Author Topic: Dark Otto, Come on... BANNED, Attn Youse (Read 935 times)

JugadorJ3 · « **on:** January 01, 2004, 08:05:00 pm »

Edit: You didn't provide good enough proof of 130. So Youse will remove you when he gets a chance, right Youse? You can always send us a 131 / 132 vid and provide some proper scrolling proof at some point in the future to get let back in.

You're the next contestent on This is your Proof Call.

If you don't prove that you are able to achieve investigation agent 1:30 (yes this means get it again on tape) in 3 weeks you will be banned.

We also want proof that you have PAL so make sure the opening is on tape. If you can't get 130 again, 131 with scrolling proof of 130 will be fine, just as long as we see PAL on that screen.

Neo · « **Reply #1 on:** January 02, 2004, 01:21:00 am »

You can't tell me what to do.

Trent-Easton · « **Reply #2 on:** January 02, 2004, 01:53:00 pm »

haha, when did he got that time??
If it was a long time ago, you can't demand proof now.

renemesis · « **Reply #3 on:** January 02, 2004, 05:12:00 pm »

Says who?

Boss · « **Reply #4 on:** January 02, 2004, 10:46:00 pm »

Heh, Steven's 1:31 is gonna get taken down on GE soon so yeah.

OO · « **Reply #5 on:** January 07, 2004, 10:21:00 am »

Hmm... I have a 1:30 scrolling vid! But it's very crap quality but you should be able to see it somehow. It was taken with my friends digital camera the day I got it!

koti.mbnet.fi/darkotto/In...%20130.MPG

But the only problem is that there is no proof about that it's PAL on this video

Damnit, J3! I don't wanna get banned... I have been in the elite for over 3 years time and the elite means a lot to me!

Djie · « **Reply #6 on:** January 07, 2004, 10:30:00 am »

As he said just tape first screen showing the PAL thing. Then play Investigation to get at least 1:31. 1:30 Scrolling will be fine.

psycho · « **Reply #7 on:** January 07, 2004, 02:26:00 pm »

Yeah it's just that no-one else with pal has got under 1:32...

SamSim · « **Reply #8 on:** January 08, 2004, 01:49:00 am »

Just because he's calling proof doesn't mean he wants to ban you, dude.

.. · « **Reply #9 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:24:00 am »

Hey Matt, tell us again when you became the person that can make proof calls? You are a moderator of the forum and a proof mod, NOT a rankings moderator. This proof call was not legitamate as the only people that can really make them are Derek, Jon, Bryan, and Greg.

JugadorJ3 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:30:00 am »

Tell me again when you became enlighted to all the conversations I've had with people.

renemesis · « **Reply #11 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:32:00 am »

Um, three tuesdays ago.

JugadorJ3 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:37:00 am »

.. · « **Reply #13 on:** January 23, 2004, 10:02:00 am »

Why don't you answer my questions since they are actually pertinent to the information on the boards?

nspd 2 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 23, 2004, 01:25:00 pm »

I think Matt had the right to make this "proof call." Why not? There are people with WRs that are not proven and the moderators don't seem to give a damn about it at all...It's up to someone to question this, and I guess Matt was the one who did it.
I guarantee if Matt didn't start this "proof call," the guy would be in the rankings with his 1:30 ten years from now...assuming the rankings are still here.

And besides, it's not like he's doing the banning. If the moderators think it's not right for Matt to do this, then they just simply won't ban the guy...end of story.

.. · « **Reply #15 on:** January 23, 2004, 02:54:00 pm »

If Matt (or anyone else for that matter) seriously thinks that a proof call is required they should email Bryan or Jon. Besides, Ottos time is not even a WR anymore, nor is it as important to be proven (vids made) of.. seeing as there are people with untieds *cough*funkybuddha*cough* that haven't proven anything to the whole community.

Basically.. Tylers old sig

bcks · « **Reply #16 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:03:00 pm »

hit list one?

.. · « **Reply #17 on:** January 23, 2004, 03:40:00 pm »

I was thinking the "MATT COOK IS GAY" one..

youseinthehouse · « **Reply #18 on:** January 23, 2004, 05:02:00 pm »

Matt came to me first with the case, provided me reasons which Dark Otto should be banned, and asked if he could proof call. Of course I let him. 1) I didn't have to make the call... 2) I have no clue about investigation. He can't go around making random proof calls, which he hasn't. Everything must be checked with an appropriate mod, which he did here. If you see him ever make a proof call, it's because he has been given permission.

Looks like DO is gettin' banned until he can get some proof up of the 130.

edit: btw, is there any chance DO can just remove the 130 from his page and stay on the ranks? Or does he all around deserve to be banned totally, I'm asking Matt here. Because it seems to me his is pretty legit otherwise, and might have just not gotten around to proof of the 130. Your call though, since you're the one pressing.

JugadorJ3 · « **Reply #19 on:** January 24, 2004, 03:15:00 am »

Yes, it would be my preference to see him stay in the rankings, without the 1:30. It's the only time of his which is a problem. Keep DO in the ranks without 130.

youseinthehouse · « **Reply #20 on:** January 24, 2004, 04:59:00 pm »

You heard it here first, Dark Otto, change your 1:30 to N/A or your next best proven PR and you're allowed to stay. Failure to comply within a few updates = you getting banned.

JugadorJ3 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 26, 2004, 07:03:00 am »

Holy Kabooly. I can't believe how stupid I was to not realise this immediately. If anyone has good recollected of emulated perfect dark, you'll remember that at level select screen the background is black. Just like in the vid DO posted. It doesn't end there. I watched the vid in full screen. Just as i suspected, the font is just like in the emulated perfect dark. MORE... Greg pointed this out. Instead of having -- : -- for the lack of perfect agent time... it has this "." Yes a fullstop or something.

The vid is 100% fake. He should be removed from the elite.

genisics · « **Reply #22 on:** January 26, 2004, 07:36:00 am »

hmm.. kinda off topic.. but now emulation has been brang up... what would u say is a decent n64 emulator?

JugadorJ3 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 26, 2004, 07:51:00 am »

pj64.

I think the site is www.pj64.net - I could be wrong though:-/

OO · « **Reply #24 on:** January 26, 2004, 08:34:00 am »

Thank you very much Youse and JJ3

for letting me stay in the rankings! I will change my Invest A time as soon as possible, is it OK if I change it to 1:37? I would not like to change it to N/A then I would get out of the top 100 Agent rankings

bcks · « **Reply #25 on:** January 26, 2004, 08:53:00 am »

Dude DO, read 3 posts above yours.

OO · « **Reply #26 on:** January 26, 2004, 09:45:00 am »

Oops, didn't read the whole topic

OK, so I got banned then!?! I have to admit, yes JJ3 you are right I used Project64 to get this 1:30 time on PAL (PAL ROM that is), thought at first that there were no difference between the ROM and the real thing... On my real cart I have been able to get 1:34 $:\$ By the way this time is the ONLY time that I have that is fake (=played on emulator), all my other times are real. If you want I can try to make a video showing me scrolling through all my times to prove that I'm at least telling the truth about this thing!?

I don't know why I were so damn stupid in the first place to post a time that I got with an emulator, should have never done that

I don't expect you guys to take me back into the elite even if I show a scrolling vid of all my times or do you?

No matter if I get back into the elite or not, I will still continue to play PD and improve my times, I have done it the latest 3 years so why would I quit now?

Oh, and thank you everyone for sharing your videos, sharing strats and making this such a nice gaming community as it has been or is, it has been a very fun 3 years

By the way, if someone wants the PD ROM then I'm sharing it on AIM but don't ever consider doing the same thing as I did or you will get banned :evil

Sorry about all the trouble I have caused

vitor · « **Reply #27 on:** January 26, 2004, 06:48:00 pm »

Neo · « **Reply #28 on:** January 27, 2004, 03:15:00 am »

Yeah, that's funny and stuff...and I will steal that rom from you.

SadisticMystic1 · « **Reply #29 on:** January 27, 2004, 09:25:00 am »

Note that the camera angle on that scrolling video is not aligned.

That's not something you'd think would be likely on a computer screen. Maybe a TV, but there's no reason an external digital camera needs to be used for proofs from computer screens.

genisics · « **Reply #30 on:** January 27, 2004, 10:13:00 am »

to make it less obvious it's been taken from a computer screen @#%$, if he took a straight screenshot everyone would be like.. @#%$ you you're gay, but doing it in that way people were like.. oh.. that's cool.. then eventually like @#%$ you you're gay etc.

SadisticMystic1 · « **Reply #31 on:** January 27, 2004, 10:50:00 am »

A TV screenshot or video can appear perfectly straight and square by being transferred from VCR.

A computer screenshot can appear the same way without needing a VCR or equipment, just by using screen-recorder software.

And if someone has the capability of transferring video from a fixed camera, surely it wouldn't be unreasonable to be able to transfer the smoother view from a VCR, so they don't have to go out of their way to take the shot from such a camera angle that the use of camera instead of VCR is apparent.

In any case, it seems doubtful that anyone would need a camera to record their computer screen.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #32 on:** January 27, 2004, 01:47:00 pm »

who cares? the fact is the guy did it and admitted to using an emulator (a pc thing, you know) so why are you even trying to defend him?

also don't act like everyone is smart, most people are too dumb to think of such simple things that they rather do something harder which they've already been learned how to do even though the result is the same, or has the same effect (only thing different in this case is the angle and quality maybe).

SadisticMystic1 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 27, 2004, 03:24:00 pm »

That wasn't exactly a defense...if I could show that the time wasn't from an emulator, after he claimed it was, then even an emulated 1:30 would have its credibility blasted.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #34 on:** January 27, 2004, 05:28:00 pm »

man just face the facts, we've given the reason for why it was emulated already. he certainly didn't use a n64, so it doesn't matter whatever he used, if it was an emulator or a hacked game, it doesn't count. and if we know a time is emulated it already has no credibility.

News:

Author Topic: Dark Otto, Come on... BANNED, Attn Youse (Read 935 times)

JugadorJ3

renemesis

JugadorJ3

renemesis

JugadorJ3

nspd 2

JugadorJ3

JugadorJ3

JugadorJ3