While I see no reason to not publish an improvement of the game, provided it's not a "pride improvement" (However you'll define that), when the game is already in the workbench, I realise that there is an abnormally large amount of time and work laid down to just improve movies by mere seconds or frames.
I'm not referring to one specific movie in this case, but it has happened many times before.
What I can expect people would oppose themselves against is small unnoticable improvements taking up space in the workbench and being unneccessary work for the publishers and encoders. This however is of course up to the people encoding and publishing the movies in question.
With the old voting question "Did you enjoy watching this movie", it could be justified as such that if you watch a movie you feel like you've already seen, this refers to very small improvements of movies including barely or no new tricks, the newer question of "Should this movie be published" is a trickier one to justify a no vote because of not enjoying watching a movie you feel like you've watched before.
In either case it's very possible to say that you might not feel like the work involved in publishing a small unnoticable improvement to a movie is worth the effort it takes. Of course you would have to be consequent in this and not just apply it to games you don't like, or have very little relation to. Including of course the Mario/Metroid/Zelda games.
On the other hand this might be advocating the original state of the game. Thinking that maybe zipping, BLJ glitches, out of boundries glitches and warp glitches are better left for demonstrational versions of the game and that you should exclude these glitches in runs to better suit them for people who are not that into the games.
This is of course highly subjective, and in drawing a line of which glitches should or should not be allowed is of course impossible to do without stating an opinion based on the very situation or game you're looking at for the moment.
There's no doubt that there are alot of competative players on this site, that would like to hold a record for a more popular game, and that there are those who would rather try and make a game not previously TAS'ed interesting to watch with newer glitches, routes or tricks.
This obviously leads to different camps of players who value optimization higher than entertainment, and vice versa.
The term "TAS" is a very vague one, and it can be defended as such to call it a "Tool-assisted Speedrun", and that it should be as optimized as possible, therefore justifying another couple of frames of improvement off a more or less popular run.
It can also be interpreted as an acronym for "Tool-assisted Superplay", meaning you should try and bring something new, innovative and highly entertaining for the viewer to watch.
In this you might feel it's more important that a new movie includes precise movement, cool tricks and playaround elements (Not necessarily a trade-off to speed) than breaking the game into a five minute glitchfest, as I'm sure many would refer to it as.
These are both to me very relevant opinions, and as such they should both be respected as valid.
What you're going to have to remember as you post on this forum, is that there is no one who will ever be truly subjective. You might like one game broken into a warp glitchfest, and another game not, depending on what kind of relation you have to the game.
Whether or not you refer to that as inconsequent and double morals or not, is up to you individually as well.
Another problem posed in these situations as well is the relation between different people of the community.
There are people those who are humble enough to accept that no one but the people really into the game might enjoy the run they've made, and there are those who are proud enough to take a single no vote, no matter the reason as a personal attack against them. This is a huge span, and being as we're just people there's inevitably going to be tension rising between players.
And as such movies can no longer be judged solely on the movie in question, but maybe even in spite of personal opinions of what system it's played on, who's made the movie and what another person in the topic has voted.
Not only are we very subjective when it comes to game choice, execution and run type, but also about the runner, others opinions and what other votes the movie has recieved.
Now I believe only one person has said he voted no in protest, so it's hardly representative of every no vote in the history of this website. And there's always going to be no votes on movies based on what I've written, or maybe something as simple as someone who votes no on a movie just for the sake of it, since no one had yet voted no.
There are those who vote yes, even though they might not have enjoyed the movie as a whole, but that they believe someone else might like it. On the other side of the spectrum, there's also those who would
vote meh on a movie based on it missing a single trick saving a couple of frames. Looking back at it I realise I feel stupid for posting what I posted.
The vote is there for everyone to use, a single no vote doesn't make it harder to publish a publishworthy movie, but everyone should have the privilege to vote what they want, and explain why they did it. The problem in this case is not a no vote cast in protest, but you should ask yourself, why would he vote no in protest?
Now is this really important? Is it hurting someone that a movie doesn't have a perfect record of yes votes? You're giving the voting process some kind of artificial value by stating that a single no vote against a hundred yes votes is somehow valuable to how the movie is going to fare in publication. Let people vote whatever they want, as long as they explain why they voted how they voted. And if it like in this case brings up a discussion, let's just hope it's a valuable discussion, and not one cluttered with personal opinion of the value of a no vote, of how you feel against another person on the forum or how it used to be on this page.
Maybe it's time to change the voting process again, and add more choices to the poll, maybe it's not needed at all. Most submitted improvements of popular games have over 95% yes votes anyway. Maybe it's time to have poll that doesn't have an option that generates arguments and hard feelings, or maybe it's just time to accept that not everyone will feel exactly the way you do.
Not everyone loves Mario, Metroid or Zelda, not everyone feels like every movie has a great replay value, and therefore a "highly similiar" movie might not be enjoyable, or bring anything new to the table. Not everyone likes zipping, out of boundry glitches or warp glitches.
You think this is a big deal, you personally find this "akin to vandalism", but guess what? I couldn't care less about whether someone voted no on a movie or not, whether it was mine or not. Just like TAS'ing and this site needs to develop, so do we, and I hope I have in the last five years, and I hope I will in the next five years.
This isn't the first time you've made a topic like this, in a matter similiar to something like this, I'm not sure it's lead to anything in particular before, so maybe, just maybe this is an excessive topic. And that this kind of discussion needs to develop further than just stating your own opinion over and over again.
And yes, I do realise I'm doing pretty much the same thing as I'm antagonizing, but as much as I would like to submit myself to apatheia, I can't as a human being be objective. In my own self-righteous way I believe myself to bring something to this topic here, but in fact I might as well be just as opiniated as anyone else would.
At least I try, I try to develop and understand why not everyone feels like I do, and to try and listen and understand others opinions as well, and not just see them as something to bounce off my own opiniated arguments against.
