replays are as simple as people make it out to be and i'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on the matter.
    Don't worry the pause dispute is coming next. I think I have 10 hours or so until I can dispute again.

    As for replays, I just don't think they are held in the same standards as seeing the actual footage of when someone plays it. This only really goes for modern consoles and as for obtaining a "file" to view it like an INP.. does anyone know how that would be possible?
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us