Dispute: Brandon Finton - NES / FAMICOM / DISK - Gradius - NTSC - Points - Player: Joe Jackmovich - Score: 745,500

Is this a valid dispute?

    This poll is closed
This poll is closed
  1. Dispute: Brandon Finton - NES / FAMICOM / DISK - Gradius - NTSC - Points - Player: Joe Jackmovich - Score: 745,500

    07-29-2020, 09:15 AM
    NES / FAMICOM / DISK - Gradius - NTSC - Points
    Factory Default
    No Codes Allowed

    Special Rules
    Level skipping via destroying a boss fast enough is permitted. You are only permitted to obtain the secret 1-Up on Level 4 once per loop or your scoring attempt will be disqualified. Please note that when you beat the game it starts over from the beginning with your score intact, so you may continue on until you either lose all your lives and reach the Game Over screen or the score maxes out.

    Player Name
    Joe Jackmovich
    Original Adjudication
    Verification Method
    Verification Date
    Disputed Score
    745,500 (Rank 4)
    Disputed By
    Dispute Evidence / Rationale
    YouTube video is private. Mediafire link video is gone.
  2. 07-31-2020, 11:00 AM
    But isn't this score completely probable, and didn't it pass the standards of the time? ;)

    I'm jk, there seems to be no way to review this evidence, rendering it useless. Have we exhausted attempts to contact this person? Besides that, I support removing scores that have no surviving evidence and were supposed to have an evidence pack.
  3. 07-31-2020, 12:33 PM
    actually, and get ready some confusing ruling, but this simulatanesouly did and did not meet the standards

    the standards of the day was evidence must be permanent. That means adjudicators needed to know the future, and needed to know the evidence would be permanent. We were warnted even then if evidence ever went missing at a future date, the score would be removed and the people who approved it would retroactively lose credibility. This obvioulsy led to confusion among people who dont read the fine print, since they were simultaneosuly told to vote yes while at the same time warned a yes vote could penalize them. The only exception was if you direct uploaded to tg and tg lost the footage, then you're safe. This is why many of us mass abstained on third party uploads even though they were allowed. we knew we couldnt see the future and we were worried the video would go down and we'd eventually lose cred

    so no, since the standards of the day invovled knowing the future and that the video be permanent, it did not meet the standards of the day. Though i can certainly understand how those standards were confusing. it led to alot of arguments, and so that ugly confusing rule was eventually changed. this is why direct upload is now a rule, much simpler. the only rule too many people misinterpreted and it just led to many fights on disputes as well as refusal to vote on scores leaving them in the queue forever and protests from the submitter that its not fair everyone abstains.

    in fact, any argument you'll see on these disputes is really just a reminder on why the old rule of "can be third party but must be permanent" had to be changed.
    Lode Runner Champion
    Thanks Bogart thanked this post
  4. 08-10-2020, 09:39 PM
    I fully support the mandatory upload rule...I thought it would have been much simpler to protect the scores in TGSAP prior to the mandatory upload. That way people could vote, scores where protected, voters where protected. You know, kind of like those old TG scores. I lost. Voting yes.
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Join us