Joined: 1/7/2023
Posts: 69
Location: Somewhere on planet earth probably
The person who resubmitted is probably just him pretending to be a different person
Samsara: For context, Logan was recently banned for extremely poor behavior on Discord. He had been banned for the same reason prior to this, but he was unbanned about two weeks ago after promising to show good behavior. As you can see, that good behavior didn't last long. The account that submitted this isn't "a friend of Logan", it's Logan himself lying to circumvent his ban. While it is still true that solo submissions from banned users are not allowed at all for publication even when submitted by others, I've updated this submission from cancellation to outright rejection for being an unauthorized submission so that it does not get mistakenly reinstated should we ever choose to change that rule.
"He who is tired of TASing is tired of life" Something Homer Simpson definitely said
I'm looking over the submissions that were rejected for trolling reasons, and I noticed that thesethreesubmissions were previously rejected because they were submitted using alt accounts (there may be a couple more that I missed). This submission falls under the "unauthorized" category...
Perhaps the rejection reason, either for this submission or the other three mentioned earlier, could be updated for the sake of consistency. Just my opinion though.
Yaaay, I'm an active player now! :D (as of 11/9/2024) Thanks to TASVideos for the support, they're awesome.
I'm Asumeh, semi-expert SMB1 TASer. :)
Check out some of the TASes I don't submit/upload to TASVideos on my YouTube channel, if you'd like.
In progress:
- Extra Mario Bros. (redo) (with HappyLee and w7n) - I'm currently assisting with finding improvements before the boss. On hold; we're currently struggling to confirm that we have the fastest route. Some debugging may also help with finding glitch exits, but neither of us are experts in that field.
- Record my older TASes (excluding any obsolete TASes) and upload to YouTube.
- Pretty busy at the moment...
Check out my other links here. (Mostly WIP hehe)
I'm looking over the submissions that were rejected for trolling reasons, and I noticed that thesethreesubmissions were previously rejected because they were submitted using alt accounts (there may be a couple more that I missed). This submission falls under the "unauthorized" category...
Perhaps the rejection reason, either for this submission or the other three mentioned earlier, could be updated for the sake of consistency. Just my opinion though.
I cannot confidently speak to any of the examples you've given as they are from quite a long time ago. First two being from 15 years ago, and the last from 8 years ago.
DJ_Incendration wrote:
Unauthorized? He gave permission to resubmit it, so I'd say it's authorized.
The author may have authorized it, but that doesn't mean we are allowed to proceed with the judging process.
The "unauthorized" reason will typically mean either:
The submitter didn't have authorization to submit the work (e.g. plagerism or authors didn't want it submitted)
One or more authors were banned. Meaning they can no longer participate/communicate in the judging process and as such we cannot move forward
In the latter case, if the author(s) are unbanned sometime in the future, then those submissions may be re-evaluated.
Whereas "troll" will typically indicate that the submission itself is problematic in some form, such as willfully ignoring submission rules. The 3rd movie you mentioned seems to be an example of this, given the indication that the user was previously restricted from making submissions.
I'm glad he returned for a bit, and sad about his latest ban. Even I'm not the most positive at times, I argue about things, but in his last submission's discussion thread, I didn't notice anything bad.
DJ Incendration
Believe in Michael Girard and every speedrunner and TASer!
I'm glad he returned for a bit, and sad about his latest ban. Even I'm not the most positive at times, I argue about things, but in his last submission's discussion thread, I didn't notice anything bad.
As Samsara mentioned in the judgement notes, Logan’s ban resulted from his actions on discord, not from activity in a submission’s discussion thread.
I read through the Discord, and here's what I'm getting from the conversation.
1. People start a conversation about language and pronunciation. One person thinks someone else was demeaning them when they were not.
2. One of the staff jumps in, saying one of the people was being rude. They were only talking about the languages, explaining that the complicated concept is indeed complicated. The gave an oobservation about either one person or a group of people, and while they may or may not have made a generalization, if an explanation is that complicated, they shouldn't have to explain it.
3. Logan expresses his dislike for the other person, then states that sometimes, the wrong people are punished here. This is true.
4. After the first person is told to link messages about the discussion, Logan says that people can scroll up to see them. This is true, and I don't see anything bad about that. As he said, he's trying to help. I think that's great.
5. Logan jokes about not being able to help only because he's not a mod. I accept that.
6. Logan asks if he is always wrong. No. He asks if he should be banned just for trying to help, which is also no. Then he tells people to enjoy their therapy, a nice thing if you have it.
7. Another person joins, asking what's happening. Logan suggests that everyone stop talking about the topic, and I agree. He then says that the drama isn't wanted here. Again, true.
8. People keep talking about it, for some reason, even though Logan is telling everyone to stop.
9. Logan goes on a little tangent about gender, the only part that I think is not very good.
10. The staff say that if he keeps up his trying to help and deescalate the situation, he's banned. The only thing he did wrong was overcorrecting himself on that tangent. I don't think that deserves a ban or even a warning.
11. Logan mentions society being horrible, because of banning helpful people like him. I don't think all of society is terrible, no.
12. One of the mods tells him to stop after mods say he isn't helping. He probably already understands that, and he was being helpful, so he was fine. He also mensions the reason for being let back in, for positivity. Logan was encouraging positivity by trying to end the drama. Logan states that he's not having a tantrum. True. He says he's trying to help. Good.
13. Here, Logan pushes the race thing out of the original context. He then incorrectly states that trying to help is bad.
14. He claims that the people there are sick, but he has no idea if that's true. If I was sick, I probably wouldn't be on Discord. He says the community is cold-hearted. Some people here may very well be, others are certainly not. I've had enough of the drama, too.
15. After the original person asks for help, Logan does the right thing and says to move on. Another one of the staff says Logan is distracting, but I really don't think so.
16. Logan asks if people can read messages. Of course they can!
17. Logan points out a threat/warning from the staff, then reminds everyone of the reason for Tasvideos being called Tasvideos. Again, trying to help people to move on from a conversation that really should have ended a long time ago at this point.
18. Logan points out the flaws of many online communities, some good things to know. Helpful. The other person tells him to stop because the mods said to, but if he's being helpful, I don't see a need.
19. Logan mentions the illogical nature of this conversation. The other person talking about the language says their depressed, Logan acknowledges that they are beginning to understand the situation.
20. Another staff member posts a Gif, inaccessible with my screen reader. Logan then makes an incomplete thought: "Joining TASVideos be like:". He forgot to put a word like "can" or "should" before "be."
21. He then suggests ditching the forum and server to avoid more drama. While that can certainly avoid drama, it's good to have a place to talk about submissions and other TAS/emulation projects. I agree that the situation is stupid, even more so now that he's banned again. Another LGBTQ+ tangent, and unfortunately, he hasn't posted anything here since.
DJ Incendration
Believe in Michael Girard and every speedrunner and TASer!
Hmm. I'm struggling to come up with a reason why he's continuing forward with the disruption even though he was trying to "help". This might be nosy of me to try to find out why, but it may have to do with a certain condition he might have, judging from his first edits on his homepage...
But really, the main thing to note here is that Logan got banned for his disruptive behavior on the Discord server, also resulting in his ban on the site overall. It definitely doesn't matter whether it's on the official forums or in other sites, disruptive behavior is still disruptive behavior. (At least I think that's what it is, right?) I can only hope that Logan eventually recovers, even if it'll be years from now.
Myself, I don't like to get dragged in to any arguments, and so if that's the case, I prefer to keep my distance and not continue to participate so that I don't say things that shouldn't be said. And I'm a bit of a shy person, but at least I'm kind-hearted about it, and I'm also doing my best to stay cautious when doing or saying things.
Just wanted to put this up for clarification and for my stance on Logan's case; I believe he was wrong for trying to step in and "help", and that it would've been best if he backed out of the conversation.
Yaaay, I'm an active player now! :D (as of 11/9/2024) Thanks to TASVideos for the support, they're awesome.
I'm Asumeh, semi-expert SMB1 TASer. :)
Check out some of the TASes I don't submit/upload to TASVideos on my YouTube channel, if you'd like.
In progress:
- Extra Mario Bros. (redo) (with HappyLee and w7n) - I'm currently assisting with finding improvements before the boss. On hold; we're currently struggling to confirm that we have the fastest route. Some debugging may also help with finding glitch exits, but neither of us are experts in that field.
- Record my older TASes (excluding any obsolete TASes) and upload to YouTube.
- Pretty busy at the moment...
Check out my other links here. (Mostly WIP hehe)
DJ_Incendration, your characterization of Logan's behavior that led to his ban is concerning. Given your actions here, and (under a changed name) your posts on Discord, your own behavior is becoming disruptive and problematic. Your entire commentary of the events is fraught with misunderstandings and misrepresents what really happened. It sounds more like a long-winded defense of individuals that were clearly in the wrong.
DJ_Incendration wrote:
2. One of the staff jumps in, saying one of the people was being rude. They were only talking about the languages, explaining that the complicated concept is indeed complicated. The gave an oobservation about either one person or a group of people, and while they may or may not have made a generalization, if an explanation is that complicated, they shouldn't have to explain it.
You're leaving out a lot of details here. The staff member addresses several issues beyond simply being rude (and even that's not what was said). The now-banned user did in fact make sweeping generalizations which several community members repeatedly objected to. Much of the preceding discussion was dedicated to community members trying to get the user to provide evidence or a logical explanation for their claims (which they refused to do).
DJ_Incendration wrote:
3. Logan expresses his dislike for the other person, then states that sometimes, the wrong people are punished here. This is true.
Again, you're leaving out important details. Logan's first message was actually a demand for another person, who had done nothing wrong, to be banned. He did this without supplying any reasoning or evidence. Similarly, you are asserting that "the wrong people are punished here" despite offering no evidence of that.
The rest of your commentary continues with comments that blindly defend people who have, in fact, been highly disruptive to the community. Logan in particular has a long history of outbursts like this, and had even admitted that what he did in the past was wrong. It's not logical to argue that he was wrongly punished or that he's innocent.
Oddly, this isn't the first time you've came to defense of banned users. You previously criticized the decision to ban HappyLee which, after a lengthy debate, you were then given a warning for. You also previously argued a person shouldn't have been banned despite literally circumventing another ban for repeatedly stealing work from others.
Just a year after that, again you tried to argue a different user shouldn't have been banned for a very obvious case of plagiarism, attempting to minimize the issue by claiming they "only did it once" and they "just forgot to include the other authors". This is despite the fact the submitter didn't actually contribute anything, and literally copy/pasted the movie created by other people.
For this continuing pattern of behavior, in which you repeatedly and purposefully argue against the group decisions of staff and defend users who have brought harm to this community, you are now banned for 3 months. Given that you've expressed this behavior in Discord too, the ban will include Discord as well.
