Author Topic: THE ULTIMATE DAM 53 OPINION POLL (Read 2562 times)

RWG · « **on:** January 16, 2015, 10:15:41 am »

It's time to see where the community and the players stand regarding Dan Berube's unproven Dam Agent 0:53 WR, noteworthy for historical implications of being the first tie on the oldest WR, a long standing untied, and one of the defining WRs of the greatest Goldeneye player in history.

This is a POLL. But not an automated one. There will be three subsets of voters. The Goldeneye Top 20. Those with Dam Agent 0:53. And everyone else. Your answer must be in the format:

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES/NO/DON'T CARE
Explain why? - (answer a few words here.)

I will manually keep the OP updated with results from each subset. I will use this information to present to The Elite Council and therefore this thread should be taken as research for the council.

-----------------------------------------------

Goldeneye Top 20:

Perfectace - YES
Clemens
Marc
Luke - YES
Boss
Karl - YES
Goose - YES
Jimmy
Jimbo
Illu
Koch - YES
Eise
Alex
Afan - YES
Guillermo
Kirkness
Cervone
Lovins
Coehlo - YES
Wouter

Those with Dam Agent 0:53

Leo Santos
Arnaud Navilite
Gragz Maddocks
Glen Stevens
Rafael Lanfredi
Eddie Lovins
Axel Z - YES
Lockwood - YES
Patrik N
Cliff
Greg Woll
Bozon
Mirrormage1 - YES
Stefan Persson
Speedruntrainer
Henrik
Adam Moore
Stoxen
JustinDT
Troubleclef - YES
OHMSS - YES
TaylorTotFTW - YES
Sammy Rodgers
Typosaur
Nick Franks
Walton Mattei
Gus Riolo
Dan Parker - YES
Joao Andrade - YES
Jonathon Hotinski - - YES
Aaron Morgan - YES
Oscar P
Matthew Burden

Everyone Else:

Flickerform - YES
Quizno - YES
Thingy - NO
Dugg - YES
Icy - YES
Qweczol - YES

flicker · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2015, 10:17:05 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - Prove it or remove it.

SimThreat · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2015, 10:18:01 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - Time is too significant to be unproven. Whoever originally made the decision to allow the time made a mistake. Just because someone made a mistake in the past doesn't mean everyone else has to live with it now.

flukey lukey · « **Reply #3 on:** January 16, 2015, 10:32:16 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - U didn't provide proofe Jungle Bell Cat :#

sweetener · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2015, 10:33:23 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - why the fuck are there unproven WRs on the rankings

Quizno · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2015, 10:39:24 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - Every WR should be proven. Especially WRs that tie an UWR. Plenty of people have Dam53 (not me) it should be easy enough to dupe.

Aztec Exemplar · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:11:55 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - DB looks ugly on the rankings.

TheFlash · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:25:01 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - NO
Explain why? - I think we need to follow the established rules of the site instead of just acting on things based on who has the loudest voice.

http://rankings.the-elite.net/proof#Subsection_iv.29_Grandfathering

Quote

Current significant world records (set before December 31, 2013) will be grandfathered.

RK · « **Reply #8 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:34:56 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - ABSOLUTELY
Explain why? - There is no proof. "Preserving the elite's history" is a not a legitimate reason to grandfather it in.

Wody · « **Reply #9 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:35:32 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - DB can't read.

DYM · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2015, 11:43:03 am »

Quote from: dat Flicker on January 16, 2015, 10:17:05 am

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - Prove it or remove it.

Couldn't have been summed up better.

AZ · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:03:59 pm »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - I would like the rankings to be as proven as possible

Scrambler Fanny · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:12:12 pm »

Quote from: Stalemate on January 16, 2015, 01:03:59 pm

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - I would like the rankings to be as proven as possible

<:

Swiss · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:13:43 pm »

Quote from: dsx on January 16, 2015, 10:33:23 am

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - why the fuck are there unproven WRs on the rankings

Icy · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2015, 01:53:17 pm »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - No proof.

Spec · « **Reply #15 on:** January 16, 2015, 03:11:02 pm »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES

Explain why? - There is no evidence. The proof policy might have been loose back in the day, because it was much easier to give an excuse for a non-recorded time. But we, as a community shall look into everything shady, suspicious and/or unlikely. Doubting them, defending them, seeing both sides of the story and getting closer to the truth. Saying that it should be kept solely because of how things were "back then" is an argument with no basis to stand on, given how the ranking system is structured and what its objective is.

I am a world record holder for this level. (João Andrade)

Wodahs-Reklaw · « **Reply #16 on:** January 16, 2015, 03:45:20 pm »

I support removal of Dan B. 53

Because he has no proof and

Quote from: Wyst3r on January 16, 2015, 01:58:39 pm

Grandfathering is good in the sense that it takes into account the technical limitations of the past, when today's quality video wasn't available and VHS was still the standard. However, to me it seems it'd be going too far to include times that have no proof at all, even if the non-existing policy of the past allowed it. We need to set a reasonable standard and keep the current rankings as trustworthy as possible, without erasing all of the history of this site.

Removing WRs that have never had vids at all seems like a good starting point (the case of lost videos is tricky, but should be discussed as well). How far to go beyond that, i dunno. I think the best option might be to go by the current proof policy, and remove times that require proof today. That way, you at least keep the rankings as accurate as the current proof policy requires them to be (obviously, there would be no point in removing times below this point, since we don't proof call them today anyway).

Disregard what I just said, this is stupid and I don't care what happens.

Taylor · « **Reply #17 on:** January 16, 2015, 04:57:27 pm »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - Current WR with no video proof. ez

T+ · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2015, 01:52:38 am »

Do you support killing DB53 (as a non important voter) - YES
Why? It reflects poorly on the community especially given the high standard The-Elite is usually held to in public and within ourselves

deletedprofile.u · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2015, 02:27:09 am »

Quote from: dsx on January 16, 2015, 10:33:23 am

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - why the fuck are there unproven WRs on the rankings

OHMSS · « **Reply #20 on:** January 17, 2015, 06:53:50 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - No unproven WRs or significant PRs on the ranks! The 53 should've never gone up.

OG · « **Reply #21 on:** January 17, 2015, 07:08:41 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings aka #BERUBE2015? - YES
Why is that, mellow fellow? - As is the fact, there is no proof: it was his responsibility to record the run.

RWG · « **Reply #22 on:** January 17, 2015, 12:52:56 pm »

Updated the OP

of 23 people who responded to the poll so far, 22 are in favour of the time being removed.

I will work on a post to present to the elite council on this matter.

Infected Mind · « **Reply #23 on:** January 17, 2015, 09:00:59 pm »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - No proof, have doubted the time since 2003. Canadian Goldeneye rankings do not list this time, as we don't believe it is real. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1chdG-4Wyz4sAhxTKsiLMQpoW-vZwl_sh1BfiVycGpd8/edit#gid=0

johnlennon007 · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2015, 05:12:45 am »

I believe the time should be removed. Other people have to post proof of their times even if the player is a famous or respected player in the community. I may be pretty irrel since I'm technically new here but I have by on and off the forums as a guest for the past 10 years so I've seen my share of arguments on this topic.

Deep-Darkness · « **Reply #25 on:** January 18, 2015, 10:17:41 am »

Do you support Dan Berube's Dam 0:53 being removed from the rankings? - YES
Explain why? - No proof on a hard WR (Well, for me it is). For example, my Duel PA 0:09 was backrolled in 2010 for not having a video proof, even though the time had been done years before and I owned a photo proof and a video of the ending screen, appart from the many videos of the menu where you can clearly see the time (In adition, I'll say that I also had had a video proof of the run, but I haven't managed to find it in the computer, so meh). So yeah, I support this time being removed too.

flukey lukey · « **Reply #26 on:** January 18, 2015, 11:44:53 am »

Jimbo · « **Reply #27 on:** January 18, 2015, 12:05:23 pm »

There's too many jimmies being rustled with this topic now that it's spiraled mostly out of control. Kind of avoiding the vote on purpose...

News:

Author Topic: THE ULTIMATE DAM 53 OPINION POLL (Read 2562 times)