The Elite Forum

The Big Three Plus One => GoldenEye 007 => Topic started by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 05:40:37 am

Title: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 05:40:37 am
Reasons to remove Dan's 53:

- There is no proof
- Removal sets a strong standard of expectation from all
- Removes some precedent that the elite mods & admin play favorites
- The elite enters a progressive age where we make just, informed decisions
- It improves accuracy of historical GE timekeeping


Reasons not to remove Dan's 53

- Ngamer gets to pretend he's infallible and never makes bad decisions


Please keep this topic open at the very least to discuss the matter.  There is no harm in discussing, even if something is set in stone.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: flukey lukey on April 10, 2014, 06:12:39 am
at the very least remove it from the board top. it looks fucking ridiculous
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: OHMSS on April 10, 2014, 06:38:08 am
Signed. Add Matis' Archives 16 to the list. Those exceptions are a joke.



(https://forums.the-elite.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjonathandallen.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F08%2Ffight_the_power.jpg&hash=f488c28f335c31b62752d3077a931510d86cf5f6)
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 07:03:18 am
I support the notion to remove Berube's 53. Given that there is no proof, the time it was achieved, and his skill as shown by his other times.

I don''t support removing Matis'' 16 as he does have skill.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Adam Miller on April 10, 2014, 07:25:51 am
I support the removal of all unproven Dam 00:53 and Dam 00:54s.

Mainly because I am going for Dam 00:54 tomorrow and I want it to be worth more points.  :kappa:
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 08:37:57 am
Why not give him the 1 month time frame to get proof online?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: AZ on April 10, 2014, 08:42:46 am
Why not give him the 1 month time frame to get proof online?

:kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa: :kappa:
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Aztec Exemplar on April 10, 2014, 08:48:51 am
I support the notion to remove Berube's 53. Given that there is no proof, the time it was achieved, and his skill as shown by his other times.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Jimbo on April 10, 2014, 09:58:56 am
I was the one who removed it and instantly got pressured by the other admins to put it back online. They assume it's a personal vendetta (it's more of a historical thing for me), and insist that we must then remove Matis' 0:16 and Expert's 0:54 as well amongst other times if we set this Berube precedent.

I might make a more in-depth topic later, but they don't seem to understand that most players want this time removed.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 10:06:06 am
I thought it was someone who has played in the past and got a new WR since it showed at the most recent record list. I thought the proof policy states that all records obtained prior to December 31st of last year will be "grandfathered" and not require any additional proof. Why was this guy's time any different?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RK on April 10, 2014, 10:41:36 am
I'm not sure if wr's were ever supposed to grandfathered in with no proof. Poor quality proof was grandfathered in i.e marc's dam sa/00 times.

I dont think dan ever got 53
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 10:43:12 am
Dam :53 is not a significant WR. I don't see what the hassle is over for a time that is over 11 years old.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RK on April 10, 2014, 10:44:33 am
Players put many many hours into achieving it.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 10:48:25 am
War :54 is not a significant WR. I don't see what the hassle is over for a time that is over 11 years old.

Fix'd
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 10:49:07 am
I did the same for Dam :54 at the time I achieved it, doesn't mean it is significant. But I said that based on what the proof policy deems as a "significant record".

Subsection ii) Significant Records

A record is deemed "significant" and thus requiring captured, standard quality proof, in the following cases:



In other words, if your time is so good that it beats everyone else on the level, except for a small handful of 5 people, it is a significant record and requires quality proof. All players should strive to provide quality proof, but for significant records, poor quality proof will count as no proof.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 10:49:40 am
War :54 is not a significant WR. I don't see what the hassle is over for a time that is over 11 years old.

Fix'd

It is fixed. It's not even a WR.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 10:53:53 am
The proof policy isn't the infallible word of god.

This time is different to others because the time is way too good compared to his other times and was achieved at an insane date. It's very similar to your 54 and I see the only reason you're so quick to defend this random time that you know nothing about is because you know your time is in the same boat.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RK on April 10, 2014, 11:35:10 am
Why not give him the 1 month time frame to get proof online?

I think this option could bring a solution in this case.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 11:52:58 am
The proof policy isn't the infallible word of god.

This time is different to others because the time is way too good compared to his other times and was achieved at an insane date. It's very similar to your 54 and I see the only reason you're so quick to defend this random time that you know nothing about is because you know your time is in the same boat.

I am no longer in the same boat. Carry on discussing Dan's time though, since he isn't here to defend it.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RK on April 10, 2014, 11:58:23 am
why would you do that?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: wheatrich on April 10, 2014, 12:00:22 pm
why are all of experts times now 19:59?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Lark on April 10, 2014, 12:04:15 pm
He must have removed himself. There was honestly no reason for him to do that. Oh well...
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 03:49:37 pm
I did the same for Dam :54 at the time I achieved it, doesn't mean it is significant. But I said that based on what the proof policy deems as a "significant record".

Subsection ii) Significant Records

A record is deemed "significant" and thus requiring captured, standard quality proof, in the following cases:


  •    it is an untied world record
  •    it is a tied world record, tied by fewer than 11 people
  •    it is a non-tied time worth 92 or more points (an untied 4th or 3rd place time on a level, ie: Attack Ship PA 3:13, Aztec 00 Agent 1:41, etc)
  •    any time ranked ahead of all but 5 people (ie: an untied 6th place time, a tied 5th place time 1 second faster than 7th, etc)
  •    any other record that is deemed significant by the council or community
[/list]

In other words, if your time is so good that it beats everyone else on the level, except for a small handful of 5 people, it is a significant record and requires quality proof. All players should strive to provide quality proof, but for significant records, poor quality proof will count as no proof.

The outcry in this topic should show you that the community deems Dan Berube's Dam 53 significant.

It is the most historically significant WR ever tied in the elite, and is the one with no proof.

Let me ask you this hypothetical.  Clearly, Steven Zwartjes did not get Aztec 1:31.  The reason it was "removed" is because it was a 25 second untied at the time with no proof.  Imagine if you will, that SZ claimed 1:55 instead.  Only a 1 second untied, using some kind of "glass strategy" that we only discovered existed 1-2 years later.  Would that 1:55 still be up?  Probably.  Would he ever have gotten that 1:55?  Absolutely not.

Do not make the children of the future pay for mistakes by the adults of today.

53 needs to be removed.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 04:33:20 pm
All the reasons everyone listed above about why the time should be taken down and no one has said it was a significant WR and that is why it should be taken down. It seems like we just want to remove any time that is above, lets say, 80 points that does not have a little video icon next to the time to be removed from the rankings. Is this true? Trent Hovis's Dam :53 would like to know.

Maybe there should be a listing of what times are significant, because it's not clearly written anywhere.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Adam Miller on April 10, 2014, 04:41:33 pm
Actually, I do think that any 80+ point times need proof. I think all of them are significant enough for proof, with the exception of Duel 0:03. Because a monkey could get it - hence why everyone that tries to get that time, has it.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 04:46:40 pm
Actually, I do think that any 80+ point times need proof. I think all of them are significant enough for proof, with the exception of Duel 0:03. Because a monkey could get it - hence why everyone that tries to get that time, has it.

But requiring proof on a time that is over 10 years old, regardless of who got it, should not be removed because of the lack of proof. That time was accepted and has been accepted for years. It's a part of the rankings and accuracy of those that submitted times to The Elite.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: TheFlash on April 10, 2014, 04:49:14 pm
Why not just ask him if it was legit or not?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: AZ on April 10, 2014, 04:52:47 pm
Why not just implement a proven rankings into the current elite rankings (i.e. filter by video icons) and make everyone happy? It can't be that hard.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 04:55:40 pm
I'm pretty sure every person who has actively played GE + PD at a serious level in the last 8 years agrees that every 80+ pointer should have a video.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: We Love Spliced Runs on April 10, 2014, 04:56:20 pm
at the very least remove it from the board top. it looks fucking ridiculous
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 04:57:56 pm
But requiring proof on a time that is over 10 years old, regardless of who got it, should not be removed because of the lack of proof. That time was accepted and has been accepted for years. It's a part of the rankings and accuracy of those that submitted times to The Elite.

How obtuse can you be?

Slavery was accepted for nearly 100 years in the USA before Abraham Lincoln was finally like "not anymore."

Prohibition went on for 13 years until the USA realized it was a bad idea.

Rape, incest, genocide, many other things were "allowed" in many cultures for hundreds of years until people became enlightened and realized better.

Are you seriously saying "just because something was done in the past when it was fine, it should remain fine today?"  Because that is what you are saying.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Adam Miller on April 10, 2014, 05:00:47 pm
Actually, I do think that any 80+ point times need proof. I think all of them are significant enough for proof, with the exception of Duel 0:03. Because a monkey could get it - hence why everyone that tries to get that time, has it.

But requiring proof on a time that is over 10 years old, regardless of who got it, should not be removed because of the lack of proof. That time was accepted and has been accepted for years. It's a part of the rankings and accuracy of those that submitted times to The Elite.

Yes, I agree that historical times are an issue. But I certainly think that in this day and age, evidence of some kind must be considered mandatory for good pointed times (even webcam). I do think though that we do need a re-evaluation of historical times. Maybe offer an extended period for them to get their evidence sorted? I know a lot of the players from back then are not active anymore; but that also means that they probably won't care if the times get removed as part of a clean-up procedure.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Adam Miller on April 10, 2014, 05:01:59 pm
Rape, incest, genocide, many other things were "allowed" in many cultures for hundreds of years until people became enlightened and realized better.

I concur. Dan Berube's 00:53 is exactly like rape and genocide.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 10, 2014, 06:25:06 pm
Actually, I do think that any 80+ point times need proof. I think all of them are significant enough for proof, with the exception of Duel 0:03. Because a monkey could get it - hence why everyone that tries to get that time, has it.

But requiring proof on a time that is over 10 years old, regardless of who got it, should not be removed because of the lack of proof. That time was accepted and has been accepted for years. It's a part of the rankings and accuracy of those that submitted times to The Elite.

Yes, I agree that historical times are an issue. But I certainly think that in this day and age, evidence of some kind must be considered mandatory for good pointed times (even webcam). I do think though that we do need a re-evaluation of historical times. Maybe offer an extended period for them to get their evidence sorted? I know a lot of the players from back then are not active anymore; but that also means that they probably won't care if the times get removed as part of a clean-up procedure.

This is exactly what I'm trying to explain.

I have seen my fair share of liars, cheaters, and hoaxers since the beginning of The Elite. If it were up to me, every time submitted should require proof from the beginning. And to a certain extent it was. We had "Proof Mods" that would accept VHS tapes of all recorded times, and not just world records. These individuals would acknowledge the fact that these times are legit and then the next tape would be recorded by this player. This was a day and age where recording videos and putting them online didn't take just 5 minutes of work. YouTube didn't exist.

This day and age, it is extremely easy to play, record, create, and upload all game content online in a matter of minutes. But requiring someone, who's prime play time was over 10 years ago, to go out and prove their times is unrealistic.

You can't expect someone, such as myself, to try and recreate their play-style, skill, and personal records in a matter of days, weeks, or months when they take a 10 year break from the game. Some of us who have moved on from these games simply can't dedicate the hours upon hours it took to get the times in the first place. Let alone the fact that some people may not even have the system anymore. I myself went out and got an N64 last year to start streaming after not having one for 8+ years probably.

Moving forward with new times being submitted, I would definitely suggest requiring proof for times over a certain number of points or doing that "proof call" on certain names each month and following through with it and having no personal opinions toward anyone and their times. What I mean by that is if someone like myself were to get, lets say a 95 point time in either game, me being labelled as trustworthy for all these years plays no benefit and I would still need proof. Even if I said, "Well, I plan on getting a better time any day now so I won't upload a video."

Removing times that have been imprinted in The Elite's history books for all these years and have created an extremely accurate representation of skill and dedication toward the game just because we want to proof call the time 10 years down the road, is absurd to say the least. These times show a timestamp of what records people were getting at what date. It shows progression of skills and is a stepping stone to what The Elite has become today. These records are part of the reason why we have the times that we do today. Removing them will create a gap in the history of The Elite and will forever keep people wondering what may have taken place.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Thiradell on April 10, 2014, 06:28:51 pm
I support the notion to remove Berube's 53. Given that there is no proof, the time it was achieved, and his skill as shown by his other times.

I don''t support removing Matis'' 16 as he does have skill.

Kappa

Berube's other times (including Depot 0:26 proven) show he could've easily gotten Dam 0:53 for real. Eric Bond recently getting 0:53 with some similar times on Agent shows this further. The time can't come down.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Thiradell on April 10, 2014, 06:41:00 pm
@Goose: It's a misapplication of the policy to say that the community deems his Dam 0:53 insane. The policy is meant for times got in the future. You can't write a new law and apply it to old things.

All your analogies about "slavery isn't okay" "prohibition was wrong" only serve to show that we realized allowing great times without proof is wrong, so we changed our policies. This doesn't mean the new policies apply to old times. As Expert said, trying to do this will only cloud the true history of the-elite, rather than clarifying or helping it.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Mavalock on April 10, 2014, 06:58:38 pm
Berube's other times (including Depot 0:26 proven) show he could've easily gotten Dam 0:53 for real. Eric Bond recently getting 0:53 with some similar times on Agent shows this further. The time can't come down.

Considering all the subtle strat optimizations we've implemented and knowledge of the game we've gained in the past 11 years, it really isn't fair to compare Eric's 53 with Dan's.  It's a much different story tying a time that only one person has gotten vs. tying a time that nearly 40 other people have gotten.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 07:13:33 pm
Thiradell saying "it can't come down" is so insanely tilting beyond description.  "It can't come down."  Just read that.  "It can't come down."  Like what.  I can't even right now.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Soft-Hedwig on April 10, 2014, 07:44:54 pm
Berube's other times (including Depot 0:26 proven) show he could've easily gotten Dam 0:53 for real.

lol  :nesquik:

Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Thiradell on April 10, 2014, 07:45:25 pm
Berube's other times (including Depot 0:26 proven) show he could've easily gotten Dam 0:53 for real. Eric Bond recently getting 0:53 with some similar times on Agent shows this further. The time can't come down.

Considering all the subtle strat optimizations we've implemented and knowledge of the game we've gained in the past 11 years, it really isn't fair to compare Eric's 53 with Dan's.  It's a much different story tying a time that only one person has gotten vs. tying a time that nearly 40 other people have gotten.

Lockwood's 1:12, then.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 09:04:47 pm
Lockwood provided proof for 1:12. Aside from the fact that lockwood has numerous proven times that require a high degree of skill, he actually proved 1:12. It would be like someone claiming 1:12 without proof. I don't understand how you can't see the difference there.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Thiradell on April 10, 2014, 09:40:09 pm
Sorry, should've explained more. Lockwood was the first to tie 1:12, and skipped 1:13 to do so. I was using it as an example, comparing it to Berube's in terms of context and believability. Yes, Lockwood did prove it, good on him, etc. But the fact that he got 1:12 the way he did was really crazy (he had just started playing Streets).
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Scrambler Fanny on April 10, 2014, 09:46:11 pm
I'm pretty sure every person who has actively played GE + PD at a serious level in the last 8 years agrees that every 80+ pointer should have a video.

I've never agreed with Ryan more in my life.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Time was untied when set. on April 10, 2014, 09:48:00 pm
Berube clearly never got 53, i think this is indisputable. He posted a description of the run a while back i remember reading and it sounded complete bs. Keep in mind back when 53 was achieved nobody did lookup after lockshot which loses some time and nobody really knew how the level worked. Boss hit a magic run and theres a reason it lasted untied so long. But should his 53 be taken down? I dont really care. He clearly lied about it but its history now. Jim taking it down in 2014 is absurd and should be stripped of admin abilities if he has no self control to do whatever he pleases. I agree the time SHOULD be taken down, but considering how long ago it was achieved, its kinda a "fuck it, who cares" situation imo. Whats done is done, just move on and stop bitching.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 09:52:30 pm
Ryan Lockwood already have very hard world records (proven) such as silo A 1:01, s1 1:02 as well as other numerous difficult times.. and it was still rediculous that he tied 1:12. Berube's case would be like Lockwood having no other WR's or even very strong times and tieing an untied WR on a strafing instensive level. Have we even ever seen this?

Depot 26 doesn't even compare to 53. I could get 26 1 out of every 3 runs. You can also see on the rankings many more people having 26 even though more people would be playing dam A.

There is not a single other person who got 53 that doesn't either have mutiple WR's or at least some other strong times with a full times page.

But the crazy thing is that this was claimed in 2003 when there was not a plethora of videos to copy from and we didn't even have a good understanding of the game at that point.

BTW, Berube had already started taping BEFORE he got 53. So why was he not taping then? Seems strange that he would tape a depot 26, not tape for 53, and then tape again for s1 1:04.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Jimbo on April 10, 2014, 10:19:06 pm
I'm turning into Axel. The Elite/Rankings are extremely important to me and I know damn well a consensus decision will never be reached. If I hadn't said anything in Mouser's chat, I bet no one would have noticed.

Perhaps now it's time to set a precedent of no-vid-no-rank for WRs, but even then past vids that are lost (that Axel and I have seen in the past) might throw a wrench into these plans. Now I understand why everything moves so slowly in congress.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 10:46:41 pm
I dont see why we need to talk about precedents or act as if we need to create a new 'rule'.

This is a pretty specific situation that requires a judgemental decision.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RK on April 10, 2014, 10:58:14 pm
Quote
trying to do this will only cloud the true history of the-elite, rather than clarifying or helping it.

Preserving the elite's history by keeping a time on the ranks that the majority of active players feel should be taken down is disrespectful. Why is this clarification so important? It isn't. Anyone who cares enough will remember this time even if it's not on the ranks.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: wheatrich on April 10, 2014, 11:05:01 pm


Removing times that have been imprinted in The Elite's history books for all these years and have created an extremely accurate representation of skill and dedication toward the game just because we want to proof call the time 10 years down the road, is absurd to say the least. These times show a timestamp of what records people were getting at what date. It shows progression of skills and is a stepping stone to what The Elite has become today. These records are part of the reason why we have the times that we do today. Removing them will create a gap in the history of The Elite and will forever keep people wondering what may have taken place.

then why are all yours now 1959s instead of what they were for 10+years?

I'm turning into Axel. The Elite/Rankings are extremely important to me and I know damn well a consensus decision will never be reached. If I hadn't said anything in Mouser's chat, I bet no one would have noticed.


You really are naive

Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: wheatrich on April 10, 2014, 11:26:49 pm
personally I'm just hoping berube comes back into this thread just to call all of us losers and go off on a rant.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Thiradell on April 10, 2014, 11:27:16 pm
Quote
trying to do this will only cloud the true history of the-elite, rather than clarifying or helping it.

Preserving the elite's history by keeping a time on the ranks that the majority of active players feel should be taken down is disrespectful. Why is this clarification so important? It isn't. Anyone who cares enough will remember this time even if it's not on the ranks.

I have felt, from the first time I became aware of the 0:53, that it should be taken down. I've never taken it down or brought it up because a decision was  made on it in the past, and changing that decision 11 years later for just this one time is inconsistent and wrong.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 10, 2014, 11:35:33 pm
Who actually supports the time being up?

Ngamer?  That's about it?

I'm considering pursuing legal action on Ngamer to rid him from this community.  If he's gone, everything changes for the better.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: wheatrich on April 10, 2014, 11:38:35 pm
I think the majority of people think the time is fake, as far as I can tell clark was the one who made the call to keep it on the ranks (in like 2005 or something).

I think a rule of "well we can't change it b/c one person made a decision 10 years ago" sounds a bit ridic tho but yeah I can see not wanting every darn discussion hashed and rehashed all the time too.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 10, 2014, 11:52:01 pm
To those who think that we need to keep the time because of a decision made 10 years ago I give you this hypothetical..

In your own personal life, do you think it's wrong to learn new things or become wiser? Would you like to have to stand by the decisions you made 10 years ago? If you believe that decisions made a long time ago are things we need to live by then you don't seem to be appreciating the value of ... learning.

The decision was definitely made, but revisiting the situation I think it's pretty safe to say that most people agree the time likely was not achieved. If it was achieved, it would require proof given the weight of the accomplishment.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: flicker on April 11, 2014, 12:09:07 am
I can see not wanting every darn discussion hashed and rehashed all the time too.

there is a valid reason for revisiting this, now.

the rankings format was changed so now the date of achieved WRs is more significant on the ranks, no longer do we have a DCMRRI sweep on Egypt.

due to the new arrangement of initials on the rankings, seeing BBDB on the very first record is just off-putting. if illu was the one to really untie 53, then it should show BBIP. dont tarnish that because "that's the way it's always been"
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: flukey lukey on April 11, 2014, 02:33:24 am
^

but we also need to see times tied within a day to be sorted the Correct way as well. A bit surprised this hasn't been fixed yet
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: bcks on April 11, 2014, 04:24:01 am
Didn't Dan have a 54 vid, back in the day with a 53 best time?, when he sent a tape in, to either expert/clark/lavery, or jon. Or was it just a end screen pic/vid?
Maybe wouter has it, or remembers the topic at least. Maybe the topic still exists even? I know whoever was the person viewing the tape, listed what was on it, not sure what was made into vids.

If dans time should come down, so should trents, and everybody else who has a tied wr, with no vid.

Alot of you people who want this time down, have never spoken to him or where around when he was here. You don't even know his reason for getting it, and thus his motivation. But perhaps he lied to everyone, well I mean, the people who where around at that time, not the new school people who know nothing about him.
The same with Steven Z They both had the skill.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Your Eliteness on April 11, 2014, 05:23:45 am
I completely agree with Expert. I believe that in this era every 80 pointer should have a video, but in the older days it's acceptable for them to not have them, and they shouldn't be removed because standards have changed.

On a related note, I reverted Expert's actions on the rankings at Axel's request. In in the next rankings rewrite I should make it so only mods can remove times, and any untieds require moderator approval...
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: RWG on April 11, 2014, 05:42:34 am
WHAT THE FUCK

REMOVE THAT IMMEDIATELY

WHY THE FUCK WOULD UNTIEDS NEED APPROVAL

NOW THERE IS A BOTTLENECK SO WHEN LUKE GETS CAVS SA 117 FOR INSTANCE, AND BOSS GETS IT 3 HOURS LATER, THEY WILL BE "APPROVED" AT THE SAME TIME
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Adam Miller on April 11, 2014, 05:54:26 am
Presumably they will be approved in the order that they come in. I can't imagine the mods will get flooded with untied times to approve.

Also, I imagine the time/date stamp will be from the time submitted and not the time it was approved. Using your example, it Luke got Cavs SA 01:17 on the 23rd of the month and the mods approved it two days later, it will be on the records as achieved on the 23rd - not the 25th.

I am speculating of course, because I imagine the mods have already considered this situation and don't just decide things on a whim. Correct me if I am wrong, YE.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 11, 2014, 06:23:52 am
It is interesting how people who do not have 53 are claiming they have any idea about what skill is required to get 53. It's also interesting how all of the people who think the time should remain on the ranks are more or less irrelevant on the GE ranks.

If you think the time is being taken down just because it's a WR with no video you have NO CLUE what this issue is about. When you say things like "if this time gets removed then other WR times without proof should be removed" it further demonstrates that you have NO CLUE what the issue is here.

This isn't just about a WR without a vid. It's a unique scenario where a player with no other times that require skill claiming an insane WR with no proof at an insane date.

Do not talk about 'precedents'. You don't have to set a 'precedent' with every fucking action you take. Seriously, look at the situation and make logical decisions. "The time has to remain on the rankings because it's old" is the most retarded argument I've ever seen. Actually use your brains please. If you have a logical reason for this time to remain then state it.

Essentially all of the good players are saying this time likely was not achieved. For VARIOUS reasons. You choose to blatantly overlook this because of some principal you are pulling out of your ass.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Shadow on April 11, 2014, 07:55:53 am
More drama.

(https://forums.the-elite.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FsecIcN0b7tAZ2%2Fgiphy.gif&hash=ae34affc0f081b637348483e2cd79436d9914e30)
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Henning Blom on April 11, 2014, 08:36:03 am
There is a video of 54 with best time saying 0:53.

Is Dan's 53 real? Probably not.

It should be removed. 

Will it ever happen? Probably not.  :kappa:

I should be let back on to the rankings if the elite accepts 11+ year old lies.  :kappa:
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 11, 2014, 08:54:37 am
This time is different to others because the time is way too good compared to his other times and was achieved at an insane date. It's very similar to your 54 and I see the only reason you're so quick to defend this random time that you know nothing about is because you know your time is in the same boat.

It is interesting how people who do not have 53 are claiming they have any idea about what skill is required to get 53. It's also interesting how all of the people who think the time should remain on the ranks are more or less irrelevant on the GE ranks.

If you think the time is being taken down just because it's a WR with no video you have NO CLUE what this issue is about. When you say things like "if this time gets removed then other WR times without proof should be removed" it further demonstrates that you have NO CLUE what the issue is here.

This isn't just about a WR without a vid. It's a unique scenario where a player with no other times that require skill claiming an insane WR with no proof at an insane date.

Do not talk about 'precedents'. You don't have to set a 'precedent' with every fucking action you take. Seriously, look at the situation and make logical decisions. "The time has to remain on the rankings because it's old" is the most retarded argument I've ever seen. Actually use your brains please. If you have a logical reason for this time to remain then state it.

Essentially all of the good players are saying this time likely was not achieved. For VARIOUS reasons. You choose to blatantly overlook this because of some principal you are pulling out of your ass.

So my :54 War PA never happened is what you're saying, right Karl? I never had the "skill" to get it at that date and time? Yet I was the one with the Untied :56 War PA record at the time. No competition there. With a video and all. I surpassed my own time to achieve :54. 2001 and 2002 were big years for me. To tell me that I didn't have the skill involved to get the time is ignorant.

I removed my :54 War PA yesterday to see the ripple effect of what would happen. It longer listed on the Longest lasting WR list. The time just vanished and Karl got the first :54 in 2004. Nice untied Karl! Is this what everyone wanted to see? A gap in reality? An emptiness of truth behind my time? Also, I did not request to have my time put back on the ranks. YE and Axel decided it needed to stay up.

Dan's time is not in the "same boat" as me. Understandably it was extremely difficult to get the time back in 2003. I know for a fact because I was someone that was trying to get it. Someone mentioned that he may have had a video of :54. That's probably lost in the internet somewhere by now or was forever erased on someone's hard drive years ago. He has other videos showing his strafing abilities. I don't know how any of you can say that he didn't get the time at all. No one knows for sure. Could he have gotten a crazy fluke run like Bryan. Extremely fast door, 2-3 guard boosts perhaps? No one will ever know. But what we do know is that "Lookdown" was used with most times achieved in 2002 and on. Dam is not a "skill" level. It 75% luck with a little bit of strafing tightly at the end. 40 people wouldn't have :53 if it was a "skilled" time.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SgtRaven on April 11, 2014, 09:04:41 am
There is not a single other person who got 53 that doesn't either have mutiple WR's or at least some other strong times with a full times page.

With the timesheet I have this really, REALLY makes me wanna try and grind out a luckbox :53.

All currently submitted times 80 points and higher should require proof via video. The quality of said video is another story. I do not like the idea of removing a time that is 11 years old just because of the current standards. REGARDLESS of the points about learning and becoming better and becoming more strict etc. All times on the ranks submitted prior to any rule changes should be grandfathered in UNTIL proven to be fake. We shouldn't go monkeying around with really old times because they don't measure up to the standards had they been submitted yesterday. The idea to take down an 11 year old time just sounds like it was a troll move to keep things entertaining on the boards. Congrats, it succeeded.
*golf clap*
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: AZ on April 11, 2014, 10:03:18 am
Since it's been brought up a few times (but never linked), here's Dan's Dam video:


Expert, we reinstated not just WAR 54, but all the others of your 122 PRs, since no player should be able to remove already claimed times, especially times 10+ years old.

Oh, and Trent provided proof of his Dam 53, but it was later deleted. Same thing with Clemens' Egypt 45.

If a player possess skill or not is hardly relevant in this case (besides, not many Berube videos exists). What people are upset about is that Berube was the first to tie an untied WR. But using this logic, Ben Southward's Caverns A 1:03 should also be removed (he was the first to tie the untied by WJ). Southward's 103 was also achieved at "an insane date" (even earlier than Berube's 53), and barely no PRs of Southwards has video proof. And by looking at Ben's timepage, 103 is by far his best time. Yet, people fail to look at this issue objectively, and Southward's 103 is overlooked just because 103 isn't the WR anymore.

And what about a player like Tim Greneby and his claimed untieds? 2:13 on Train 00A was a 4 sec untied when set but was never proven (probably because Tim was a proof mod or so at the time). Same thing with his Cav 00A 2:02. Those times were untied for more than a year, and barely any Greneby videos are in existence. So please don't come and say that "Greneby at least had skill, unlike Berube" because a) it's arbitrary, and b) barely any Greneby videos exists. Greneby was even banned in PD because he lied about all his times, so it's certainly possible he could've lied about some of his GE times as well. But no one gives a damn about his times anymore because they have been beaten. But when originally set, they were insane.

So yeah, please give me a good reason as to why we only should remove Berube's 53 but not Southward/Greneby etc times. Because 53 is still a WR? Well, what if Dam 52 is achieved tomorrow?

Personally, I want 53 removed but by doing so is at the same time very inconsistent. If we should remove it because it's a WR, then Adam Matis's Arch 16 needs to go too. If we should remove it because it's a significant time i.e. 80+ points, then many of Glen Stevens claimed 80+ PRs needs to be removed as well because, according to Goose, Shawn + every active player, "agrees that every 80+ pointer should have a video", and especially since those times were claimed as late as in 2006-2008 but somehow were never proof called.

I'm not defending Dan's 53 or anything. I just want people to look at this matter objectively.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: OHMSS on April 11, 2014, 10:19:33 am
Is Glen Stevens really proven as poorly as his current timespage suggests? Lol, rankings-integrity-wise that'd be ridiculous.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 11, 2014, 10:28:36 am
Rayola's posts and actions remind me of me when I was 16. Seriously bro, are you having a midlife crisis or something?
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 11, 2014, 10:35:12 am
On a side note, Axel does bring up good points.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 11, 2014, 10:35:28 am
Rayola's posts and actions remind me of me when I was 16. Seriously bro, are you having a midlife crisis or something?

You brought up my :54. I'm responding to what you had said.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: SimThreat on April 11, 2014, 10:38:36 am
Removing your times and ranting about the emptiness is an appropriate response? I don't see it. Your time is similar in so many ways to this 53. Though your situation in general is different. But the time is similar in more ways than it is different.

It's over 10 years old, unproven, outside standard deviation and STILL considered a very hard time.

I never doubted your 54 but your crazy actions have me second guessing to be honest.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Wyst3r on April 11, 2014, 10:44:12 am
Gotta agree with what Axel said. There are so many questionable times from the past, and we simply have no way of telling which ones are real/fake. Beginning a removal process now would be very complicated and surely end up in the removal of many legit and historical times.

Looking at that :54 vid, it seems like Dan at least had the skills necessary for 53 (Although that obviously doesn't have to mean anything). If i were to guess, i'd say the 53 is legit.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Aztec Exemplar on April 11, 2014, 10:44:13 am
Dam is not a "skill" level. It 75% luck with a little bit of strafing tightly at the end. 40 people wouldn't have :53 if it was a "skilled" time.

(https://i.imgur.com/in2oSSX.png)
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ExpertGamer64 on April 11, 2014, 10:52:53 am
There are so many questionable times from the past, and we simply have no way of telling which ones are real/fake. Beginning a removal process now would be very complicated and surely end up in the removal of many legit and historical times.

This. This. And more of this.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Lark on April 11, 2014, 10:53:06 am
I agree that removing Dan's 0:53 would be inconsistent. It is annoying that an unproven world record is on the rankings, but we are not certain if it is legitimate or not.

I don't like the idea of implementing "mod approved" untieds before they go on the rankings. There have been some incidents with new players submitting troll untieds like caverns 0:30, but those are always quickly spotted and removed. I believe that the GoldenEye and Perfect Dark players should have some freedom and control of their times page.

Please omit any personal insults. Let's try to be objective FOR ONCE.

Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Deep-Darkness on April 11, 2014, 11:02:00 am
Just saying, but the fact that most PRs are bad doesn't imply the fact that one can't get a good time. For example, Toth got Defection SA as an untied on PD and most of his shown PRs are bad.

Edit: in fact, Dan Berube beats/ties a lot of my Agent times, so considering how easily I got 0:54, I don't see why he wouldn't have a lucky day or something. I'm not defending him, since I don't know him at all, and I can't know if his time is real. I'm just saying that some people complain of other's bad arguments and then give bad arguments.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: ManceGaydar on April 11, 2014, 11:06:26 am
Who actually supports the time being up?

Ngamer?  That's about it?

I'm considering pursuing legal action on Ngamer to rid him from this community.  If he's gone, everything changes for the better.

Bahahahaha please, please, please, PLEASE do this.

Obviously a new sub forum will be required for the Goose vs Ngamer case.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Mavalock on April 11, 2014, 11:33:13 am
40 people wouldn't have :53 if it was a "skilled" time.

Go cake it, then.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: typosaur on April 11, 2014, 02:56:53 pm
Why not just implement a proven rankings into the current elite rankings (i.e. filter by video icons) and make everyone happy? It can't be that hard.
Didn't a proven ranking exist before? Personally I don't have any strong opinions on this particular Berube case, but I think Axel shares some good points in his latest post. With the ranks the way they are I guess it's inevitable that there is some uncertainty whether a few times (WRs or not) were actually achieved. Having separate proven rankings would sort out a lot though and maybe in the future the proven rankings would be more important and sort of more prestigious than the normal ranking.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: Wouter Jansen on April 11, 2014, 03:21:41 pm
I think mod approval for untieds could be an idea for newcomers and lowranked players who haven't shown capability of untieds yet, but once someone has proven capability they should be free to post untieds. At least some sort of system to prevent trolls from totally unknown names. (better than fix afterwards)
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: AZ on April 11, 2014, 04:32:41 pm
Is Glen Stevens really proven as poorly as his current timespage suggests? Lol, rankings-integrity-wise that'd be ridiculous.

I agree 100%. But people like Glen in general and think he's sexy and skilled and stuff so it's OK for him not to have 80+ pointers proven. He jumped all the way from like top 30 to top 7 within just a few weeks in 2007 with like not even half of his times proven. A complete joke.

Furthermore, he once made a fake account, Dion Goodman, and posted Archives 16/55s with it. And he once claimed Aztec 00A 145 (current WR at the time) along with very strong Aztec A/SA times. Fortunately, those claimed times of his were backrolled, but not stuff like Statue 00A 219, S2 00A 132, Depots (1.2'd) etc. And his current claimed 1:52 on Aztec 00A was a 97 pointer when set, yet it was never proven.

But Glen is not the only player with strong times unproven. There are quite a few others (just check all the levels for all missing video icons), although he is the worst example.

Didn't a proven ranking exist before?

Yeah I updated it for a while and it was really fun and all. However, the moment another eliter was caught faking a video I decided to abandon it. Why bother updating such a ranking if people cannot be trusted and still keep faking videos anyway. Unfortunately, it's relatively easy to fake a video as we've seen in the past, and many people don't like seeing horrible digcam proof on a proven ranks in the first place.
Title: Re: Remove Dan Berube's 53 or we riot
Post by: bcks on April 11, 2014, 05:24:25 pm
It is interesting how people who do not have 53 are claiming they have any idea about what skill is required to get 53. It's also interesting how all of the people who think the time should remain on the ranks are more or less irrelevant on the GE ranks.

If you think the time is being taken down just because it's a WR with no video you have NO CLUE what this issue is about. When you say things like "if this time gets removed then other WR times without proof should be removed" it further demonstrates that you have NO CLUE what the issue is here.

This isn't just about a WR without a vid. It's a unique scenario where a player with no other times that require skill claiming an insane WR with no proof at an insane date.

Do not talk about 'precedents'. You don't have to set a 'precedent' with every fucking action you take. Seriously, look at the situation and make logical decisions. "The time has to remain on the rankings because it's old" is the most retarded argument I've ever seen. Actually use your brains please. If you have a logical reason for this time to remain then state it.

Essentially all of the good players are saying this time likely was not achieved. For VARIOUS reasons. You choose to blatantly overlook this because of some principal you are pulling out of your ass.

Karl, remember when Thiradell questioned your War agent :25 video, and you got a little angry at him, and told him it was dealt with in the past, why bring it up now.
Same situation.
It has been dealt with, many year ago, time to move on.

Also, All the good players do not say it wasn't achieved.