Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
By resyncing your input to sync on a desyncing core that bizhawk uses.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Radiant wrote:
So yes vote, and I'm in favor of obsolescence (although you could make a case for re-tagging the older movie as "100%").
That's a very good point. Even if the current movie can't be considered full completion due to some probable minor incompatibility (worst case scenario), it can still theoretically be changed to be true full completion, hunting down another entry in the 500 list (the right way).
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Okay let's go.
feos posts a picture of a Venn diagram describing how some kinds of play relate to each other.
The post has a subject:
I have no idea how to draw such stuff properly, but...
The diagram shows subsets of play relevant to the prior discussion: superplay, tool-assisted play, and speedrunning.
There is a Wikipedia article about Venn diagrams. It says:
A Venn diagram (also called primary diagram, set diagram or logic diagram) is a diagram that shows all possible logical relations between a finite collection of different sets.
A Venn diagram in which the area of each shape is proportional to the number of elements it contains is called an area-proportional or scaled Venn diagram.
Venn diagrams normally comprise overlapping circles. The interior of the circle symbolically represents the elements of the set, while the exterior represents elements that are not members of the set. For instance, in a two-set Venn diagram, one circle may represent the group of all wooden objects, while another circle may represent the set of all tables. The overlapping region or intersection would then represent the set of all wooden tables. Shapes other than circles can be employed as shown below by Venn's own higher set diagrams. Venn diagrams do not generally contain information on the relative or absolute sizes (cardinality) of sets; i.e. they are schematic diagrams.
The image shows us that tool-assisted speedrunning is a subset of tool-assisted superplay.
Warp says:
feos, that picture is rather hilarious given the fact that probably about 95 to 99% of TASes published on the site focus solely on completing the game as fast as possible (sometimes with side goals, which still have to be completed as fast as possible). It's the non-speed-oriented "superplays" that are in the significant minority. Yet the sizes of these two areas are completely reversed in your picture.
By replying in this manner, Warp shows that he has hallucinated a set called "the site" on that diagram, as well as some "focus" of that hallucinated site.
By replaying in this manner, Warp also shows that he believes that right after "having no idea how to draw such stuff properly", the author of the diagram managed to draw a scaled Venn diagram instead of the more common one.
By believing in that, Warp shows that for him it is theoretically possible to measure:
a) all play in the universe,
b) all superplay in the universe,
c) all tool-assisted play in the universe,
d) all speedrunning in the universe,
e) all cheated play in the universe,
f) all tool-assisted superplay in the universe,
g) all tool-assisted speedrunning in the universe, and
h) all real-time speedrunning in the universe
all at once, despite the fact that they are all abstractuncountable entities. As in, he uses to say "my brother recorded 7 speedrunnings yesterday".
Maybe it's not obvious that they are uncountable nouns, and "speedrunning" doesn't even exist in OxfordDictionaries or Dictionary.Cambridge. But to a sensible human being it is obvious that the word "speedrunning" is derived from the word "running". And both OxfordDictionaries and Dictionary.Cambridgeclearly define it as uncountable.
Warp resumes with this:
I swear I'm not nitpicking in the least when I say this: I honestly and genuinely can't understand why some people seem to be so obsessed in maintaining that these are "superplays", not "speedruns", and seem to pretend like actual speed-oriented playthroughs are simply a small minority of all published runs. What's so shameful in calling this a speedrunning site, which sometimes also publishes non-speed-oriented playthroughs?
Now, in addition to the hallucinated "the site" he has seen on the picture, he visualizes "published runs" on it.
By saying the above he admits that he has never seen sets being used to describe something. Because from the picture he so criticizes it is obvious, that "speedrun" is a subset of "superplay", therefore it is possible to refer to something as "superplay, not speedrun", or, "superplay, speedrun", but it's impossible to refer to something "speedrun, not superplay", because there's no set where that would be true on that picture.
Another hallucinated entity now is "shame", which clearly has no relation with reality described by the picture in question.
Warp proceeds with this:
The vast majority of people out there know this as a speedrunning site. It looks to me that only a few people here adamantly maintain otherwise, for reasons unknown.
Zero relation to the picture found, can be ignored.
feos says:
That's exactly what I predicted as your reply. Nice job.
That prediction has been made on IRC to express expectation that Warp will not pay any attention to the actual argument behind the picture, but will instead nitpick about the incorrect proportions of perfect circles and their fractions produced by overlaps. The message behind the picture happens to match what Nach independently said while that picture was being made:
The key point in why this is important: Speedruns are a subset of Superplays, and we want to keep publishing the entire superset.
The fact that such predictions happen to be accurate means that Warp is predictable, lacks common sense, lacks understanding of the English language, lacks understanding of the topic at hand, and uses to cheat in arguments where logic is supposed to be used.
After seeing that he is fully predictable, Warp decided to post a reply:
Warp wrote:
Since you didn't even try to defend yourself
This shows that topics are not being discussed when Warp participates in a thread; the only thing that is being discussed is personalities of his opponents. feos didn't need to defend himself, because he has not been attacked, and even if he was, that would hold zero value in a discussion, where logic and objective facts are supposed to be used.
Warp proceeds with this:
I'll take that as a concession that you chose those two areas in the picture deliberately to be misleading (most probably to elicit such a response from me).
As discussed above, it is completely impossible to measure appropriate sizes of perfect circles representing how uncountable abstract entities overlap. This impossibility leads Warp to the conclusion that this impossibility was deliberately crafted in the real world by feos, only "to be misleading", and also probably to provoke a specific kind of illogical and absurd reply from Warp.
By posting such a conclusion Warp admits that he believes that feos is capable of manipulating the objective reality of the universe in order to influence Warp's way of making posts.
Warp resumes:
In other words, there was no honesty in you making that picture.
feos's honesty has been shown in finest details on the same page as that picture. Driving principles behind his contribution to TASVideos can be understood from that post. Those principles are absolutely incompatible with dishonesty.
Visualizing feos's dishonesty in things directly connected to TASing, Warp attacks value feos sees in TASVideos and TASing in general. By choosing to attack things that feos values in TASVideos and TASing, Warp admits that he is incapable of having a discussion that's free from personal accusations and filled with objective facts and logic, neither is he interested in having such a discussion.
Warp concludes:
Btw, I also love how a member of the site staff is taunting/mocking me, right in the thread where I criticize some members of the site staff for doing exactly that.
By stating things like this Warp once again demonstrates that he believes that objective reality is under heavy manipulative pressure from feos, with a simple goal of "taunting/mocking" Warp. If one can be "taunted/mocked" by a Venn diagram that describes objective reality and has zero relation to personal issues, then it is a dangerous situation where one can also be mocked by a table or taunted by a pudding.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Wow. Your whole life has less honesty than my picture.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
I voted No on this. I'm well aware that the current run has terrible rating, and I don't know why I moved it to Moons in 2012, therefore they can hardly co-exist. But this run defeats the entire purpose of playing the game, it doesn't beat a single level, doesn't even try to beat the final boss. This run's goal is literally "fastest death" in every room. I consider it vaultable, but would be really sad if the current run got obsoleted by this.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Warp wrote:
feos, that picture is rather hilarious given the fact that probably about 95 to 99% of TASes published on the site focus solely on completing the game as fast as possible (sometimes with side goals, which still have to be completed as fast as possible). It's the non-speed-oriented "superplays" that are in the significant minority. Yet the sizes of these two areas are completely reversed in your picture.
That's exactly what I predicted as your reply. Nice job.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Yes. And as mentioned, other types of major skip glitches can require other branch names, but indeed this movie class should never go to the branch labels as is (because it's not descriptive).
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Does anyone have a screenshot suggestion. Please!
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Major skip glitch is a movie class describing a phenomenon that was used in "glitched" branches initially. About 40% of the viewers liked it that way. Another 40% said that it's not descriptive. So we came up with something more descriptive.
First of all, the very term "major skip glitch" was used because it was already common to use the term "major skip" in the RTA world. But that alone doesn't tell anything about glitches such skips originate from. So we used "glitch" to indicate fundamental difference from intended major skips.
Major skip commonly means that some huge chunk of gameplay is skipped entirely. Independently from each other, TAS people and RTA people used to have branches with and without major skips. It is obvious that it's impossible to strictly define the term "major" here. So I added a mention to the movie class description that movies using such techniques skip something like 50%+ of the run that avoids the techniques.
It is also important to know that when 2 runs are judged to be published alongside each other, they are required to represent compelling differences in how they are played. No strict definitions again. But when all other aspects are factored in, we usually end up with a branch that we used to call "glitched" (and RTA people describe it "with major skips") along side a branch that avoids such glitch (or a set of glitches). They indeed have significant differences in gameplay and in final time. In most obvious cases it's more than 50% of the movie.
"Game end glitch", "warp glitch", "SRAM glitch" are branch names. Whenever it's not possible to classify the glitch, we invent a name for it or borrow the name it already has. Like I said, it's important to understand what is accomplished: major chunk of the game is skipped by using some glitch. Avoiding that glitch results in a completely different movie that is usually accepted as a separate branch. This difference is described by the word "glitch" in the branch label: it means we are looking at something fundamentally glitched that isn't even trying to look like regular play.
When the word "warps" (or "warpless") is used as a branch name, it describes intended gameplay element. When the branch name is "warp glitch", it describes unintended gameplay element. I don't understand how it can be confusing to anyone.
klmz wrote:
So "major skip glitch" = "game end glitch" + "warp glitch"? It would be weird to me that "glitching-warping to the end" is not a "warp glitch".
EDIT: And then hypothetically:
* You skip a large chunk of levels with a double-damage-boosting trick in midair, and it's not a "warp glitch".
* Later you start over and skip the same large chunk of levels by the same with a double-damage-boosting trick in midair, this time using a glitched out healing item between the two boosts to survive from dying due to skipping an armor earlier in the game, and now it's a "warp glitch".
That would sound kind of... inconsistent (my vocabulary is limited).
It only makes sense to compare it to a run that avoids this technique, even if it doesn't yet exist. "Warp glitch" doesn't describe game engine mechanics, it describes the result: the glitched major skip. And it skips to something other than game end.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Nach wrote:
As Bisqwit wrote:
As for objectivity, the thing is that we aim for a subjective measure: entertainment. Entertainment is not a mathematical formula. It cannot be objectively measured; it needs a number of subjective components, the human audience.
Speed, etc. are just devices to create entertainment. Even though speed can be measured accurately, entertainment cannot. This is a fact, and we have to live with it. Our method of judging that is a variation of something called "consensus". Your mileage may vary.
And from our old Why and How page:
Our primary goals are to create art and provide entertainment.
A movie is entertaining when it is:
* Interesting (not slow, boring, or repetitive)
* Surprising (does the unexpected)
* Skillful (handles awkward situations efficiently and creatively)
and our main goal is to create movies that are beautiful to watch.
I only joined in 2010, but this is what made me fall in love with tasing. I was very naive and excited, but some time later I came up with a page describing how to make art while tasing:
http://tasvideos.org/TasingGuide/TASArt.html
I've put all the best knowledge, feelings and ideas into that page, and some people that have created top-notch tases expressed that that page inspires them.
It isn't about a page. It is about what you feel and what you end up doing as a result. Creativity and art has always been praised here. But technicality and research have been praised just as much.
What I'm trying to say, some people keep this excitement over the years, they just grow, and let their hobby grow with them, reaching new levels of skill and inspiration. Standing ovations at ADGQ 2014 TAS Block, is it a clickbait that keeps repeating the same thing over and over? No. It is a revolution in people's mindsets. How many people remember annoyances between RTA and TAS communities? I also remember how RTA people started pulling off TAS strats in real time. It was also a revolution in people's minds. Nowadays TAS Block is a major highlight of a GDQ event, people wait for it and most of the time they love it.
On the other side, there are people that have lost this inspiration. They don't feel any soul behind TAS art anymore. It's sad, but it is more sad when they feel like pushing for some ideas that are impossible to implement on a huge scale.
I've been dealing with controversial cases for all these years, in some way or another, with different level of absurd involved. I happened to come up with ideas that have worked for all the conflicting camps. And I can assure you that it is not possible to enforce subjective and arbitrary ideas like absolute and objective policies. It does not work, it never did, it never will. No one will be happy if we start doing that, and we will not.
It is only possible to enforce something that can be objectively defined and evaluated. Yet it only makes sense to enforce it if it encourages productivity. Want to fix some policy that is imperfect? Make a thread dedicated to that problem specifically, and get ready to dig into the problem for as long as needed, as deep as needed. Stating that things just don't work anymore is not just unhelpful, it's disrespectful to all the people that are still inspired themselves to handle all the jobs, and happen to inspire others that contribute their works. If you're getting old, it's fine. If you're being counter-productive, it's a problem. Because it resolves nothing and makes nobody happier.
This quote describes how we deal with things that can not be enforced objectively. We rely on how much the users have been entertained. I listed a bunch of other criteria earlier in this thread, but they were ignored due to selective reading.
Regarding RTA people. Speedruns.com is a site dedicated to record keeping. They do not care how many absurd and ridiculous categories people happen to speedrun. Because they do not have to handle them the way we do. TASVideos has always been about publishing the best pieces of tool-assisted work. It will stick to this principle. It will keep its standards.
Think of how much effort is required to manage a community that allows you to verify and publish your own run, simply by adding a record entry (and optionally a video). Compare it to all the job we do for every submission, in order to only publish the best ones.
Of course it doesn't mean that we artificially raise the barrier to only cherry pick the best of the best. For record keeping we have Vault, it stores all the any% and 100% runs whose goal can be clearly defined and that have speedrun value even to minorities. For old-stile runs that aim for speed or entertainment, but nonetheless look impressive and superb, we have Moons. Moons is very close to old TASVideos, where boring speed records were rejected (because only the best examples were appreciated). But when tiers were introduced, we expanded this in order to publish more branches that are just as impressive. Old TASVideos required to keep branches to minimum. We allowed for more branches, but we test them quite a bit before accepting, to make sure the standard doesn't downgrade.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Do you have actual examples?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Is anyone planning to work on this anytime soon? Rumor about scissorman skip hasn't been confirmed so far.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
When I first suggested the term "warp glitch" I used this logic:
- We're getting more and more runs that skip directly to the game end using some glitch. Let's call it "game end glitch".
- What about runs that use glitches to skip very far ahead, but not straight to the game end? Let's calls it "warp glitch".
I don't think it matters how you skip to there precisely. You arrive to a point you weren't supposed to visit that soon, and it's not a game end. Even if it happens consecutively instead of instantly, you still do skip to there. So you effectively warp. The key here is not whether physics engine is used or ignored, but the result of arriving to some completely unrelated area. Does it make sense?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
It would have worked on win7 if MS didn't decide to kill all the needed features eventually. Warepire didn't feel like developing for a dead platform (win7 isn't officially dead yet, but it's the first candidate).
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Nah, this project went through a lot of brainstorming but never left experimental phase, because win10 destroyed all the principles behind it, effectively making hourglass-like approaches useless.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Kill screen in this game is the same of on the NES original. Same reason, slightly different memory addresses. Legend: you only have 4 seconds to beat level 132 (count starts from 0). It's not possible, you die.
Language: asm
; Set up level timer, called before every level
; level counter - how many loops you've completed (shown under L)
; level timer - remaining time (shown under BONUS)
$CB8A: A4 54 LDY $54 ; load level counter into Y register
$CB8C: C8 INY ; increment Y register
...
$CB94: A9 80 LDA #$80 ; load 0x80 into A register
$CB96: 88 DEY ; decrement Y register
$CB97: C0 04 CPY #$04 ; perform Y - 4
$CB99: 10 03 BPL $CB9E ; if result is positive, skip to $CB9E
$CB9B: B9 07 C2 LDA $C207,Y ; otherwise load value from memory into A register
$CB9E: 85 2E STA $2E ; set from A register into level timer
If level counter is from 0 to 3, the game will read remaining time from memory. If level counter is from 4 to 127+4, the game will force remaining time 8000. If level counter is from 127+4+1 to 255, the game will read remaining time from memory it wasn't supposed to read it from. This is because NES CPU 6502 uses signed numbers when preforming comparison. So starting at level 123 the game reads level timer from memory again, and it offsets the source address farther from what it's supposed to base on - $C207.
Here's the dump of that memory area, it is inside ROM:
Level counter 132 makes it read remaining time from $C28B which is 4. Greatest possible level counter value is 255, it makes it read from $C306, which is 0. You can see a few more 0 values in-between, so even if you cheat your speed or something, you just instantly die in some levels.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
It saddens me that you repeatedly ignore the fact that all the needed methods of making sure it's the right decision were used before officially establishing it. It saddens me that you ignore the actual intellectual work we do to handle judgments properly. It saddens me that you blindly call our reasons lame excuses. It saddens me that you invent arbitrary requirements and cargo cults. It saddens me that you switch to personal accusations. It saddens me that you have zero arguments regarding the actual topic at hand.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
However, I should tell you that I have never seen any serious institution that gives someone simultaneously the power to enforce and change the rules without some due process, which you refer later as "those formalities". You can of course disagree, indeed a member seems to be discontent with democratic ideas. In any case, if you don't sympathize with it either, I suggest that you specify how seriously you take your own rules in the Front Page, it would save the members the trouble to figure out how things really work.
We are able to discuss things before enforcing and changing. And we are able to express disagreement with how the rules were changed. The discussion did happen. No disagreement was present before, during, or after the rule change. What else do you want from people who are able to discuss things before, while, and after changing the rules?
p4wn3r wrote:
As I said previously, it was my expectation for any place that wishes to be taken seriously, which I assumed were commonplace. Also, most of the time it's the practice of formalizing that stops abuses. For example, I was in a student union where there were elections, and it was required that the exact date and time of the election should be published in a given manner that made it easy for all students to see, and that it should stay there for a given period, because there were cases where the guys in power would suddenly say that the election was the next day at 2 in the morning, and only his friends would go to vote. After the formalism, it stopped.
How many cases of judge power abuse at tasvideos can you list?
p4wn3r wrote:
From the community, why not? If the input does not matter, why don't you request that the Workbench be abolished, while we're at it? Just tell people to send emails to the judges and things show up published.
Quote input pieces that didn't matter.
p4wn3r wrote:
Abscence of disagreement does not imply agreement.
Absence of ice-cream doesn't imply elephants. Quote disagreement that you evidenced regarding sanity of the updated rules.
p4wn3r wrote:
And also, could you clarify to me why you think discussions in IRC are a transparent way of discussing rule changes?
Because it is a way to collect all the relevant staff members in one place and discuss things in real time. And you are probably underestimating discussion abilities of other members that are present on IRC. The #tasvideos IRC channel is a public and transparent discussion environment by its nature.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
The issue is: a judge does not change the law, never. This violates the principle of separation of powers.
Is TASVideos suddenly a country?
p4wn3r wrote:
What I have think you should have done is state that the current text is not appropriate and would make you cast a bad decision, and request the change explicitly. Then, only after theach following discussion, if the staff approves in a transparent way, give the verdict.
Is it just your thoughts, or some approved set of meta-rules TASVideos has been obeying for all these years? Because from what I've seen, this is exactly what happened, just without imposing all those formalities you pretend we have.
p4wn3r wrote:
and request the change explicitly
Request it from whom? Moth is an admin and a senior judge.
p4wn3r wrote:
I read a bit of the Math Blaster thread and it's the exact opposite of what you're implying it is.
Essentially, a judge decides something and people protest after many pages demanding to reconsider the rule. Then the rules get changed, the dicussion is acknowledged in the change, the decision retracted and the judge casts a new verdict. No problems in the process.
It took so long to fix the rules because there was disagreement among staff members (and among users). Here, no disagreement was present. Do you disagree with the updated rules? Do you think the movie would have been judged differently by the older rules?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
You haven't been around since we added the tier system, have you?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
