swaggers's Feed

swaggers
06-26-2020 at 06:35 AM
30 Comments
Rate this Entry

TG Ramblings

Just some TG ramblings I've been thinking about. I know a LOT of people have a lot of strong opinions about all of this and I'm happy to discuss. I also know that in the scheme of things I shouldn't care one bit about any of this, but I do, so here we are.

THE RULES OVERALL - It's all fun and games to have really ambiguous rules and put all the work on the adjudicators so TG has no real responsibility, but its time for TG to take some leadership. People coming to this site have NO idea what is expected of them. Some people get away with things that new people would never be allowed to get away with. Look at the official rules even today. Video evidence is NOT required by the rules. Is anyone here going to approve a photo? Make some RULES.

SEE A SYSTEM YES OR NO - Make it an OFFICIAL ruling. This comes up all the time and it swings back and forth. There are so many people here that direct feed and get approved and then a new player comes in with a twitch stream and gets rejected for not showing a system. Just put it in the rules. One way or the other. Man up.

PLATFORMS - It's already so diluted with Flash Carts and RGB mods and everything else being used. I really don't know how we would get back to original versus everything else. This is a whole discussion on its own. I'm getting to the point where I am just going to give up hoping for Original Hardware and games. It's to the point where we need to just being tracking a game and then noting how it was accomplished. I personally prefer original hardware with actual original games but TG has let so much slide that it is what it is. We have scores that get accepted with direct feed, we have no real idea what they are using.

RULES OFFICIALS - Frankly we need someone who actually understands and play games. No more one person says to make a change and it's just done no questions asked. The number of times someone just goes in and says, "Oh by the way this should be on Ultra speed." and it's just done is absurd. Even if they are right there needs to be checks. Even something as simple as a forum post. People have 2 weeks to voice their issues, then it gets changed. Now there is a record and people were given time to talk it out. And if TG ever directly hires any more employees can you please make sure they actually know what a video game is.

HISTORICAL DATA - F it. Pure and simple. We've got cheaters who made up absurd scores and were caught, we have cheaters that used improper equipment and were caught, but there are cheaters who just saw a score come in and 2 days later somehow had a score just a few points better and they are never going to be caught and they are never going to get removed. I'm not going to say that cheating doesn't happen now but at least with some form of proof and video someday hopefully they'll get caught. People with just a X score in the database are never going to get caught.
Some options:
- Make a Legacy section
- Make a scoreboard that is actually sortable. That will remove legacy scores, legacy ESI and legacy WR counts (I mean a sort that will wipe them from the planet completely) if the user wishes.

ESI - I'd like to see it based on game and not number of tracks so a racing game with 100 tracks isn't worth more than a game with 1 track. But honestly it's doesn't mean anything so it's fine if nothing changes.

BILLY - Look at Alexa. Every time Billy opens his mouth the traffic spikes pretty significantly. Explain to me how someone coming to TG because of Billy is ever going to find the dispute page knowing nothing about TG. Billy drives traffic to the site. I don't know why there isn't a Billy centric page with all the video findings with some nice ads in them to get TG some money.

CERTS / MERCH - This confounds me to this day. How hard is it to print a piece of paper and put it in the mail? How hard is it to slap your logo on some merch and make an online dropship page?

ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
Comments
  1. sdwyer138's Avatar

    You have some good points. I don't mean to take away from your concerns, but I'd like to add my own if that's ok.


    New track creation needs to be reworked.

    -Proposed tracks should be able to be revised based on community input with out having to cancel and start a new proposal and lose the SP.

    -Proposed tracks should not be able to be immediately fully funded by one person.

    -Fix the problem where all formatting is lost when a new track goes live.

    -Popular and/or new releases should have tracks created by TG. I think this could help draw in new users.


    Also.. The SP economy is whack.

    If a new person makes an honest mistake on their first submission, which happens frequently, they are just out of luck for a few weeks. Which is probably enough time for some of those people to give up. Meanwhile people who have been here for years have more SP built up than can ever be used, or can afford to spend it willynilly on garbage tracks with out any community or admin input.

    I feel it was conceived with the expectation that "people will only vote enough to fund their own submissions" instead of "people will click accept all day long and never submit their own scores". I don't know that I have a solution for this other than: Make it harder to earn, make things more expensive, make it available to spend on other things, or make it expire.

    ThanksSincerelyFranny thanked this post
    Likesswaggers, Snowflake, Foot0fGod liked this post
  2. Barthax's Avatar

    SEE A SYSTEM YES OR NO - Make it an OFFICIAL ruling. This comes up all the time and it swings back and forth. There are so many people here that direct feed and get approved and then a new player comes in with a twitch stream and gets rejected for not showing a system. Just put it in the rules. One way or the other. Man up.

    I love this one. This is just comfort zone stuff. See a console flash on camera before it's turn on or even retain a system in front of camera the entire recording but feed the TV from the knock-off/emulated system just off camera. See a system: be comfortably fooled. :D

    ThanksPixe Sukola thanked this post
    LikesSnowflake, ILLSeaBass liked this post
  3. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by sdwyer138

    -Proposed tracks should be able to be revised based on community input with out having to cancel and start a new proposal and lose the SP.

    Start the discussion before spending the SP.


    -Proposed tracks should not be able to be immediately fully funded by one person.

    I'm curious what's the purpose/catalyst behind this? I've seen it mentioned before and it usually boils down to somebody being uncomfortable with other people having power. Would like to see a non-power-based explanation that isn't solved with "Start the discussion before spending the SP".


    If a new person makes an honest mistake on their first submission, which happens frequently, they are just out of luck for a few weeks. Which is probably enough time for some of those people to give up. Meanwhile people who have been here for years have more SP built up than can ever be used, or can afford to spend it willynilly on garbage tracks with out any community or admin input.

    The single submission does not foster a good introduction, I agree.

    People having earned lots of SP: so what? They did the work (*cough*) involved...

  4. swaggers's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax

    I love this one. This is just comfort zone stuff. See a console flash on camera before it's turn on or even retain a system in front of camera the entire recording but feed the TV from the knock-off/emulated system just off camera. See a system: be comfortably fooled. :D

    As I said there are always going to be cheaters. As it is people get their scores randomly rejected for not showing a system and there is no official rule that actually requires it. TG currently pushes platforms as a requirement to what track someone submits to so at least require some form of proof. If they are cheating it at least gives the opportunity to look for things that are amiss. If you don't think any evidence is ever really true then you should be approving everyone who just takes a pic or says they got a score. Or on the other end rejecting everyone as they can't live up to your standard. You have to expect some form of proof no matter how fleeting as the more you get the better a chance to catch someone.

  5. swaggers's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax

    Start the discussion before spending the SP.

    I should probably log out and see what new people see.

    But for the most part this site is set up like the Wild West and it's whatever you can get away with. I honestly don't think new people coming to this site have a fair chance of figuring out what they are supposed to do to get a score properly submitted or a new track created. Read through the rules. It's as wishy washy as anything could be.

    Even giving people 2 free full sub points so they can make a mistake and get some feedback and the ability to correct it. Then you can throw them into the system with the rest of us.

    ThanksGibGirl thanked this post
    Updated 06-26-2020 at 07:36 AM by swaggers
  6. Snowflake's Avatar

    good discussion points and i have a bit to say about all of them except the esi, esi i feel differnetly but thats so opinion based its like arguing over favorite color

    hard rules/just be convincing -- i see both points of view. Jace is right that flexibility is needed. However, flexibility doesnt just allow for things to be better and deal with corner cases, it also allows for abuse, biases, and confusion. Fortunately I think we as a community are good enough that the flexibilty will not lead to abuse and rather actually will allow us to deal with each case better. But your point on confusion very much remains. Additionally there are some "rules" the community have effectivly made that really arent flexible and so defeat the point.

    yes the whole "show the system" really has basically become a rule. and honestly i agree with barthax how stupid the rule is. showing the system does NOTHING heck the first TGSAP cheater showed his system and noone looking at the system caught the cheating, it was the direct feed anallysis that caught it. now showing a system is easy enough that i'll just do it to avoid the argument but its gotta be one of the dumbest things the community has agreed to demand and i do think new users see what a silly rule it is.

    now, sure if you made the person show the wires connected to the back of the tv, sure, that might actually do something. but just showing the system, theres zero evidence the system being shown is really the same system connected. the only reason i dont argue more how stupid this is, is because well again its so easy to show the system, that whatever, give the baby its bottle right?


    platforms -- yeah a split would be tough. TG at one point correctly saw the need to split atari but man did it make for contention and no doubt mistakes. and that was just one platform with far fewer submissions than TG now has. it would be a monster undertaking so we're stuck with what we have. we can make purist tracks. also i never worry about "dilution" that sort of gatekeeping isnt just forcing opinions on others but frankly if your record can be "diluted" by someone else then it probably wasnt anything that impressive to begin with. a gem, even in a pile of trash, still grabs the eye. if the only reason people respected a record was simply because it was deemed "a world record' at a respected site, and therefore stands to reason mut be impressive, is that really something to even be proud of? cause those are the only types of records that can be "diluted". The amazing records will be respected by their own right regardless of what else is recorded.

    Rules official -- totally agreed. it does raise the question though of corruption and abuse and whos right for the job. i think though the issues you bring up is more that we actually already have many rules officials how could get changes through. some were worse than others. currently the trusted people have earned their trust and their changes are good, but its still scary as a matter of principle wondering how long before we get another knucklehead messing things up. so i dont see it as a conern right now, but it sure was before and sure could be again. i'd suggest any sort of "rules official" be elected rather than appointed.

    ESI -- theres definitley apples to oranges. but like i say alot of room for opinion. remmeber we used to just have overall esi but now we at least have platform esi. maybe if you could find a way to put into words another way to group things so that there could be other more apples to apples esi? you're example of racing games, maybe their should be esi that groups all racing games together?


    BILLY
    -- I see your point but theres a yuge danger in what you suggest. Conflict of interest, special treatment, legal issues.
    Look everythhing has some bias and conflict of interest thats unavoidable, but once tg formally starts focusing on hits from a dispute it creates a motivation for admin to see certain scores disputed just for hits. This is why we dont earn credibility or sub points off disputes. well TG shouldnt be earning money off disputes. That would just create too much of a conflict of interest. yes, the hits are gonna happen anyway, nothing you can do about that, but once you start formally consciously looking for it thats a problem.
    Additionally this ties into lawsuits. conflict of interest isnt just an issue in its own right, its also an appearance issue, and appearances can create issues. billy's lawsuit accuses jace of carrying out the dispute just for clicks. implementing your suggestion would bolster his case. I cant imagine tg wanted to play into that.
    I think i've made clear many times how i feel about special treatment, granted this isnt elevating a player its humiliating one to draw such attention, but in some ways that could be seen as worse. yes yes we're not truly all equally skilled, interesting, or impressive. But TG needs to be neutral. let the viewers play favorites. TG itself has to treat us equal.

    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    LikesBarthax, JJT_Defender liked this post
  7. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by swaggers


    As I said there are always going to be cheaters. As it is people get their scores randomly rejected for not showing a system and there is no official rule that actually requires it. TG currently pushes platforms as a requirement to what track someone submits to so at least require some form of proof. If they are cheating it at least gives the opportunity to look for things that are amiss. If you don't think any evidence is ever really true then you should be approving everyone who just takes a pic or says they got a score. Or on the other end rejecting everyone as they can't live up to your standard. You have to expect some form of proof no matter how fleeting as the more you get the better a chance to catch someone.

    Several different things in there.

    Always going to be cheaters. However, not just cheaters but people confused, people that just "don't know" and I definitely would have been banned long before if people that made mistakes were labelled cheaters. Add to that, TGSAP is ever-evolving because the community pushes "the envelope" of submissions. I've even been unsure if the something is or isn't likely to pass muster: so I submit & find out. Just because something does pass muster doesn't mean its correctly adjudicated: the dispute process is where additional justice resides.

    Submissions get rejected because "other people". There's no automated random rejection. It's inconsistent because there's an inconsistent adjudication base. Random person voices one thing, other people react. Sometimes causes an argument, sometimes not. This forum is a teeny tiny reflection of life. People do random stuff.

    The burden of proof is always on the submitter. TG has made this clear. If there is insufficient evidence in the video it should be questioned. Some people see that questioning process as reason to vote No. The solution, like many things in life, is education. Education of the submitter, education of the reaction methods of the adjudicators.


    ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likesfredb999, Luigi Ruffolo, JJT_Defender liked this post
  8. Snowflake's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by swaggers


    I should probably log out and see what new people see.

    But for the most part this site is set up like the Wild West and it's whatever you can get away with. I honestly don't think new people coming to this site have a fair chance of figuring out what they are supposed to do to get a score properly submitted or a new track created. Read through the rules. It's as wishy washy as anything could be.

    Even giving people 2 free full sub points so they can make a mistake and get some feedback and the ability to correct it. Then you can throw them into the system with the rest of us.


    @GibGirl is really leading the charge on this with the wiki and pointing people to it. still, no matter how good the wiki gets, yeah, people dont know about it unless pointed to it AFTER their first mistake. I respect her work but its not something i've found myself quite motivated to take up. Maybe if you're passionate about this point work together with her on it?

    LikesBarthax liked this post
  9. Barthax's Avatar


    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake

    BILLY --[...]

    ... or any other hot topic.

    Having a very wide spread of pages is actually beneficial. More indexing, more nuances of wording means more search engine hits & more traffic arriving because there's simply more content to match up. It's why there's a team working on the "front page" stuff and zero clean up.

    Dumbing down the content (even to a simple list page) infers "TG opinion" is being exercised and bias is being represented.

    Leave the history splintered in its component parts: interested parties will voice more here to find it & generate more (non-TG) pointers and more pages, more indexing... etc.

  10. Madsandy's Avatar

    I feel like there should be a way for a site wide vote on rule addition/amendment. Have a separate section that a user can propose a change, and have other users vote to either strike it down or pass it/show the admins that this is a change that is wanted. Should this particular category come into fruition, I also propose that there is a minimum of 1 month so that everyone voting has the opportunity to discuss/decide on the ruling. These rulings could also be compartmentalized(eg. Site wide, per platform, per game, per track, etc.)

    Implementing this process would accomplish 2 very important things.

    A. It would allow for a much more organized rule set that's easier to ingest.

    B. It would allow for this organization to occur without the need for referees, as from what OP states does seem to lean more towards the ref side.



    LikesGarrett Holland liked this post
  11. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by swaggers

    Even giving people 2 free full sub points so they can make a mistake and get some feedback and the ability to correct it. Then you can throw them into the system with the rest of us.

    Many people will just show off two mistakes as their first acts on TG. :P

  12. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Madsandy

    I feel like there should be a way for a site wide vote on rule addition/amendment. Have a separate section that a user can propose a change, and have other users vote to either strike it down or pass it/show the admins that this is a change that is wanted. Should this particular category come into fruition, I also propose that there is a minimum of 1 month so that everyone voting has the opportunity to discuss/decide on the ruling. These rulings could also be compartmentalized(eg. Site wide, per platform, per game, per track, etc.)

    Implementing this process would accomplish 2 very important things.

    A. It would allow for a much more organized rule set that's easier to ingest.

    B. It would allow for this organization to occur without the need for referees, as from what OP states does seem to lean more towards the ref side.


    You mean have a TGSAP for rules amendments? 'cause TGSAP is such a fail-safe. :P

    (Sorry, I'm naturally sarcastic.)

  13. sdwyer138's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax


    Start the discussion before spending the SP.



    I'm curious what's the purpose/catalyst behind this? I've seen it mentioned before and it usually boils down to somebody being uncomfortable with other people having power. Would like to see a non-power-based explanation that isn't solved with "Start the discussion before spending the SP".



    The single submission does not foster a good introduction, I agree.

    People having earned lots of SP: so what? They did the work (*cough*) involved...


    Well therein lies the problem. Presently starting a discussion before spending the SP is very optional. And where to put it? Wall post that will get buried or that people who aren't friends with you wont see? Forum post mixed in with other stuff, its not even super obvious how to find the forums.

    That discussion should take place in the track market. And there should be a minimum time for that discussion to happen, and there needs to be some consensus from hell at least one other person before a track goes live.

    As far as a catalyst... Most recently Jared and the 6 Pak tracks. But we have also seen garbage from JJT, Rudy, Alan, others.

  14. Snowflake's Avatar

    i didnt wanna name names, but now that its out there, i do think its worth distinguishing between
    1. Tracks that are crap because the rules are literally impossible. either impossible understand grammar. or contradicitng rules, or soemthing like that.
    2. Tracks that as a matter of opinion some people dont think should exist


    since you've given names anyway option 1 is jjt, and was solved with admin getting invovled. i suspect this problem will be rare enough that admin can handle case by case.

    alan and rudy were much more option 2 and i believe this argument has come up many times and jace has made pretty clear track creators have the right to make their tracks. though they did have some spelling and grammar issues, the rules were usually understood.


    jared's six in one is a very weird corner case that while a corner case does come up from time to time. to be fair it happened pre tgsap as well. I remember ryan genno submitted to some gameboy game that was listed on both a compliation and individually -- i dont mind naming him cause this isnt shaming him he did nothing wrong. but he might be able to tell you the game name as hes more likely to remember his sub than i am. my only point bringing him up is to show the compilation issue existed before as well.

    jared's compilation issue might be a case where he just didnt realize the issue and so a true error is in. however he may have wanted the two distinguished. i believe barthax for example made some near duplicate tracks with the only difference being for dancing games camera isnt required (if i'm wrong on this barthax you must at least know what i'm referencing), that wasnt a mistake and was his right.

    LikesBarthax liked this post
  15. sdwyer138's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake



    jared's six in one is a very weird corner case that while a corner case does come up from time to time. to be fair it happened pre tgsap as well. I remember ryan genno submitted to some gameboy game that was listed on both a compliation and individually -- i dont mind naming him cause this isnt shaming him he did nothing wrong. but he might be able to tell you the game name as hes more likely to remember his sub than i am. my only point bringing him up is to show the compilation issue existed before as well.

    jared's compilation issue might be a case where he just didnt realize the issue and so a true error is in. however he may have wanted the two distinguished. i believe barthax for example made some near duplicate tracks with the only difference being for dancing games camera isnt required (if i'm wrong on this barthax you must at least know what i'm referencing), that wasnt a mistake and was his right.


    I'm not saying either Jared or Ryan were doing anything nefarious. But the fact of the matter is, those tracks are in the wrong place and do not follow precent on how just about all other same system compilations go and had there been any level of checks and balances or community involvement, it could have been avoided and set up correctly.

  16. SincerelyFranny's Avatar

    Hi @swaggers ,

    I'd like to address some of your concerns....

    THE RULES OVERALL - It is mentioned in multiple places across the website that video evidence is required. On every submission form, there is a hoverable question mark that provides links to submission help pages. Additionally, to my knowledge, the submission form won't even progress if you do not choose a video to upload or provide a vzaar link. If you can pinpoint a submission that got submitted without it, can you please sent it our way so we can look into what might have happened.

    SEE A SYSTEM YES OR NO - I will have to get back to you on this one. I've had multiple conversations on this one. Universal TG and Universal Platform Rules were something that Dave and I had talked a lot. There is definitely a need for a visible set of universal Rules. This would also apply to the topic above. Perhaps we can get it added to the top every submission sooner rather than later. I will need to talk to @Jace Hall to see if or how this can be prioritized.

    RULES OFFICIALS - I am going to go out on a limb and assume this is an issue with me changing rules quickly that are brought up in the Scoreboard Error thread. Please know, that anytime a user makes a request that I am not tending to that request blindly. I research all requests that are made if they require a rule amendment that requires more than simple typo fixes. If I have question and require evidence as to why this change is necessary, I always ask for that publically.

    HISTORICAL DATA - Filtering is something that has been on a list of features we would like to bring to TG for a long time. The lack of new feature addition is solely due to lack of resources.

    ESI - This is a @Jace Hall topic.

    BILLY - Also a Jace topic. However, if I were to guess how he would reply, it would have to do with building out a wiki page. While I understand that Billy does bring traffic to the site, but due to the known controversy, we will need to find a way that informs users without highlighting him... but is also easily accessible.

    CERTS / MERCH - Both would require us to allocate money and resources that we cannot pull from other areas at this time. I know it's extremely unfortunate, but we have to make sacrifices to keep TG up and running as the free service it is. The revenue made from certificates and merch would not generate enough to justify their means. We need to fix the website and grow a user base before we can think about trying this again. I am very sorry. I also hope for this in the future.

    ThanksBarthax thanked this post
  17. SincerelyFranny's Avatar

    Please know everybody... I hear your concerns.
    Many of them I share with you.

    I am doing the best I can within my limits to make as many people satisfied. :(

    Likesnads, Barthax liked this post
  18. swaggers's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by SincerelyFranny

    Hi @swaggers ,

    I'd like to address some of your concerns....

    THE RULES OVERALL - It is mentioned in multiple places across the website that video evidence is required. On every submission form, there is a hoverable question mark that provides links to submission help pages. Additionally, to my knowledge, the submission form won't even progress if you do not choose a video to upload or provide a vzaar link. If you can pinpoint a submission that got submitted without it, can you please sent it our way so we can look into what might have happened.

    Sorry I just really went through the first page and this is a quote: "The "Video Upload" field is where you upload any recorded performance video that you may have of your score performance. "

    That doesn't scream it's a requirement. But you do say it is a requirement on the next page of instructions. Just didn't get far enough into the rules today as I thought I remembered that it wasn't a 100%. Thanks for clearing it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by SincerelyFranny

    RULES OFFICIALS - I am going to go out on a limb and assume this is an issue with me changing rules quickly that are brought up in the Scoreboard Error thread. Please know, that anytime a user makes a request that I am not tending to that request blindly. I research all requests that are made if they require a rule amendment that requires more than simple typo fixes. If I have question and require evidence as to why this change is necessary, I always ask for that publically.

    This wasn't aimed at you at all but at others.


  19. swaggers's Avatar

    Going through the rules for the first time in a long time. Can anyone say when this was made a official rule?

    "System boot up and game application launch/startup should be shown for Arcade and Console platforms in any evidence video provided."

    I don't remember this as a 100% requirement.

    LikesGarrett Holland liked this post
  20. SincerelyFranny's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by swaggers


    Sorry I just really went through the first page and this is a quote: "The "Video Upload" field is where you upload any recorded performance video that you may have of your score performance. "

    That doesn't scream it's a requirement. But you do say it is a requirement on the next page of instructions. Just didn't get far enough into the rules today as I thought I remembered that it wasn't a 100%. Thanks for clearing it up.


    This wasn't aimed at you at all but at others.



    I needs to be more obvious as a requirement. I will give you that one. I will see what I can do about that.
    It simply does not progress... It needs to tell users why and send them to helpful resources.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us