thegamer1185's Feed

thegamer1185
04-25-2020 at 06:23 AM
16 Comments
Rate this Entry

Submissions being accepted.

I'm get that everyone wants quick adjudication, but some of these submissions aren't even in the queue for a day. I think there is going to be a lot of mistakes and unacceptable submissions getting through with the new TGSAP set up and it's going to hurt the leaderboards more than help them. We wanted accuracy, not how quickly things went through. We had that.

@Jace Hall , I'm all for a little speedier and am grateful for the changes being made, I think the TGSAP system should have stayed "almost" the same. The accuracy was so good even with blind voters. Now submissions are hardly even staying around long enough to vote on, you have to view them on the accepted area. This is coming from a guy who is on here almost every night. Just bringing it up to think about.

I really don't think we were losing people because submissions sat in the queue. As @sdwyer138 said, if they sit in the queue that long there is probably something not right with the evidence package...and some just get passed over in time.

ThanksJJT_Defender thanked this post
Comments
  1. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    I don't think it matters. The database is admin's playground, anyway, so who cares what goes into it?

  2. thegamer1185's Avatar

    Some of us do. Do it for those that do care and don't worry about the ones who dont...because they don't care.

  3. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Good philosophy, but I'm more concerned about practicality. Who cares enough to sift through the growing mass of accepted submissions, checking for invalid records? Anybody?

    Likesthegamer1185, lexmark liked this post
  4. thegamer1185's Avatar

    That's my whole point. The slower acceptance rate IMO was a much safer, less hassle approach for later. Accuracy of leaderboards vs faster adjudication. I'm good with a little tweeking here or there to see what happens, this adjustment seems a bit to much.

    LikesMyOwnWorstEnemy, lexmark, Ragequit liked this post
  5. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock

    Good philosophy, but I'm more concerned about practicality. Who cares enough to sift through the growing mass of accepted submissions, checking for invalid records? Anybody?

    Answer: The same people who cared enough to adjudicate and vote on the submissions to begin with.

    The bottom line is that members can dispute any adjudicated score in the database and then supply the evidence they need to support their dispute claim. If the claim is valid, the score will be removed.

    Show that a score is not valid, or don't - but arbitrarily raising the conjecture of an overall degraded adjudicated score validity may be a premature position to take.

    Scores are still being adjudicated via the TGSAP process. People are weighing in. If they are making adjudication mistakes, it will surface, scores will get removed and CR will be adjusted as is the norm. It will equalize over time as needed.

    Blind voting can get penalized much more frequently in this tighter process, so it may discourage that behavior.

    Thanksadmin staff thanked this post
    Updated 04-26-2020 at 12:54 AM by Jace Hall
  6. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    The bottom line is that members can dispute any adjudicated score in the database and then supply the evidence they need to support their dispute claim. If the claim is valid, the score will be removed.

    Scores are still being adjudicated via the TGSAP process. People are weighing in. If they are making adjudication mistakes, it will surface, scores will get removed and CR will be adjusted as is the norm. It will equalize over time as needed.
    .
    I have shown many times that this is completely untrue, and will be revisiting the subject, next week. Every time you claim that scores are removed because of successful disputes, I will call you out for your BS. The fundamental difference between you and I is that, when I say something, I present evidence which proves the truth of it. You just talk. We'll see how much you have to say, when I once again illustrate how much of a joke the CR and dispute systems are.
    Updated 04-26-2020 at 12:56 AM by Almighty Dreadlock
  7. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock


    .
    I have shown many times that this is completely untrue, and will be revisiting the subject, next week. Every time you claim that scores are removed because of successful disputes, I will call you out for your BS. The fundamental difference between you and I is that, when I say something, I present evidence which proves the truth of it. You just talk. We'll see how much you have to say, when I once again illustrate how much of a joke the CR and dispute systems are.

    How about you stop talking and instead, show and prove. That would be great. Always happy to improve where we can.

    Last time you and I discussed something you completely failed to successfully demonstrate your point and literally threw a tantrum. I hope the conversation can be more productive this time.

    If you have an issue with an adjudicated score, feel free to dispute it, provide evidence and then it will get evaluated and removed if necessary.

    Updated 04-26-2020 at 01:10 AM by Jace Hall
  8. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    Last time you and I discussed something you completely failed to successfully demonstrate your point and literally threw a tantrum. I hope the conversation can be more productive this time.
    .
    Last time we "discussed something", all you did was post a screenshot of what somebody else said. It's clear to me that you have no interest in "productive conversation", but we shall see if your attitude improves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    If you have an issue with an adjudicated score, feel free to dispute it, provide evidence and then it will get evaluated and removed if necessary.
    .
    You have tampered with my account, in order to stop me from raising disputes. Don't feign ignorance. Anyway, in one week, I will once again highlight the uselessness of your vaunted dispute and CR systems.
  9. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock


    .
    Last time we "discussed something", all you did was post a screenshot of what somebody else said. It's clear to me that you have no interest in "productive conversation", but we shall see if your attitude improves.


    .
    You have tampered with my account, in order to stop me from raising disputes. Don't feign ignorance. Anyway, in one week, I will once again highlight the uselessness of your vaunted dispute and CR systems.

    I have not "tampered" with anything related to your account. You are making false accusations. However, if you would like me to make your accusation accurate and show you what it looks like when I tamper with your account, I would be happy to do so.

    Looking forward to your "highlight" - hopefully it will be useful so improvements can be made - but i have to ask, if you feel that all this is so useless, why are you here? There must be no "use" to this site for you since you have deemed it useless.

    And why do I have to wait a week? Show me now. Or is it your plan to try to manipulate the system to prove a point? I wouldn't suggest attempting that.


    Updated 04-26-2020 at 01:29 AM by Jace Hall
  10. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    I have not "tampered" with anything related to your account. You are making false accusations. However, if you would like me to make your accusation accurate and show you what it looks like when I tamper with your account, I would be happy to do so.
    .
    I am not making "accusations". Feel free to check my account, you will see that it is not permitted to raise disputes, despite having a more than high enough CR. This indicates tampering, unless you expect me to believe that it's just some rare bug, which happened to affect the one account which was raising more disputes than any other. And, if you want to run some power trip on my account, don't bother threatening, just go ahead & do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    Looking forward to your "highlight" - hopefully it will be useful so improvements can be made - but i have to ask, if you feel that all this is so useless, why are you here? There must be no "use" to this site for you since you have deemed it useless.
    .
    Whether or not "improvements" are made is entirely up to you and your staff. I haven't seen any, so far, despite repeatedly addressing the problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall
    And why do I have to wait a week? Show me now. Or is it your plan to try to manipulate the system to prove a point? I wouldn't suggest doing that.
    .
    I wanted to let a full month elapse, to give admin staff time to fix the problem. If you would like to know about it, beforehand, refer to this post, and the ones preceding it. Rest assured that I have no interest in manipulating any of your website's systems, nor do I have any need to. I suggest you save that paranoia for the coronavirus.
  11. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    Just making a specific note that this submission is in the Accepted archive. Anyone can verfiy this fact by following this link. Even if this changes, within the next week, it shall remain relevant.

    Also noting the dispute, which was successful, and so should have prompted the permanent removal of the above record, has the correct "Original Adjudication" link.

    Updated 04-26-2020 at 02:40 PM by Almighty Dreadlock
  12. thegamer1185's Avatar

    I guess I'm not understanding the logic Jace. Having submissions go through faster will catch more blind voters? I'll post a link to my wall thread that will prove my point perfectly. I specifically made a submission and wrote "test submission" on the message thread. The video never even had me playing the game, yet one person commented "Accept", and it got accepted...and it sat in the queue for months. Now we have submissions clearing in a day, with that same thing happening. Im all for figuring out a way to speed things up. This just seems like it will create a less accurate leaderboard, more work for adjudicators to clean the leaderboards and more work for TG to handle the dispute decisions.

    I guess I don't understand the mind set behind it. Slower adjudication process was batting almost 99.995% or something (whatever it was when I listed about it awhile back, you commented in that thread as well). It was awesome!! Why would you want to possibly change that by making things quicker with literally .005% to gain and 99.995% to lose?

    I could possibly be missing your point with your initial response, but the system was damn near perfect...and generally the faster something works, there are more likely to be mistakes when it comes to a group of people making a decision. Many of the more active people seem to agree with me with the likes this received.

    If I may propose the slightest of tweeks. Have submissions sit a mandatory of 2 weeks, or even 1 week. Just as a fail safe. I think people would be fine with that amount of time for things to sit and then clear through. That's still very quick compared to the average time things used to stay in the queue (months) and I see it drastically reducing mistakes. Faster which seems to be the wanted effect, more than likely more accurate which is the most important effect.

    The site is working much better and that is fantastic. I hope you are correct and everything keeps staying this accurate. Stay healthy everybody!

    ThanksMyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post
    LikesMyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post
    Updated 04-26-2020 at 07:55 AM by thegamer1185
  13. thegamer1185's Avatar

    Seriously, that post took 2 seconds to process. The site is fucking awesome now!!!

    Thanksadmin staff thanked this post
    LikesJace Hall liked this post
  14. The Evener's Avatar

    I'm not sure the updated TGSAP algorithm has been around long enough to conclude that faster is negative outcome. How do we know that the older algorithm provided more accurate results? Length of time in the queue for the majority of submissions I voted on wasn't tied to controversy - well described, evidence based submissions sat around for what seemed like a long time for what was a straight up approval.

    If the fear is that things will go through too fast to catch mistakes based on blind voters, well I can imagine a similar dilemma with past submissions that sat around for some period of time where one or two people confirmed they voted 'yes' by posting in the thread. In other words, even under the old algorithm, not every submission received the same type of scrutiny from the same group of people - scrutiny can only be based on the diligence of the participants in any given submission, whether old or new algorithm.

    I'm willing to look at the added benefits of the updated algorithm - why have straight forward, evidence based submissions stick around for several days or weeks in the queue? Why not have a submission process where users can get the positive feedback of an approved record earlier? Whether one cares or not, I do think that stretched-out approval timelines for submissions did have a more negative than positive impact for new members, and the goal of the site for a host of reasons is to grow the membership.

    If the fear is that blind voters with outsized CR will blind vote and push through submissions before anyone else has time to scrutinize them correctly, again, we're talking about number of eyeballs on any given submission, there are scads of approved scores in the past where one or two people confirmed their "yes" votes, they just hung around (sometimes for a while) before getting through. In other words, just as before the overall accuracy of an approved submission will rest with the members who voted yes, I don't believe that these submissions received greater silent scrutiny with additional time in the queue, scrutiny that we fear might be lost under the new algorithm. And as before, objecting members can avail themselves of the dispute review if they conclude that a submission they reviewed was wrongly pushed through.

    If there's the fear is that this situation puts the onus on TG members to use the dispute review to correct mistakes that would have been caught with a slower algorithm, again I fail to see how that's the case given that some blind voters have outsized CR regardless if the queue is slow or faster, their "influence" in possibly pushing through a bad submission isn't negated if the submission hangs around longer, particularly on titles where only a few members participated in the review, or at least conveyed this impression by publicly posting their votes.

    That all said, maybe I'm wrong. But let's build up some data around approvals with the new algorithm to scrutinize against the old one before turning back.

    ThanksJace Hall thanked this post
  15. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock


    .
    I am not making "accusations". Feel free to check my account, you will see that it is not permitted to raise disputes, despite having a more than high enough CR. This indicates tampering, unless you expect me to believe that it's just some rare bug, which happened to affect the one account which was raising more disputes than any other. And, if you want to run some power trip on my account, don't bother threatening, just go ahead & do it.


    .
    Whether or not "improvements" are made is entirely up to you and your staff. I haven't seen any, so far, despite repeatedly addressing the problem.


    .
    I wanted to let a full month elapse, to give admin staff time to fix the problem. If you would like to know about it, beforehand, refer to this post, and the ones preceding it. Rest assured that I have no interest in manipulating any of your website's systems, nor do I have any need to. I suggest you save that paranoia for the coronavirus.

    AD - I was just informed that apparently your ability to file a dispute was revoked by admin sometime ago due to a contention that took place.

    I was unaware of this.

    I am having your ability to dispute restored.

    Please use your best reasonable judgment when applying the tool.

    I will take a look at the issues that you are pointing out above and see if/how we can best address them.



  16. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Almighty Dreadlock

    Just making a specific note that this submission is in the Accepted archive. Anyone can verfiy this fact by following this link. Even if this changes, within the next week, it shall remain relevant.

    Also noting the dispute, which was successful, and so should have prompted the permanent removal of the above record, has the correct "Original Adjudication" link.

    This dispute is dated in 2017 - so yes, it is possible there may be places where the back-end service failed to perform the removal earlier on in the dispute system implementation and was missed. @admin staff is looking into it.

Join us