Dispute: Marc Cohen - Nintendo Game & Watch - Donkey Kong Jr. / Donkey Kong Junior - G&W DKJR Points Game B - Player: william rosa - Score: 177

Is this a valid dispute?

    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
You may not vote on this poll
  1. 07-29-2020, 01:23 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by sdwyer138 View Post
    Perhaps you SHOULD trust that he WILL go in the pantry!
    reminds me of an xgirfriend
    her: you broke my trust to many times by not doing that (i choose not to disclose what i refused to do)
    me: yes, but every single time i explcitly told you i aint gonna do it, so what trust was broken?
    her: well even though you said you werent gonna do it, i just trusted you to do it anyway

    yeah, that aint trust.
    Lode Runner Champion
  2. 07-29-2020, 04:59 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    curious where you stand on the many other such scores that went through that you said nothing negative about -- you're not a blind voter are you lexmark? cause your comments seem to show an understanding of other comments but no comments of whats in the video
    Firstly, if I seen something in a submission that I didn't think was right, I would ask out loud. I don't think i ever made a seriously negative comment in all the time I adjudicated, UNLESS something was being pushed for acceptance that obviously shouldnt be accepted (for example a rule/s was broken) Then it usually ended up an argumentative s*it fight like the CK and Roger Rabbit submissions amongst others.

    Secondly, I stand proud that I did an honest good job adjudicating.

    Thirdly, So there!


    john

    .
  3. 07-29-2020, 06:49 PM
    I am inclined to vote YES on this dispute, however, here is something to consider:

    First, a disclosure:
    I voted yes on this.

    Now, what probably should be considered:

    The rules state:
    "... make sure to show a clear view of the back of the game as all relevant information is displayed there..."

    The submitter did, in fact, show a clear view of the back of the game, as required by the rule set, and did so in Comment #19 of the submission thread. This informed me that the rule had been met, and thus, my yes vote was earned. Granted, it wasnt as "additional evidence", however, there is no way to attach a jpg as "additional evidence". There is nothing in the rule set or global rules that prohibit the use of a still photo to be used as supplemental evidence that the rules were followed. A snapshot of the back of a unit doesn't constitute "gameplay" that is required in the global rules.

    Again, something to think about. At the end of the day, it, like CR, doesnt mean that much to me.
  4. 07-29-2020, 06:54 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett Holland View Post
    A snapshot of the back of a unit doesn't constitute "gameplay" that is required in the global rules.

    Again, something to think about. At the end of the day, it, like CR, doesnt mean that much to me.
    I need to use better English, here.

    The global rules state that video of the performance is required. Showing the back of the console to confirm authenticity is not part of the gameplay, or "performance". It merely backs up the performance, and therefore, in my opinion, satisfies all of the requirements of the global rules. Since the track rules are the only thing that may supersede global rules, and the track rules do not prohibit a photo, then this also fulfills all requirements of the track rules.
    Likes Snowflake liked this post
  5. 07-29-2020, 07:01 PM
    Something else to consider: A member requesting other members to vote no does not necessarily mean that voting no is the correct action to take, especially if all the rules appear to have been met and the final result matches what was submitted.
  6. 07-29-2020, 07:10 PM
    I abstained but you did add additional evidence showing the back and "voters" took that to be good enough. So I would say this score stands.
    Undisputed #1 Game Wave Family Entertainment Player
  7. 07-29-2020, 07:45 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett Holland View Post
    I am inclined to vote YES on this dispute, however, here is something to consider:

    First, a disclosure:
    I voted yes on this.

    Now, what probably should be considered:

    The rules state:
    "... make sure to show a clear view of the back of the game as all relevant information is displayed there..."

    The submitter did, in fact, show a clear view of the back of the game, as required by the rule set, and did so in Comment #19 of the submission thread. This informed me that the rule had been met, and thus, my yes vote was earned. Granted, it wasnt as "additional evidence", however, there is no way to attach a jpg as "additional evidence". There is nothing in the rule set or global rules that prohibit the use of a still photo to be used as supplemental evidence that the rules were followed. A snapshot of the back of a unit doesn't constitute "gameplay" that is required in the global rules.

    Again, something to think about. At the end of the day, it, like CR, doesnt mean that much to me.
    yeah sorry about that i see now i sent mixed messages. Look i try real hard to be clear in communication, but i'm still a pedantic direct speaking nerd that often forgets implicatoins. i showed the back simply because someone asked if i could. thats it, i was answering a question. i wasnt doing it for evidence or an acceptance. in retrospect that seems pretty naive of me so sorry again. i can see where a few of my comments could come off as implicilty asking for an accept, with rationale to support the accept, but in truth those comments should be taken completely literally as me just fact of the matter stating things. I didnt like the cancel feature cause it made it to easy for cheaters to hide cheats by canceling when they realized they were about to get caught, it resulted in inappropriate cancels for silly reasons like hte person beat their own score, yet cases like this is where a cancel would've been good.

    i screwed up, and i dont think all (though maybe some) accepts were blind votes. my own comments made thing worse with the mixed signals.
    Lode Runner Champion
    Thanks MyOwnWorstEnemy, Garrett Holland thanked this post
  8. 07-29-2020, 07:49 PM
    Wait , what? He showed a screenshot of the back in the submission later? Naw that's different, sorry, changing my vote to no. He fulfilled all requirements. That probably wouldn't fly if people didn't already know about his other submissions where he does show the back. If it was his first sub for this track, would a screenshot be good enough as proof that it's genuine? cuz i'm thinkin he could've gotten a photo like that off google images or something...or a tiny video showing the back would be better?
  9. 07-29-2020, 07:59 PM
    Did anyone vote no? The problem now is, removal screws anyone who voted yes in good faith, and as we see there are in fact people who voted yes that were not blind voting. leaving the score screws any no votes -- unless of course there were no "no" votes.

    i have already beaten the score, so this score is leaving the scoreboard either way. as for as the scoreboard is concerned whatever happens here is moot. the only practical result of this is cred recalculation. if noone voted no, then maybe let the score stay and fall off naturally when my next score goes though? if however someone did vote "no", i guess please speak up, and we're back to figuring out the best solution for all involved
    Lode Runner Champion
    Thanks Garrett Holland thanked this post
  10. 07-29-2020, 08:38 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    yeah sorry about that i see now i sent mixed messages.
    There isnt a soul on this site who would be justified in being critical toward for sending mixed messages. Everyone does it, and frequently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    but i'm still a pedantic direct speaking nerd that often forgets implicatoins.
    Nothing wrong with that LOL! I resemble that remark! The onus is not on you to not send mixed messages. Rather, the onus is on the readers to discern what the proper course of action is, and to develop a way to overcome their bias. I'm biased in your favor and in favor of a few others' here, however, because I realize this, I take extra care to be objective when reviewing your submissions and those of certain others, as well. The fault would be ours, not yours.


    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    i showed the back simply because someone asked if i could. thats it, i was answering a question. i wasnt doing it for evidence or an acceptance.
    Your intent, whether good or bad, is irrelevant, imho. As far as I see it, that post was the missing piece of evidence that fulfilled the rule and validated your submission claim, regardless of why you posted it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    sorry again.
    While your humbleness is appreciated, you did nothing wrong to be sorry about. Again, just my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    I can see where a few of my comments could come off as implicilty asking for an accept, with rationale to support the accept,
    I can't, and it wasnt how I perceived it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    but in truth those comments should be taken completely literally as me just fact of the matter stating things.
    EXACTLY. If we readers took it the other way, then that's on us, not you. We all know how this works by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    i screwed up,
    I can't accept that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake
    and i dont think all (though maybe some) accepts were blind votes. my own comments made thing worse with the mixed signals.
    Maybe, but that's not on you. Adjudicators should be both objective and diligent.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Join us