I can't pay a capture device at the moment.
I can't pay a capture device at the moment.Use a few hours you'd otherwise spend on playing to make some $50 and then you can.
Just because you wrote the-elite proof policy doesn't mean that you have legal ownership of it. I agree that this time must be removed.
I don't think we really even need videos anymore. We should just have a list of acceptable proof for each individual player. This can be listed on their profile page.
For example:
Henning Blom: Streamed, high quality capture
David Montieth: Streamed, high quality capture
David Clemens: Shitty webcam vid
Chris Rayola: Cause he said so
Mirrormage: High quality capture
This way we don' even need a proof policy. In fact I have a better idea, a PROOF RANKS.
The way the Proof Ranks work is that we list how high people are on the proof ranks by how much we trust them. If you're ranked in the top 10 this means you don't even need videos or pictures for proof. you can just say you got the time and we'll have the rank it because you said so.
Guys ranked 10-20 can provide pictures or shitty webcam vids with little to no quality. If they are questioned about the legitimacy of their times they can say things like "yeah but you know it's legit", or "you all know it's legit so just leave it up". As long as they say this the time can stay up.
Guys ranked 21+ have to provide high quality vids for all substantial times.
You can move up the ranks in different ways. You can become friends with the admin. Remain in the elite for a long time. Be ranked highly at some point.
I believe this to be the fairest system for everyone.
lol Luke, he has a video of the run on his channel, pretty sure I saw it live or something. Just was too lazy to link it. Guys are deertier are much more trustworthy and dont assume everyone is cheating (like people here)
Everyone knows that Clemens got 356. It seems silly to take it off the rankings and pretend it doesn't exist.
How did you even know he was playing Silo? Also, how can you even make out that he had all the settings turned up all the way, since the run isnt captured?
Since when does proof transcend into satisfaction? The Elite: where speedrunning is cerious buziness and your runs are reviewed by a panel of mods who determine if you deserve your time on the ranks. No capture card? No money? Then you dont deserve to have your time on the ranks :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik: :nesquik:
Obviously this is a matter for the council
In fact, let's go a step further. How about we ship free N64's to everyone on the planet in case someone is too poor to afford to play GE and thus is missing out.
It's completely fine if you think a capture card is a useless thing, DD, but then you shouldn't expect to have your (good) times on the ranks either.Hm... A capture card isn't useless, lol, I didn't mean that. I simply say that in times when economy in Spain is the shit it is atm, there are more important things to spend the money on. A capture card is used for entertaining purposes, not to live, at least in this case. Of course, as soon as I can pay one I'll buy one, but that moment is not now. And well, my times are not good enough to be removed from the rankings for being shitty quality, so I'll expect them to stay there for now. If it arrives a day where I need good quality videos for my times and I can't afford a capture device, I'll keep playing, because I play for fun, not to be the best.
Deep darkness: You're saying that captured vids can be spliced so we should accept webcam vids. (...)Sorry if my English isn't good enough to express what I want to say, but I didn't mean that exactly... I'm not saying "let's accept webcam videos because captured ones can be spliced aswell". What I'm saying is that saying that webcam videos can't be here because they can be faked doesn't seem a good argument for me, and some people use it often. I agree that they are ugly, bad-looking, and whatever else, but I don't see the point to remove them because they can be faked, since every proof can be faked. Also, my argument is just as bad as many others, so no point in saying it's "pathetic" imo.
Also, saying things like "Community X accepts this kind of proof so why can't we?" is a pathetic arguement. (...)
Yeah I agree that not wanting to spend money is a joke. (...) People who think speedrunning should be free are just insane, lazy, unmotivated, and need to reassess their entire lives.No Ryan, the thing is not "not wanting to spend money", the thing is "not being able to spend money", and they are quite different things. If you could spend those big ammounts of money you wrote being 19 years old, be sure you are lucky. Plus, I live in a country where even university costs more money than average salary, where scholarships almost don't exist, etc. Believe me when I say it's not as easy. Plus, not every hobby requires significant expenditures, and as an example, one of mine is to solve Maths problems and go to Maths competitions (yes, they can cost money to their organizators, but most of the ones I go to are free for the students). Also let me 100% disagree with yout last sentence, as I think I'm not insane, not lazy, not unmotivated and I don't need to reassess my entire life.
Yes my run quality isnt perfect but the video is consistent, theres clear audio and commentary , color, and at no point in the run is it not possible to make out what is going on and whether the run is legit.I can say the same thing about my and Illu's videos which you shot down a few years ago. And this is 2014, so our standards should be good at least.
Lets say someone wanted to get a 2.x record but it was decided that there should be camera footage to prove the person is holding both controllers (which there probably should be to be honest, its only a matter of time till someone cheats with 2.x anyway), will there run not be allowed on the ranks because it isnt captured? Theres a thousand arguments i could make that would convince people my 356 should stay up, but again, I dont really care either way and honestly i enjoy bringing forth the issues with the proof policy for GE.irrel strawman argument
You're a complete joke. Stop coming in here with every post acting like you're better
Thiradell:
November 2012, after the Henning fiasco, I write a proof policy stating that all untieds need captured quality. This was the first iteration of my proof policy, but the council approved it and agreed it was fit for use.
Jan 2013, Clemens gets Extraction PA 1:29. Untied. Webcam quality.
No fuss was ever made about that untied. Why? Clearly, according to the proof policy, it should have been taken down. But it wasn't. In fact, you've probably never even noticed. Why is this 3:56 different?
Clearly you and the council have set the precedent that Clemens is exempt to needing captured quality. This is 100% irrefutable conclusive fact based on your inaction towards his Extraction untied. It is unfair to penalize him now, when you didn't penalize him in the past for this exact same violation.
If anything, give him this official, final, last chance or something. No more WRs after today uncaptured.
I think we are missing the point of why we are after captured quality.
DD, maybe I should offer a cash incentive for you. I'll get you a capture card if you can break 1:30:00 total time in GE. Or, if I can't afford it, a TWINE cart. :)Oh, wow, I thank you a lot the offer, but I can't accept it! I don't want anyone here wasting his own money for me! I'll find my own ways to earn money as I need it (talking about needs, not about hobbys). Also, I would say that goal seems quite easy :D, just too lazy to go for it atm e.e. For example, I think it would be enough with playing Control 00A and Aztec 00A for 1 evening, my times really suck there :P (Being honest, I can't understand how I have had points on Control 00A and how I still have on Aztec 00A, which such times...).
DD, maybe I should offer a cash incentive for you. I'll get you a capture card if you can break 1:30:00 total time in GE. Or, if I can't afford it, a TWINE cart. :)Oh, wow, I thank you a lot the offer, but I can't accept it!
I don't want anyone here wasting his own money for me! I'll find my own ways to earn money as I need it (talking about needs, not about hobbys).
Now the "can't afford it" is off the table, what does this leave you with? I see an empty argument. People reaching out to improve your situation and then you're showing other reasons. It seems like you think it's a waste. (...)Hm... Remark: I might have minunderstood your entire post, since not knowing all the words, I've used a translator, and it has made a disaster of translation.
You're assuming he'll be using money to acquire it. There are other ways. And his offer isn't money (even though he called it a cash incentive lol), so your reason for rejecting it doesn't quite stroke. His offer is a means to an end - where your argument was that you are too poor to afford it and he is giving a helping hand (as a reward for doing something that won't require you the money you refuse to "waste").
Deep Darkness: Sorry for saying the argument was pathetic. I'm too quick to say harsh comments. Thanks for the feedback.No problem.
Subsection ii) Proof Calls
Proof calls will be made monthly, and players will have 1 month to provide acceptable proof. Failure to do so will result in backrolling of a player's time on that stage to their best record with acceptable proof.
How is it that the people in the Elite are decent enough individuals, yet as a community, we're the biggest bunch of shitheads imaginable?
How is it that the people in the Elite are decent enough individuals, yet as a community, we're the biggest bunch of shitheads imaginable?
Subsection iv) Members (Addition, Removal)
If public opinion of a council member becomes negative, discussion will be held in public forum to remove or replace members of the council. Likewise, when public opinion of a member of the community is favorable for addition, they shall be instated to the council.
Subsection ii) Council Members
Updated January 1, 2014
The elite council consists of Jon “Ngamer” Bearder, Derek Clark, Steve “Comeasur” Bryze, Ricky “Infil” Pusch, "Thingy”, Ryan “Your Eliteness” Dwyer, “Thiradell”, Axel Z, Hugo “Carathorn” van der Wolk, Bryan Bosshardt, Jim “Jimbo” Barrett, David “DK” Kovaz, Karl Jobst, and Ryan “Goose” White.
We need to start viewing eachother equally here.
If a run has proof, lets accept it no matter how crappy it might seem.
start being rankings- centered
QuoteYou and many others are prioritizing having the best times ever achieved on the ranks OVER people following the rules. I would say that order needs to be switched
If your site doesn't actually have the best times, someone will eventually just make another one that does. [...] From an outside perspective I'd have a hard time respecting any site where [some] top player's times have been removed, even though there is solid proof behind almost every one.
Everyone here is assumed to be lying unless they prove themselves beyond any doubt.This makes me sad. I tend to be extremely trusting in people, maybe too much so. I agree with you that almost everyone here is highly suspicious of all other players. I guess it's part of the competitive aspect of the site. If you can show your opponents out the door, you'll gain a spot on the rankings. Too bad rankings are meaningless when it's just a ranking of "me and people I like."
Quality of Proof
Subsection i) Quality
Effective January 1, 2014, all significant records must have proof in the form of an acceptable captured video, with in game sound. The audio must not have a significant delay. The-Elite World Rankings page needs to be a showcase of The-Elite's skill with quality, watchable videos. Webcam, cell phone camera, or digital camera video quality is not acceptable. Significant records must be direct captures. Just because a video is captured does not mean it is acceptable quality. Chuya's Attack Ship Agent 2:06 for instance is no longer acceptable quality. In game sound and clean bitrates are necessary. The community's public opinion as well as the elite council's decision will determine whether or not a video of a record is acceptable quality.
If a significant record is achieved without proof meeting the quality requirements, it will not be ranked, and will be backrolled in the same manner any unproven record is backrolled.
QuoteQuality of Proof
Subsection i) Quality
Effective January 1, 2014, all significant records must have proof in the form of an acceptable captured video, with in game sound. The audio must not have a significant delay. The-Elite World Rankings page needs to be a showcase of The-Elite's skill with quality, watchable videos. Webcam, cell phone camera, or digital camera video quality is not acceptable. Significant records must be direct captures. Just because a video is captured does not mean it is acceptable quality. Chuya's Attack Ship Agent 2:06 for instance is no longer acceptable quality. In game sound and clean bitrates are necessary. The community's public opinion as well as the elite council's decision will determine whether or not a video of a record is acceptable quality.
If a significant record is achieved without proof meeting the quality requirements, it will not be ranked, and will be backrolled in the same manner any unproven record is backrolled.
Clemens has until May 1 to provide proof in acceptable quality.
Thiradell backrolling the time was in DIRECT OPPOSITION to the proof policy.
The last sentence only seems to refer to the fact that there could be borderline cases where a video's acceptability needs to be discussed further
What was the standard practice for dealing with an unproven time before this whole "rules based" business started?
Nope, it refers to all "significant records achieved without quality proof." I wrote the thing so I know the intentions behind it.
Does this mean Trent could have trolled the ranks and had his 3:52 on the rankings for a month if he wanted to?
Does this mean Trent could have trolled the ranks and had his 3:52 on the rankings for a month if he wanted to?
New Strategies
You are not able to have a record on the rankings if it involves a new strategy discovery, until there is a video and proper explanation of said strategy made public for everyone to access. For example, if you claim a new strategy that skips Trev's speech entirely on Statue, and claim a 2:10, you are not able to have that time ranked until you have a video of it and an explanation on how to perform the new strategy made public. While discouraged, hoarding a new strategy is allowed so that you can keep it to yourself and keep playing until you obtain an untied world record or otherwise personally significant record. However said record will not be ranked until a video and explanation are made public.
QuoteIf a significant record is achieved without proof meeting the quality requirements, it will not be ranked, and will be backrolled in the same manner any unproven record is backrolled.
Seems to me like this sentence contradicts itself.
Nope, it refers to all "significant records achieved without quality proof." I wrote the thing so I know the intentions behind it.
All the hating and negativity alongside doesn't make your argument stronger, it shows you aren't confident enough on your side that you feel a need to attack others to try and lower their confidence as well.That's Goose's MO.
Is Karl really the only voice of reason in this thread?
If a significant record is achieved without proof meeting the quality requirements, it will not be ranked, and will be backrolled in the same manner any unproven record is backrolled.
The general proof call does give players one month to provide proof. However 'significant' times are handled differently which is why there is a seperate subsection that was included to account for this. We cannot have significant records, especially untied records, remaining on the ranks without proof for a long period of time.
I apparently have around one day to provide a captured video of my 4:05. According to the proof policy at the time I achieved 4:05, I should have until May 1 to provide proof. Clemens' 3:56 should have stayed until May 1 as well. How do you know he wouldn't have gotten 3:56 again in this time frame? As a result of this we have people posting 3:57s in the PR topic and WR topic, and it just creates more drama.
Why does the proof policy keep getting altered every time a new scenario happens?
If I claim S2 0:48 now. how long would I have to provide proof for it?
If I claim S2 0:48 now. how long would I have to provide proof for it?
Why does the proof policy keep getting altered every time a new scenario happens?