Donkey Kong Forum

High Score Lists => Donkey Kong High Score Lists => Topic started by: lakeman421 on June 08, 2021, 10:30:24 pm

Title: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: lakeman421 on June 08, 2021, 10:30:24 pm
Robbie Lakeman
1,272,800
06/08/21
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Fliplismc on June 08, 2021, 11:03:12 pm
So lowering your voltage got you an extra 100 points?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: John73 on June 08, 2021, 11:06:59 pm
Robbie Lakeman
1,272,800
06/08/21

GG.  Not sure if it's just me, but there is no sound on the YouTube video for some reason :(
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 09, 2021, 01:49:19 am
Robbie Lakeman
1,272,800
06/08/21

As it stands, I will not be accepting this score. Over the past several months Robbie has publicly declared his intent to manipulate DK hardware in an attempt to get more favorable RNG in his games, namely by lowering the voltage delivered to the DK PCB. While this specific hardware modification is not explicitly against the DKF submission rules (https://donkeykongforum.net/index.php?topic=365.0), I do believe it's a violation of the fair play rules:

Quote
D. Special
      d. Any score may be rejected if a player uses a technique or method not mentioned here, if it violates the spirit of the game and the spirit of fair play.

To be clear, I am not rejecting this score because I believe Robbie has actually given himself an unfair advantage or succeeded in his attempts to improve the game's RNG. At best, modifying the game's voltage results in a placebo effect. At worst, it results in a malfunctioning game. In fact, considered in a vacuum, this game may very well be a completely legitimate performance.

I am rejecting this score because Robbie has shown a willingness to alter the gameplay, and the possibility of other alterations (either in this submission or in the future) can't be ignored.

Oh, and his submission has no audio ffs.

However, since Robbie considers me a "biased prick", it seems it would be judicious to get input from the community (which Robbie has recently labeled as "DKFairies", I believe). Please share your thoughts, whatever they might be.

I will be busy Thursday-Saturday and probably won't have time to respond to anything in that timeframe.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Sock Master on June 09, 2021, 05:37:14 am
Congratulations, Robbie!  Good game

I am not a fan of the poor sportsmanship, hypocrisy and abusive behavior towards other players.  Frequently accusing other players of cheating while simultaneously doing your best to cheat yourself (even if ineffectively) is not a good approach and is doing everyone, especially yourself a disfavor.   Please consider being more mindful of your position in the community and how it affects other players.

That aside, I think it's a valid game.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 09, 2021, 06:01:09 am
As someone who thinks a lot of his ability to be judicious (lolz) I would say to Robbie that the first step in doing everything to ensure this performance is acceptable is providing footage that includes the audio. I suspect that if the board isn't operating under standard conditions the audio may be affected. If the audio sounds atypical it would be damning and the score shouldn't be accepted. I'm all for skepticism and conservatism when it comes to accepting/rejecting a score based on unsportsmanlike behavior that suggests foul play occurred, but I'd certainly like some more data on this particular performance to shore up that notion.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: aarontruitt on June 09, 2021, 06:23:17 am
I have a lot of feelings about this, but ultimately, I believe that the score is valid.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: colecomeister on June 09, 2021, 06:59:37 am
Thanks xelnia - I appreciate your commitment to transparency and objectivity in assessing Robbie's score.

I don't know if it was Robbie's last one, but due to a blasting I witnessed on a recent stream of DKForum, its members, and his endorsement of the Mitchell lawsuits (against the community he apparently wishes to claim membership in and use as a platform to highlight his achievements), I'm actually shocked that he decided to submit his score here. It's sad to say, but in light of his recent pronouncements, his submission has the feeling of provocation rather than celebration.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 09, 2021, 07:43:41 am
For the record, Robbie submitted this to TG also. Same video it would seem. No sound.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Lyriell on June 09, 2021, 07:58:11 am
Lots of thoughts and feelings.

The community that has grown around this game and the hard work Jeremy has put into score tracking is second to none.  If I was him, considering the circumstances he is under, I probably would have crawled under a rock and stopped tracking all scores.  I have the utmost respect for him and I understand why he would want to reject this score. It is his board and his hard work that keeps it going.  Nobody has a 'right' to have a score submitted, just like someone who is toxic in the forums deserves to no longer have the ability to post.

However; what I come back to every time is that the integrity of this scoreboard has to come before any of us.  I understand only too acutely the strain playing this game against a random number generator can take on its players mentally, and I am prone to many a bad word or two about the game and how unfair it is when I play.  However, I believe there's also a line to be drawn with poor sportsmanship. 

In the real world, if a player acted with the same kind of outward hostility for other players or team mates in the same way we sometimes see in this community, they would be ejected from a team and there would be repercussions.  Real sporting teams will fine players or side-line them if their behaviour throws a bad light on their sport.  No player is above the sport they compete in, even world record holders.  That being said, a score is a score.

Robbie, your skill at this game affords you a unique platform from which to demonstrate the depth of this game game and the amazing community that has grown from under it.  I understand that there are situations I am not privy to that have caused tensions in the past, but I still dream of a scenario when these things can be put behind all and we can focus on the game and maybe one day all of us attend a Kong off together.  I have not enjoyed being the target of false accusations or mocking etc..   Also, for the record, I do not care what voltage you play your game on, though I do not like the principle of what is going on here.  I am in agreement with Jeremy in that it is a placebo effect, so at the end of the day... if you believe it puts you on a level playing field with others, please continue to do so.  I however, do not wish to be accused of these things and I'm sure others do not either.  I also do not think it is in the right spirit of the game.

I say accept the score, but I am going to put forward a motion that in the future, sound be a requirement to these games.  I feel Robbie did a good job of validating his board and the gameplay looks genuine.  I have no qualms in saying Robbie is one of the best players there has ever, and is likely to be.   

Let's all be better people.


Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 08:00:08 am
It seems that this forum accepts scores from gamers wearing masks with no actual identity, but rejects others due to their own insecurities.
Hard work, dedication and not bowing down to bullies.  <thefinger>
The real King of Kong and most importantly. The REAL deal.  8)

Congratulations Robbie  8)
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 09, 2021, 08:19:35 am
The voltage is shown to be 4.7V

Can anyone shed light on this issue in a technical sense? I know 5V is specified in the manual. Is it 5V plus or minus a tenth or something? This is a technical question so feel free to give me the  <Pigger> and move this comment or something. This is the last remark I'll make and I'll take my answers off the air. Thanks.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: DonkeyShlong on June 09, 2021, 08:21:01 am
As much as I see the thoughts behind declining it, and echoing Matts post, the board should be based on facts and not feuds.  We all know from watching his aggressive play style, that it was just a matter of time before the score dropped.  His last few games on Twitch have been very focused and super high pace.

Do I agree with some of the stuff Robbie has said?  Absolutely not, but it's a two way street, and those people IMO need to get in the Discord voice chat and resolve it amicably.  I've had multiple DK players pm me saying how I shouldn't be friendly with Robbie because they personally have an issue with him.  One of them (who won't be named) blocked and unfriended me the other day purely because I get on with Robbie!  ???  It was someone I once respected as a person and a player, and supported every time he streamed.  It was pathetic keyboard warrior behaviour, and makes me not want to part of the community.

When I first started playing this daft addictive game, Robbie was the WR holder.  He messaged me god knows how many times giving me tips and supporting me on my stream, being nothing but a gent.  He even came on the stream with a few of us and we had a nice crowd enjoying the fun with no drama.  He could have quite easily just ignored a new player like me given his experience in the game.

Jeremy, just to clarify, that there's no sides from me here. You're a top bloke for putting in so many hours to track and keep the board running like you do, and we're all thankful for it.  8)
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Flobeamer1922 on June 09, 2021, 08:26:45 am
Robbie's behavior has been outright embarrassing. That said, lack of audio not withstanding, I think this score is valid.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: TheKD on June 09, 2021, 09:50:51 am

John?s WR video had no game sound. No one seemed to mind.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: GILLYKONG on June 09, 2021, 10:28:45 am
No sound kinda reminds me of the Jr remix submission he tried. At this point I think Robbie knows what he can get away with. And is just trying to get egg on people's face. Put the score up with a* maybe put in the rules all submissions from here on out.need sound? Give the guy his due. Or you could just bann him and be done with it. Probably get sued though.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Flobeamer1922 on June 09, 2021, 10:56:40 am

John?s WR video had no game sound. No one seemed to mind.
This does have audio. It's just really quiet.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 11:02:06 am

John?s WR video had no game sound. No one seemed to mind.

Exactly  ::)
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Sock Master on June 09, 2021, 11:17:36 am

John?s WR video had no game sound. No one seemed to mind.

Exactly  ::)

I can hear the sound just fine.  Try turning down your reality distortion field and turning up the volume.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 11:24:46 am

John?s WR video had no game sound. No one seemed to mind.

Exactly  ::)

I can hear the sound just fine.  Try turning down your reality distortion field and turning up the volume.

Clown.....  <thefinger>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Pearl on June 09, 2021, 11:35:02 am
(https://i.imgur.com/TSbduIU.png)

the supposed no sound in john's game from a 15 second snippet
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 09, 2021, 11:40:29 am
subscribing

i look forward to seeing if new rules will be put in place after soundgate.  also i clicked on mccurdy's video, the sound is low yet there as stated, this takes all of 5 seconds to verify.  Really enjoying the highly intellectual debate of these difficult to understand nuances.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 09, 2021, 11:45:49 am
I believe Robbie's score is 100% legit and have no reason to believe a voltage of 4.7 would cause a change in RNG. There are a variety of reasons why, but the main one is that the voltage would have to specifically influence the memory address responsible for the RNG timer and nothing else in order to directly influence the randomness. On top of that, it would have to only occur on the barrel boards and no other stage according to Robbie's testimony. It would be nice if the video had sound, but there's nothing in the video itself that indicates direct cheating. With all of that said, I congratulate Robbie on his achievement.

However, Robbie believes that he is cheating using this method. Admitting to attempting (whether successful or not) to gain an advantage through hardware modification is very dubious with regards to the competitive spirit. Robbie is no stranger to violations of the competitive spirit given the images he currently has on his streamed games, or his ban from Kong League for harassment of league members and perceived homophobic comments. It is sad that the best player in the world chooses to represent hate considering how different things used to be.

I think it's very clear why Robbie chose to submit to both Donkey Kong Forum and Twin Galaxies -- Places that he views as utterly abhorrent: He wants to prove a point. He knew that the score would be rejected (at least on DKF) based on his actions and public comments, and this will make him a martyr in his own circle.

Bravo.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 09, 2021, 12:37:14 pm
Thanks for your input everyone. Keep it coming. For reference, I've attached some screenshots of the claims Robbie has been making. Check the next post as well.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 09, 2021, 12:37:41 pm
More screenshots.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: DonkeyShlong on June 09, 2021, 12:54:02 pm
Whilst I wish nobody would get into the side picking and insults, if the voltage gain is laughed upon as a load of cr@p, but then a score is denied (or even just questioned) because of it, all arcade scores would be then be 'hmmmm'.  Would that not require a full leaderboard reset? ???
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: GILLYKONG on June 09, 2021, 01:24:24 pm
Yeah let's do a full list reset lol. Makes no sense what so ever.  ROFL
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 01:26:14 pm
Thanks for your input everyone. Keep it coming. For reference, I've attached some screenshots of the claims Robbie has been making. Check the next post as well.

What a shining example you are for your DKF.

Bringing in screenshots of social media to feed and whip up animosity amongst other viewers, some of which have already made up their minds on the submission.
Truly pathetic.....  FailFish
You have rejected a perfectly legitimate score because you don't like a certain gamer and the friends he socialises with.

No wonder he wants nothing to do with you or your forum based on this infantile behaviour.

Well done.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: DonkeyShlong on June 09, 2021, 01:33:02 pm
Yeah let's do a full list reset lol. Makes no sense what so ever.  ROFL

If you read it carefully, you'd have picked up on the key word 'arcade' to which none of them show voltage. If voltage is in question, it's then not a full verify. Quite simple logic tbf...

If sound is the issue, that's a different debate.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: GILLYKONG on June 09, 2021, 01:49:08 pm
But why would an old score require new rules?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: DonkeyShlong on June 09, 2021, 02:05:09 pm
But why would an old score require new rules?

You're right, I apologise for being illogical.  Onto the next bicker post.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 09, 2021, 02:11:15 pm
Thanks for your input everyone. Keep it coming. For reference, I've attached some screenshots of the claims Robbie has been making. Check the next post as well.

What a shining example you are for your DKF.

Bringing in screenshots of social media to feed and whip up animosity amongst other viewers, some of which have already made up their minds on the submission.
Truly pathetic.....  FailFish
You have rejected a perfectly legitimate score because you don't like a certain gamer and the friends he socialises with.

No wonder he wants nothing to do with you or your forum based on this infantile behaviour.

Well done.

If I wanted to reject Robbie's scores based on my personal opinion of him and his social circle, I could have started a long time ago. Those screenshots come from multiple sources, so they indicate a wider concern from the community about his behavior. If a player believes the score moderator is biased, then it seems necessary to get community input, regardless of how misplaced that belief is.

If you have something to add about my actual reasons for rejecting the score, I'm all ears.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 02:28:57 pm
Thanks for your input everyone. Keep it coming. For reference, I've attached some screenshots of the claims Robbie has been making. Check the next post as well.

What a shining example you are for your DKF.

Bringing in screenshots of social media to feed and whip up animosity amongst other viewers, some of which have already made up their minds on the submission.
Truly pathetic.....  FailFish
You have rejected a perfectly legitimate score because you don't like a certain gamer and the friends he socialises with.

No wonder he wants nothing to do with you or your forum based on this infantile behaviour.

Well done.

If I wanted to reject Robbie's scores based on my personal opinion of him and his social circle, I could have started a long time ago. Those screenshots come from multiple sources, so they indicate a wider concern from the community about his behavior. If a player believes the score moderator is biased, then it seems necessary to get community input, regardless of how misplaced that belief is.

If you have something to add about my actual reasons for rejecting the score, I'm all ears.

No thanks.
I think you've already demonstrated that with you at the helm, this ships going down.
With any luck, like all decent captains, you'll stay on the bridge.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Kibbey93 on June 09, 2021, 02:47:09 pm
no sound no score  <confused>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 09, 2021, 02:55:18 pm
No thanks.
I think you've already demonstrated that with you at the helm, this ships going down.
With any luck, like all decent captains, you'll stay on the bridge.
I'm personally happy you're so invested in the success of DKF. I mean hey you logged your first ever post here on this very thread. That shows a commitment to this forum that is literally unmatched by anyone else commenting here. Thanks for taking it so seriously. I would like to know how you're so sure of the Ship Going Down seeing as this discussion is still ongoing and several long time members have spoken up in support of this run being valid. You seem very combative and dismissive as if you WANT this score to be rejected. It's all very strange. But ok you can walk away from an opportunity to make your case. Call it out of your hands and proclaim Robbie a DKF martyr.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 09, 2021, 02:59:07 pm
It should be accepted because at the moment I'm not a believer that lower voltage gives an advantage.
You could be setting a precedent where ALL 1.2 million games will need a voltage meter.
Until voltage is conclusively proven to give an advantage I am against rejecting the score.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: johnbart on June 09, 2021, 03:01:15 pm
Not even looking at all of the drama around voltages is there a reason given why there's no sound? Given that past submissions of his had sound I don't see why this one wouldn't have sound. Give the precedent for issues with sound with scores done on DDKs I think requiring sound is a reasonable expectation.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: dnickolas on June 09, 2021, 03:29:14 pm
It should be accepted because at the moment I'm not a believer that lower voltage gives an advantage.
You could be setting a precedent where ALL 1.2 million games will need a voltage meter.
Until voltage is conclusively proven to give an advantage I am against rejecting the score.

The only person in the world that thinks the voltage affects anything is Robbie, so yeah there's no danger of that.

And I still think it's incredible that Tanner's "double ground" 21M was playable at all.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 09, 2021, 04:15:55 pm
I've split this discussion off into its own thread.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: SithOfSpades on June 09, 2021, 04:44:10 pm
I think the score is valid and should be accepted.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 09, 2021, 05:14:23 pm
Just out of curiosity, are people planning on moving this discussion to the actual Twin Galaxies adjudication thread? 
I said there that I am abstaining, only because of the sound issue. 

For the record I believe Robbie's theory that low voltages / temperature can affect the game.  I have been programming since 1981 and have worked with computers as my career since 1990.  I have seen strange behaviour with overheating chips.  In fact, back in college we learned about a virus that would disable a sensor in a very specific computer chip that would cause the fan to not turn on.  This lead the CPU to overheat, causing permanent damage.

I have also seen computers that needed to be modified after they were shipped because there was a place inside that would build up humidity and cause the computer to start displaying artifacts on the screen (random crap).  Every ICON computer that we had in our school had a 1/8 inch hole drilled on the top of the case to improve airflow.  Problem solved.

Because of strange hardware behaviour like that, I gave Todd Rogers the benefit of the doubt when it came to his claim of getting scores after thousands and thousands of attempts in a row. 
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: antelope84 on June 09, 2021, 07:09:35 pm
my 2 cents:

1. I think the majority of us believe voltage to be a placebo effect , and do nothing outside of potentially causing the game to glitch in graphics (or not boot at all) if too low, and rather, be simply a motivation tool to those who believe that's the reason they are achieving the scores they did.
If anything, i feel it works in the opposite way - in that the player is NOT giving their own skill the credit it deserves for the score they achieved.. They achieved it, because they achieved it - not alteration of the psu...
I'd imagine a lot of cabs being used to submit scores, are probably running with weak 40 year old caps and components on their psus (just not intentionally)

2. I personally see (and rely on) the DKF score list as the most 'complete' and accurate source & collaboration of DK scores as a whole.
If the absence of sound is not a rule for authenticating a score for anyone - then I vote to accept his submission.

I think it would always be in the back of peoples minds when they see that score list that 'oh actually, that score was beaten (and had a verification at the end), but wasnt recognised/updated due to reasons 1,2,3 ' etc

3. My feelings (and hope) would be that if DKF now move to accept the score with open arms, that Robbie will see this to be the case, and truly hope that this action would further discourage any complaints he may have towards other players submissions (when the case in contrast, would be that his own score was not a 'perfect' example of a submission  / accepted with no audio, yet was accepted)


Not sure this helps, just my opinion.

And on another note, Xelnia, really appreciate the effort and time you put into all of this and can imagine the frustrations that come along with it.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 09, 2021, 07:53:06 pm
my 2 cents:

1. I think the majority of us believe voltage to be a placebo effect , and do nothing outside of potentially causing the game to glitch in graphics (or not boot at all) if too low, and rather, be simply a motivation tool to those who believe that's the reason they are achieving the scores they did.
If anything, i feel it works in the opposite way - in that the player is NOT giving their own skill the credit it deserves for the score they achieved.. They achieved it, because they achieved it - not alteration of the psu...
I'd imagine a lot of cabs being used to submit scores, are probably running with weak 40 year old caps and components on their psus (just not intentionally)

2. I personally see (and rely on) the DKF score list as the most 'complete' and accurate source & collaboration of DK scores as a whole.
If the absence of sound is not a rule for authenticating a score for anyone - then I vote to accept his submission.

I think it would always be in the back of peoples minds when they see that score list that 'oh actually, that score was beaten (and had a verification at the end), but wasnt recognised/updated due to reasons 1,2,3 ' etc

3. My feelings (and hope) would be that if DKF now move to accept the score with open arms, that Robbie will see this to be the case, and truly hope that this action would further discourage any complaints he may have towards other players submissions (when the case in contrast, would be that his own score was not a 'perfect' example of a submission  / accepted with no audio, yet was accepted)


Not sure this helps, just my opinion.

And on another note, Xelnia, really appreciate the effort and time you put into all of this and can imagine the frustrations that come along with it.

Unfortunately, attempted murder is still attempted murder even if you accidentally bring a toy gun to the hit. We obviously aren't a legal entity, but it is a good basis. Robbie attempted to gain an unfair advantage compared to his previous scores through hardware modification, and made active changes in an attempt to further his better RNG theory. Regardless of whether these changes worked or not, that's how it is. Robbie's current cheating attempts do not change his history of WRs that were totally clean. That's why Billy's last legit score before the score debacle is still listed here, and Robbie's last WR is still listed as well.

I think people are truly missing the point here. Robbie's score was not rejected because the voltage changes do anything (they don't, and Jeremy acknowledges that). It also doesn't set a precedent that future scores need a voltage measurement because that's not even the point of the rejection. It was rejected because he was trying to cheat, justified by the lie that he believed everybody else was already cheating besides him. I don't speak for Jeremy, but Robbie, at the very least, would have to do a lot to come back from actively admitting to wanting to submit scores with an unfair advantage.

Just as an example for precedents, Corey Chambers was banned from TG for submitted a real run that he said in the comments was cheated just to get banned: https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers (https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers)

"Please reject this submission. I cheated by offering evidence that was not original. I spliced together the boot up seemlessly with the previous video that I did in order to make it look like it was all one recording. This is an example of how easy it is for anyone to do this. As a result of my cheating I formally request that all my scores be removed from the database and my account be restricted. Thank you for your co-operation."
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 09, 2021, 08:28:48 pm
my 2 cents:

1. I think the majority of us believe voltage to be a placebo effect , and do nothing outside of potentially causing the game to glitch in graphics (or not boot at all) if too low, and rather, be simply a motivation tool to those who believe that's the reason they are achieving the scores they did.
If anything, i feel it works in the opposite way - in that the player is NOT giving their own skill the credit it deserves for the score they achieved.. They achieved it, because they achieved it - not alteration of the psu...
I'd imagine a lot of cabs being used to submit scores, are probably running with weak 40 year old caps and components on their psus (just not intentionally)

2. I personally see (and rely on) the DKF score list as the most 'complete' and accurate source & collaboration of DK scores as a whole.
If the absence of sound is not a rule for authenticating a score for anyone - then I vote to accept his submission.

I think it would always be in the back of peoples minds when they see that score list that 'oh actually, that score was beaten (and had a verification at the end), but wasnt recognised/updated due to reasons 1,2,3 ' etc

3. My feelings (and hope) would be that if DKF now move to accept the score with open arms, that Robbie will see this to be the case, and truly hope that this action would further discourage any complaints he may have towards other players submissions (when the case in contrast, would be that his own score was not a 'perfect' example of a submission  / accepted with no audio, yet was accepted)


Not sure this helps, just my opinion.

And on another note, Xelnia, really appreciate the effort and time you put into all of this and can imagine the frustrations that come along with it.

Unfortunately, attempted murder is still attempted murder even if you accidentally bring a toy gun to the hit. We obviously aren't a legal entity, but it is a good basis. Robbie attempted to gain an unfair advantage compared to his previous scores through hardware modification, and made active changes in an attempt to further his better RNG theory. Regardless of whether these changes worked or not, that's how it is. Robbie's current cheating attempts do not change his history of WRs that were totally clean. That's why Billy's last legit score before the score debacle is still listed here, and Robbie's last WR is still listed as well.

I think people are truly missing the point here. Robbie's score was not rejected because the voltage changes do anything (they don't, and Jeremy acknowledges that). It also doesn't set a precedent that future scores need a voltage measurement because that's not even the point of the rejection. It was rejected because he was trying to cheat, justified by the lie that he believed everybody else was already cheating besides him. I don't speak for Jeremy, but Robbie, at the very least, would have to do a lot to come back from actively admitting to wanting to submit scores with an unfair advantage.

Just as an example for precedents, Corey Chambers was banned from TG for submitted a real run that he said in the comments was cheated just to get banned: https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers (https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers)

"Please reject this submission. I cheated by offering evidence that was not original. I spliced together the boot up seemlessly with the previous video that I did in order to make it look like it was all one recording. This is an example of how easy it is for anyone to do this. As a result of my cheating I formally request that all my scores be removed from the database and my account be restricted. Thank you for your co-operation."

ok let me prephase this with a few things. i know i'm really just a dkf observer not a member for all practical purposes, so you guys site you guys rule, also in general i respect you but i disagree with this a bit.

"attempted" doesnt apply to all cimres. there is no such thing as attempted speeding for example. funny side story a cop actualy pulled my buddy over for attempted running a stop sign and of course let him go. he was about to run the stop sign, saw the cop and slammed on the break, the cop realized he only stopped cause of him, didnt use the phrase "attempted running a light" but effectively called him on that and then had to let him go.  "attempted" crime matters because theres a fear for every attempt failed one might go through. as long as robbie is transparent about his attempts and they're ruled out as harmless then theres no danger of one slipping through

Also the corey situation is different, he falsified info. whether you believe he spliced (falsed evidence) or lied about the slice (false statement) there was false info given, someone who will give false info cant be trusted.

how far will the "he did something that makes no difference but he thought it would so its cheeat" mentality go?  If he says a prayer zeus believing zeus will bestow him will extra abilites, thats ridiculous, but if he honestly believes it will it count as cheating?  What if he buys some charmed bracelet that he believes give an advantage any other number of other ridiculous things that some people actually believe it. if he believes any of those nonsense will give him an advantage will that be grounds for rejection as well?

when someone breaks a rule but transparently lets everyone know they're breaking the rule, and is testing to see what the response, well, that happens alot.  I cant help but to think if someone in good standing did the exact same thing it would be viewed as a discussion point as opposed to a troll thread.

At tg i used a camera for a memory game, and made very clear i was doing it, got rejected, meanwhile to this day people still accept direct feed on memory games, but noone other than lexmark tried to accuse me of cheating there.  my point was to force a decision, either demand camera show no helping device like camera/pen and paper is used, or allow such aids.  There needed to be a decision, and to my annoyance there really wasnt other than, if you're honest about it its rejected, but anyone using direct feed is free to use pen and paper for memrooy games all they like. 

Is that where this will be headed? anyone that uses a voltmeter will be DQed for attempted cheating, but noone has to show the power supply meaning others can get away it if theyr'e not as honest as robbie?

anyway thats my take, you guys site, do as you like
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Rodden on June 09, 2021, 09:13:25 pm
I think Robbie?s score is valid and should be accepted.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 09, 2021, 09:43:30 pm
my 2 cents:

1. I think the majority of us believe voltage to be a placebo effect , and do nothing outside of potentially causing the game to glitch in graphics (or not boot at all) if too low, and rather, be simply a motivation tool to those who believe that's the reason they are achieving the scores they did.
If anything, i feel it works in the opposite way - in that the player is NOT giving their own skill the credit it deserves for the score they achieved.. They achieved it, because they achieved it - not alteration of the psu...
I'd imagine a lot of cabs being used to submit scores, are probably running with weak 40 year old caps and components on their psus (just not intentionally)

2. I personally see (and rely on) the DKF score list as the most 'complete' and accurate source & collaboration of DK scores as a whole.
If the absence of sound is not a rule for authenticating a score for anyone - then I vote to accept his submission.

I think it would always be in the back of peoples minds when they see that score list that 'oh actually, that score was beaten (and had a verification at the end), but wasnt recognised/updated due to reasons 1,2,3 ' etc

3. My feelings (and hope) would be that if DKF now move to accept the score with open arms, that Robbie will see this to be the case, and truly hope that this action would further discourage any complaints he may have towards other players submissions (when the case in contrast, would be that his own score was not a 'perfect' example of a submission  / accepted with no audio, yet was accepted)


Not sure this helps, just my opinion.

And on another note, Xelnia, really appreciate the effort and time you put into all of this and can imagine the frustrations that come along with it.

Unfortunately, attempted murder is still attempted murder even if you accidentally bring a toy gun to the hit. We obviously aren't a legal entity, but it is a good basis. Robbie attempted to gain an unfair advantage compared to his previous scores through hardware modification, and made active changes in an attempt to further his better RNG theory. Regardless of whether these changes worked or not, that's how it is. Robbie's current cheating attempts do not change his history of WRs that were totally clean. That's why Billy's last legit score before the score debacle is still listed here, and Robbie's last WR is still listed as well.

I think people are truly missing the point here. Robbie's score was not rejected because the voltage changes do anything (they don't, and Jeremy acknowledges that). It also doesn't set a precedent that future scores need a voltage measurement because that's not even the point of the rejection. It was rejected because he was trying to cheat, justified by the lie that he believed everybody else was already cheating besides him. I don't speak for Jeremy, but Robbie, at the very least, would have to do a lot to come back from actively admitting to wanting to submit scores with an unfair advantage.

Just as an example for precedents, Corey Chambers was banned from TG for submitted a real run that he said in the comments was cheated just to get banned: https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers (https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/153539-Nintendo-Entertainment-System-Double-Dragon-NTSC-Points-521-890-Corey-Chambers)

"Please reject this submission. I cheated by offering evidence that was not original. I spliced together the boot up seemlessly with the previous video that I did in order to make it look like it was all one recording. This is an example of how easy it is for anyone to do this. As a result of my cheating I formally request that all my scores be removed from the database and my account be restricted. Thank you for your co-operation."

ok let me prephase this with a few things. i know i'm really just a dkf observer not a member for all practical purposes, so you guys site you guys rule, also in general i respect you but i disagree with this a bit.

"attempted" doesnt apply to all cimres. there is no such thing as attempted speeding for example. funny side story a cop actualy pulled my buddy over for attempted running a stop sign and of course let him go. he was about to run the stop sign, saw the cop and slammed on the break, the cop realized he only stopped cause of him, didnt use the phrase "attempted running a light" but effectively called him on that and then had to let him go.  "attempted" crime matters because theres a fear for every attempt failed one might go through. as long as robbie is transparent about his attempts and they're ruled out as harmless then theres no danger of one slipping through

Also the corey situation is different, he falsified info. whether you believe he spliced (falsed evidence) or lied about the slice (false statement) there was false info given, someone who will give false info cant be trusted.

how far will the "he did something that makes no difference but he thought it would so its cheeat" mentality go?  If he says a prayer zeus believing zeus will bestow him will extra abilites, thats ridiculous, but if he honestly believes it will it count as cheating?  What if he buys some charmed bracelet that he believes give an advantage any other number of other ridiculous things that some people actually believe it. if he believes any of those nonsense will give him an advantage will that be grounds for rejection as well?

when someone breaks a rule but transparently lets everyone know they're breaking the rule, and is testing to see what the response, well, that happens alot.  I cant help but to think if someone in good standing did the exact same thing it would be viewed as a discussion point as opposed to a troll thread.

At tg i used a camera for a memory game, and made very clear i was doing it, got rejected, meanwhile to this day people still accept direct feed on memory games, but noone other than lexmark tried to accuse me of cheating there.  my point was to force a decision, either demand camera show no helping device like camera/pen and paper is used, or allow such aids.  There needed to be a decision, and to my annoyance there really wasnt other than, if you're honest about it its rejected, but anyone using direct feed is free to use pen and paper for memrooy games all they like. 

Is that where this will be headed? anyone that uses a voltmeter will be DQed for attempted cheating, but noone has to show the power supply meaning others can get away it if theyr'e not as honest as robbie?

anyway thats my take, you guys site, do as you like

Since we're already down this rabbit hole:
https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/inchoate-crimes/attempt/ (https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/inchoate-crimes/attempt/)

"Because an attempt does not result in the actual commission of a crime, prosecuting an individual for attempt requires clear evidence of intent to commit the crime. Individuals cannot be charged with attempt for accidentally committing a crime. Rather, a prosecutor must show that the defendant specifically intended to commit the crime that he attempted, and he simply fell short. Attempt is therefore categorized as a ?specific intent? crime. This means that acting negligently or recklessly is not enough to support a charge of attempt."

The screenshots Jeremy posted indicate intent. Any person who accidentally has low voltage or whatever is not trying to do anything nefarious. However, in our situation, are we going to just keep allowing the score submissions like this until Robbie or somebody else manages to cheat for real without any kind of reasonable suspicion on that individual score? This isn't a thought crime, as a I suspect some people will compare it to. This is someone saying they are committing a crime (hardware manipulation, in our case) and failing. If anybody is wondering where the line is, it's saying you want to cheat in public and are actively doing what you think works. That's the line.

Just for the record, I was initially 100% okay with the acceptance of this score just on the basis of there not being any reason to believe the score is fake. However, are we really to just ignore when someone says for months they are trying to cheat and then gets a world record? This is not as cut and dry as some are making it.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 09, 2021, 09:46:10 pm
And just to reiterate, hardware manipulation is cheating. That means doing anything to influence gameplay that is not inside the game itself.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 09, 2021, 09:59:39 pm
even with that definition you gave for law, to attempt a crime, the thing you're attempting has to be a crime

i understand the general rule against hardware mods.  Arent exception ever asked for and given?  Cheating implies some sort of deception.  Robbie had been talking about voltages forever and people have been saying it doesnt matter.  i guess he should've explcitly asked permission but the transparency is what makes it so different to me

Also, i think dkf and TG do have a real difference here.  Yes, here at dkf robbie could've explicilty asked the mods if its ok, if they said yes hes clear, if they say no he's free to point to that as evidence they think it makes a difference and declare victory all he likes.  At TG though, often times the only way to get disucssion if something is ok, is to do it, be transparent and get peoples input.  Pete Hann using a nes clone wasnt cheating, cause he was open about it and looking to get the rules changed, he intentionally broke a rule but he broke it in a way that came with no punishment other than a rejection.  McAllister broke the rule on where the first life is to be earned, he knew it was against the rules and argued for an except on the basis of it not mattering and that was granted.  There's likely other examples that just arent coming to mind as well.

but ok, if DKF's policy is that, even when transparently done and with no effect on gameplay, hardware is purposely modified thats treated as cheating and all the punishments that come with it, then thank you for the clarification.  At TG i'll argue as i have more of a vested interest in the scoreboard, here i really am just trying to make sure i understand how things work.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 09, 2021, 10:21:35 pm
actualy i think i do see a distinguihsment you're drawing. attempting to lower the voltage is fine, attempting to change rng is not, is that correct? the voltage lowering is ok, which is why theres no need to check others, its the attempt to influence rng that matters?  just as any number of actions that a person thinks will lead to murder is fine, its that they were trying it to another effect is what matters?

thats an interesting distinguishment. i still think the particular method for the attempt factors in (again if someone was trying to caste some spell to kill someone i doubt an attempted murder chargg would stick, usually the attempt has to make some reasonable sense).  Which is why i was focused on the voltage itself if its against the rules to modify. but yes, if i'm understanding that point correct i get the distinguishment
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 09, 2021, 11:42:14 pm
sorry for the spamming but i really have been trying to be see both sides and i've found myself still largely being ok with it but also sort of seeing the attempted point (also i'm tired so i spent longer on this than i should've where as if i went to sleep i probably would've arived at the conclusion in 5 minutes in the morning)

anyway it keeps coming back to the transparency aspect for me.

the attempted thing, you said it yourself, what if someday he pushes something through. thats the entire reason why attemps matter.

so, someone cheats and they get caught. they then submit another score that has nothing wrong, its still rejected because we're worried they cheated again and we missed it. This makes sense.
someone attempts to cheat, fails, gets caught, same principle right? it begs the question if they made that attempt, then did they make another attempt which was succesful that we missed

what are we worried about in this case though considering robbies tranparency. his "attempts" are inherently linked to have talking about it. thats how intent was established right. and not some private conversation but a very public one. So is this concern that if this is allowed, eventually, robbie will find a cheat that does work, tell everyone about it, perform the cheat, and then have noone notice?  You see how that aspect of tranparency makes all the difference when talking about attempts.  The idea that he didnt truly cheat, but just tried to cheat while publicly showing how he did so, is dangerous cause it could lead to him one day succesfully cheating withnoone knowing while telling everyone about is pretty preposteours.  At that point you have to turn the concern into, "well based on think i think he'll someday attempt to cheat but not tell anyone how", but this just doesnt support that. if we're gonna use past actoin to predict future action, you cant look at the half where he thinks it affects rng but ignore the half where hes tranparent about it, and no offense robbie, but obnoxioiusly over the top in everyone's face for months transparent
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 09, 2021, 11:55:50 pm
Why doesn't the admin just split the comments into a poll?

A) I accept this score submission
B) I do not accept this score submission
C) I'm friends with Wes Copeland and John McCurdy
D) I'm not friends with Bill Mitchell and Robbie Lakeman

Job done.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ninglendo on June 10, 2021, 12:52:49 am
Can anybody point out the exact moment Robbie cheated in this run? Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 10, 2021, 12:55:19 am
Can anybody point out the exact moment Robbie cheated in this run? Thanks in advance.

I don't think anybody thinks he cheated in this run.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 10, 2021, 01:05:36 am
sorry for the spamming but i really have been trying to be see both sides and i've found myself still largely being ok with it but also sort of seeing the attempted point (also i'm tired so i spent longer on this than i should've where as if i went to sleep i probably would've arived at the conclusion in 5 minutes in the morning)

anyway it keeps coming back to the transparency aspect for me.

the attempted thing, you said it yourself, what if someday he pushes something through. thats the entire reason why attemps matter.

so, someone cheats and they get caught. they then submit another score that has nothing wrong, its still rejected because we're worried they cheated again and we missed it. This makes sense.
someone attempts to cheat, fails, gets caught, same principle right? it begs the question if they made that attempt, then did they make another attempt which was succesful that we missed

what are we worried about in this case though considering robbies tranparency. his "attempts" are inherently linked to have talking about it. thats how intent was established right. and not some private conversation but a very public one. So is this concern that if this is allowed, eventually, robbie will find a cheat that does work, tell everyone about it, perform the cheat, and then have noone notice?  You see how that aspect of tranparency makes all the difference when talking about attempts.  The idea that he didnt truly cheat, but just tried to cheat while publicly showing how he did so, is dangerous cause it could lead to him one day succesfully cheating withnoone knowing while telling everyone about is pretty preposteours.  At that point you have to turn the concern into, "well based on think i think he'll someday attempt to cheat but not tell anyone how", but this just doesnt support that. if we're gonna use past actoin to predict future action, you cant look at the half where he thinks it affects rng but ignore the half where hes tranparent about it, and no offense robbie, but obnoxioiusly over the top in everyone's face for months transparent

Hm, well this is less about Robbie's specific case and rather a point I was trying to generalize. Not everybody would be as open about this as Robbie, for one, and second I think there are a lot of assumptions there on whether or not someone would continue to be transparent if they found a truly significant, undetectable exploit. Regardless, this is all pure speculation.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: dnickolas on June 10, 2021, 01:10:18 am
Can anybody point out the exact moment Robbie cheated in this run? Thanks in advance.

He wanted to cheat, but his method was as effective as rubbing olive oil on his balls. He has made that intent clear.

Bottom line is that everyone is pretty sure the run is totally legit, but he's going out of his way to make it controversial by omitting the sound.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: 80sArcadeKid on June 10, 2021, 02:25:52 am
I've encountered the voltage conversation twice in Twitch chats where Robbie has come along spouting about it. The claims are absurd and all based on conjecture.

As the voltage makes absolutley no proven difference to game mechanics (other than in the mind of the individual), and the score has been attained without any (known) game altering glitches, the performance and score is valid if the "no sound required" rule is acceptable and all other criteria is meet.

However, if the dude's been a c*** to almost every other high level player and scoreboard and site admins, perhaps he could just start his own scoreboard and shove his score there.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: John73 on June 10, 2021, 04:10:43 am
I can't help but feel there is some ulterior motive behind this submission.

Why is there no sound when his previous videos have sound?  Why show voltage when he has been going on and on about it in the last six-twelve months?

Accept the score or reject the score - nothing good is going to come out of this for the community.   I really don't know what Robbie is trying to achieve here, but I'm 99.9% sure who is backing this.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: LMDAVE on June 10, 2021, 05:02:21 am
Is low voltage the new gummy substance?  <Mruczek>

@xelnia I would be curious to see your kongtrac summary on this game, if you are doing one, to show if any outliers in the data exist on pie factory (or other boards) compared to the top 5 scores. This is the first I'm hearing of voltage manipulation in games, but I'll admit I've been out of the loop a while. I have seen arcade machines do crazy stuff on low end voltages though.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Scoundrl on June 10, 2021, 07:01:19 am
Tricky slippery slope here. Almost certainly the low voltage didnt positively effect his game, I'm sure stats will prove that out.

When I asked about the audio Robbie said "Ken House the sound was fine. I?m just editing out swearing, bitching, etc. I mean, unless you really want to hear that ". That seems reasonable, he is quite the complainer but seems inconsistent with previous streams and videos filled with that stuff without 2 F's givin what people think of it. After other players submitted allegedly faked games with certain aspects missing that would have cleared it up, you know, why would you?

Is the 'score' legit, probably. Is the submission of games where you are actively trying to manipulate the gameplay by manipulating hardware Ok? There is precedent for it, Asteroids was modified to get higher score per hour than original hardware but there were known examples of scores that uses speed up kits, not really apples to apples.

For the record I encouraged Robbie to look into weather or not the voltage would make a difference. I gave some hints on how to make lowering the voltage easier (its a pain to do on Nintendo arcade power supplies) I didnt think he would submit anything but a normal submission and the evidence would be clear to the observers one way or the other. This isn't that. The observers are missing a large portion or the evidence that the game is not effected by the lowering of the voltage,.

-Ken
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 10, 2021, 08:34:51 am
sorry for the spamming but i really have been trying to be see both sides and i've found myself still largely being ok with it but also sort of seeing the attempted point (also i'm tired so i spent longer on this than i should've where as if i went to sleep i probably would've arived at the conclusion in 5 minutes in the morning)

anyway it keeps coming back to the transparency aspect for me.

the attempted thing, you said it yourself, what if someday he pushes something through. thats the entire reason why attemps matter.

so, someone cheats and they get caught. they then submit another score that has nothing wrong, its still rejected because we're worried they cheated again and we missed it. This makes sense.
someone attempts to cheat, fails, gets caught, same principle right? it begs the question if they made that attempt, then did they make another attempt which was succesful that we missed

what are we worried about in this case though considering robbies tranparency. his "attempts" are inherently linked to have talking about it. thats how intent was established right. and not some private conversation but a very public one. So is this concern that if this is allowed, eventually, robbie will find a cheat that does work, tell everyone about it, perform the cheat, and then have noone notice?  You see how that aspect of tranparency makes all the difference when talking about attempts.  The idea that he didnt truly cheat, but just tried to cheat while publicly showing how he did so, is dangerous cause it could lead to him one day succesfully cheating withnoone knowing while telling everyone about is pretty preposteours.  At that point you have to turn the concern into, "well based on think i think he'll someday attempt to cheat but not tell anyone how", but this just doesnt support that. if we're gonna use past actoin to predict future action, you cant look at the half where he thinks it affects rng but ignore the half where hes tranparent about it, and no offense robbie, but obnoxioiusly over the top in everyone's face for months transparent

Hm, well this is less about Robbie's specific case and rather a point I was trying to generalize. Not everybody would be as open about this as Robbie, for one, and second I think there are a lot of assumptions there on whether or not someone would continue to be transparent if they found a truly significant, undetectable exploit. Regardless, this is all pure speculation.

this is about robbies case since robbie was transparent. and yes its about speculation.  the entire case against robbie is speculation and i'm discussing the speculation that you used against him.  seems weird to speculate againt robbie and then why i draw out issues with that speculation to fault me for speculation.

so great, lets remove speculation. withotu speculation, without concerns of future cases, lets just talk about robbies submssion. is it valid or not? or right we dont wanna take about his case we wanna speculate where an accept might lead
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 10, 2021, 08:56:21 am
to eleborate i'm not saying what robbie would or wouldnt do or others

i'm saying its weird to use him being transparent and open as a cause of concern to speculate others may not, or he may one day stop. of course all these things are possible.  i'm not saying its impossible, i'm saying though using transparency to "speculate" that he'll one day stop is absurd.  i'm not using his transparency to say it'll remain, i'm saying it makes no sense to use this scenario against him.

can we talk about honest bias? the thing all humans have. its a spectrum. good people have biases and try to fight it but it slips in especially in small case and grey areas where the answer is tough.

i think the vast majority of people have biases but also want to do the right despite those biases.  So for good people trying to fight their biases, play the though game of imagingin what if it was someone else. an honest person will tell themslevs "well sure if soemone else did x,y,z..." but that forces you to explcily lay out why. it forces you to admit to yourself whats factoring into your decision

So are the only factors sound, voltage, and discusssion of it? ok lets pretend thats someoen else.

also as far as "attempted cheating" we dont need a hypothetic we can loook at robbie himself pre-hard feelings.  remember when robbie thought different board revisions mattered? he used a different revision thinking it would give him an advantage. everyoen thought he was wrong but let him do it and didnt make rules on board revisions because it was believed he was wrong and it didnt matter.  i wonder if in todays environemnt his board revision tests would get thrown out as attempted cheating since he beleived it gave him an advantage
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 10, 2021, 09:38:26 am
OK, now we've discussed everything bar splitting the atom.........
is his score accepted yet? &#128580;
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Flobeamer1922 on June 10, 2021, 09:48:43 am
OK, now we've discussed everything bar splitting the atom.........
is his score accepted yet? &#38;#128580;
I will be busy Thursday-Saturday and probably won't have time to respond to anything in that timeframe.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Muerto on June 10, 2021, 09:56:16 am
OK, now we've discussed everything bar splitting the atom.........
is his score accepted yet? &#38;#128580;

Oh my, what's your goal here - besides the obvious?
Sound or no sound, the score is legit in my opinion - maybe Robbie decided to mute it because he finally understood that ppl was tired of hearing hem moaning??
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 10, 2021, 10:32:59 am
Just to add, although I disagree with the decision, I do understand the reasoning behind the decision, and am OK with the reasoning.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: CraigT on June 10, 2021, 06:39:06 pm
I get where xelnia is coming from, but if the submission looks good after the verification process, then I think it should be accepted.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 11, 2021, 09:33:39 am
https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/232686-Arcade-Donkey-Kong-Points-Hammer-Allowed-1-272-800-Robbie-Lakeman?p=1123009&viewfull=1#post1123009

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Rolledcigs on June 11, 2021, 04:52:39 pm
He got it and that's it. Aside from splicing mame footage there's no cheats in this game. Whatever disagreements we have about life or whatever dont matter.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Adam_Mon on June 12, 2021, 02:47:56 pm
My view is to accept the score.

While DataGod raised some interesting points about electronics in this thread, I don't see any concrete evidence that heat or voltage manipulation can affect RNG in the game. Robbie himself seems to be mentioning that these factors influence gameplay (whether he's trolling or serious). Either way the onus is on the community to find faults in the submitted score files, much like the MAME finger in BM's videos (please don't sue me, I'm poor).

If there are statistical anomaly's they should show up in the stats breakdown as LMDave mentioned. As far as I'm concerned, Robbie could say a UFO flew over his house and gave him better RNG and helped him 'cheat', but unless we can fault the evidence it should be allowed.   

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 13, 2021, 05:41:25 am
Time to update the Scoreboard?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Flobeamer1922 on June 13, 2021, 06:42:58 am
Time to update the Scoreboard?
Consider having some patience.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 13, 2021, 01:22:49 pm
Time to update the Scoreboard?

Yes Dad  FailFish
Consider having some patience.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Xermon54 on June 13, 2021, 02:41:22 pm
In my humble french canadian opinion, someone should always be innocent until proven guilty. As of right now, if it seems we can't find any reason of any way Robbie did cheat, so the score should be accepted. I know Jeremate is not bff with Robbie, but emotions mustn't come into play when it's about a wr.

Even if Robbie did try to manipulate the rng, if we can't prove that he successfully did, we must accept the score.

I know Robbie's craziness and paranoia can make it hard to be impartial, but we gotta be.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Xermon54 on June 13, 2021, 05:53:05 pm
Quote
I know Robbie's craziness and paranoia can make it hard to be impartial, but we gotta be.

I re-read my last sentence, and I realized it sounded quite bad toward Robbie. By saying it, I didn't want to say anything about mental health, I just wanted to point out the fact that he's crazy and paranoid into trying to find new ways to improve his game (playing with voltage, etc). That's not a bad thing to me, but to some, his ways it might be too crazy.

Where I'm from we use the word paranoid quite often when someone is obsessed with something. Fking english im outta here. Robbie's my mate I don't wanna sound mean toward him  BibleThump
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 13, 2021, 08:22:29 pm
I would like to thank everyone for their thoughtful input on this issue. It sounds like the majority of the community believes this is a valid score. However:

I will not be accepting this submission by Robbie, nor will I be accepting any other submissions from him in the foreseeable future. The outcome of the TG submission (https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/232686-Arcade-Donkey-Kong-Points-Hammer-Allowed-1-272-800-Robbie-Lakeman) will not affect my decision.

My decision is based solely on the reality that Robbie has demonstrated a desire to find a shortcut to achieve his scores and that this behavior violates the spirit of fair play (Section D, Paragraph d of the DKF submission rules (https://donkeykongforum.net/index.php?topic=365.0)).

My decision is not based on any personal feelings I have towards Robbie or vice versa. My decision is not based on any bias I have for or against Robbie or any other player. My decision is not based on Robbie's long history of treating other players poorly. My decision is not based on whether the actual gameplay in this submission is legitimate, illegitimate, or malfunctioning.

I believe I am doing the right thing and acting in the best interest of the community. But since my decision appears to be contrary to popular opinion, there is more to discuss here.

Over the years, the community has trusted me (and Scott Cunningham and others) to verify or reject scores based on the standards we have collectively agreed upon. For the most part I or the past score moderators have done this alone. On occasion, the community has been called upon to decide the validity of scores with questionable evidence or to debate new rules. In those instances I have implemented the majority decision. In this case, I am not doing that. The reason is pretty simple: it's more important to me to do the right thing than it is to do the popular thing.

I am asking the community to trust me that this is the right decision. If this was a new or unknown player, would the community reaction be the same? If it was a known player but a non-WR score? Robbie doesn't get a pass just because he's Robbie. This score doesn't get a pass just because it's a potential world record.

If the community believes their trust in me has been misplaced then the path forward is pretty simple: I'll step aside as score moderator and the community can move ahead in whatever way they deem best. Otherwise, we can put this submission to rest and I can turn my attention back to the amazing scores still waiting in the submission queue.

I am not asking or expecting anyone to be happy with me. There is no easy outcome here and, for my money, Robbie probably wants it that way. He's in the driver's seat. If he wants to run himself off the road, fine, but he shouldn't take the rest of us with him.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 13, 2021, 08:44:12 pm
speaking as more of a observer than a member, if its ok for me to ask to make sure i understand.  The line about no further submission from robbie being accepted.  Does this mean even if his voltage was 5 volts, it was never about that nor the sound, but rather all his facebook and twitch comments about voltage? so even if he submitted/futuer submits a run that does everything properly it wont be allowed?  just trying to make sure i understand that robbie banned from submitting as opposed to i dont know, maybe you're suggesting more that you just think its unlikley he'll submit a valid score in the near future?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: rayfinkel on June 13, 2021, 09:02:54 pm
A few thoughts from my end...

Number one, and most importantly, is that I feel like the heavy majority of this community is filled with some incredible people. Since the day I first started competing almost three years ago, I have made some really great friends in these parts and I am so incredibly thankful for that. Yeah, some people are super weird, but we're all a little off in our own ways. We play DONKEY KONG!

Two - none of this happens with you, Jeremy/Jerry/Jry/Platinum Trophy King. You are an absolute legend for what you do. The players appreciate you more than you can possibly imagine. I appreciate you more than you can possibly imagine. You already know this, but I have your back 100%. I'm sorry but resignation is simply not an option.  ;)

Three. Robbie and I have always gotten along well, though we've rarely talked. I think the world of him as a player. His talent is awesome and there is no doubt about his ability. I do think his score is completely legit on the basis that I don't think lowering the voltage does anything. As perhaps one of a very small handful of players that understands what is going on in a super high-level DK game, I can say definitively that I have seen no differences other than the usual changes in RNG between credits. What has gone down with Robbie over the last 6 months or so has truly saddened me as a fellow competitor. I do not think that deep down, Robbie is a bad guy by any means at all. So many players from back in the day have shared some great stories about him. I just don't think he understands the impact of his words and what he's saying when he goes after so many players. Voltage conspiracies, cheating accusations, super personal attacks on other players - it's gross. There's zero excuse for it, even if he thinks he's a victim of some grand conspiracy (which he's not). I may be a fool, but I believe in redemption stories. I believe Robbie can make things right and I hope he does. And I hope that if he tries - truly tries, that people will forgive him. And if you've ever attacked Robbie or anyone in this community for absolutely no reason at all, I hope YOU make an effort to right your wrongs, as well. There are some around here who will probably always be toxic, but I choose to believe that things can be fixed with time and the right attitude from all parties.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Yegman on June 13, 2021, 10:46:52 pm
And just like that, by not accepting a legit score, the DKF Scoreboard has become as corrupt as the Switch Scoreboard that has a 1.5m DK score at the top of it.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 13, 2021, 11:07:16 pm
A few thoughts from my end...

Number one, and most importantly, is that I feel like the heavy majority of this community is filled with some incredible people. Since the day I first started competing almost three years ago, I have made some really great friends in these parts and I am so incredibly thankful for that. Yeah, some people are super weird, but we're all a little off in our own ways. We play DONKEY KONG!

Two - none of this happens with you, Jeremy/Jerry/Jry/Platinum Trophy King. You are an absolute legend for what you do. The players appreciate you more than you can possibly imagine. I appreciate you more than you can possibly imagine. You already know this, but I have your back 100%. I'm sorry but resignation is simply not an option.  ;)

Three. Robbie and I have always gotten along well, though we've rarely talked. I think the world of him as a player. His talent is awesome and there is no doubt about his ability. I do think his score is completely legit on the basis that I don't think lowering the voltage does anything. As perhaps one of a very small handful of players that understands what is going on in a super high-level DK game, I can say definitively that I have seen no differences other than the usual changes in RNG between credits. What has gone down with Robbie over the last 6 months or so has truly saddened me as a fellow competitor. I do not think that deep down, Robbie is a bad guy by any means at all. So many players from back in the day have shared some great stories about him. I just don't think he understands the impact of his words and what he's saying when he goes after so many players. Voltage conspiracies, cheating accusations, super personal attacks on other players - it's gross. There's zero excuse for it, even if he thinks he's a victim of some grand conspiracy (which he's not). I may be a fool, but I believe in redemption stories. I believe Robbie can make things right and I hope he does. And I hope that if he tries - truly tries, that people will forgive him. And if you've ever attacked Robbie or anyone in this community for absolutely no reason at all, I hope YOU make an effort to right your wrongs, as well. There are some around here who will probably always be toxic, but I choose to believe that things can be fixed with time and the right attitude from all parties.

Well said. Regardless of how we all feel on this submission, Jeremy is our scorekeeper and has been for over 8 years. He takes the time out of HIS life to contribute to this community, and has done a fantastic job doing so. His opinion on this score is controversial, and I do go back and forth on what is the right decision moment by moment. That being said, I respect what he has said here.

As I said in my previous post, Robbie does not care about DKF and this score rejection will prove, in his mind, the exact point he was hoping to make -- Which is that DKF is out to get him. However, while I do believe this score is legit, Robbie is ultimately out to get himself. In almost every circumstance that he accuses other people of causing problems, he invited such problems into his own life. I am understandably biased and honestly hurt by how Robbie has acted towards me and my friends in this community. I hope he knows that even if it means absolutely nothing to him.

This community has been my lifeblood since my freshmen year of high school, and as of late, I feel a deep divide that is so contrary to what attracted me to play this game in the first place. So many factions have been built within a once whole group of friends just playing old ass games for no reason. It's a fucking shame. I tried for the past ~2 years to make something new like that with Kong League, but the drama even infected that somehow. I still want to continue on and restore the former comradery we all once had, but it feels harder every month to see how this can be accomplished.

This behavior, and you know EXACTLY what I'm referring to, is not what made this community great. Change or watch it all burn down.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: wolfman24 on June 13, 2021, 11:09:21 pm
And just like that, by not accepting a legit score, the DKF Scoreboard has become as corrupt as the Switch Scoreboard that has a 1.5m DK score at the top of it.
Don't worry your lord and savior will make sure twin galaxies and Guinness will accept or there will be another lawsuit   Kappa <stirpot> I fully approve jry choice
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 14, 2021, 12:24:25 am
I'll preface by acknowledging that my voice means basically nothing here. That said, I've seen the public record, and I 100% believe xelnia is doing the right thing. I'm a firm believer in doing what's right, even when it's unpopular.

If Robbie wants his scores accepted, he should stop expressing his intent to manipulate hardware for an unfair advantage, as inept at it as he may be. Fair competition requires a social contract, and his actions in this regard have broken that contract, and thus any trust. In other words, while outright cheating is often hard to prove, competitors must at the very least pretend to play fairly and honestly. Allowing Robbie to cross that line, as he has so brazenly and consciously done, would only make it that much harder to enforce down the road.

As far as scoreboard integrity, this is no different than failing to acknowledge later scores of a proven, unrepentant cheater, even if there is no other reason to doubt those specific scores. Again, a line has to be drawn.

Truthfully, Robbie's score is being rejected because deep down he wanted it to be. So I don't see any reason to defend him on this.

The whole situation is just sad and unfortunate.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 14, 2021, 02:13:04 am
Wtf fkk this abuse im gone  <Allen>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 14, 2021, 02:36:57 am
Truth be told, I knew a split was imminent.  I just thought the split would be initiated by Robbie.
Sad to see it go down this way.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Barra on June 14, 2021, 02:59:13 am
Truth be told, I knew a split was imminent.  I just thought the split would be initiated by Robbie.
Sad to see it go down this way.

There's only one person to blame here and his name is not Jeremy
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 14, 2021, 03:40:49 am
Barbra pls
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: aarontruitt on June 14, 2021, 06:10:00 am
I respect Jerry and his dedication to this community. I hate that you are tasked with this, and I wouldn't wish this upon anyone. I do still disagree with the decision. I also think that the rules should be amended to require full game audio for the entirety of the performance, at least for scores that break a particular threshold be it a specific score or above or percentile of the leaderboard.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Perfectpacman on June 14, 2021, 06:16:03 am
Nice little 'click' you have here.

I thought that his score would be accepted based on the score and not by your feelings towards him.
Don't try and smother your feelings with 'submission rules' either, you clearly only have your own agenda.
Any newcomer coming here should be directed to this thread. A new WR and that is littered with personal feelings towards a particular gamer and not the video evidence and subsequent voting up of his score.

As I mentioned earlier, you're a disgrace to your forum and your kind of bias behaviour and 'closed club' should be avoided.

Guinness will of course accept this score, like most open minded people out there will congratulate hard work and dedication in the face of bullying and harrasment.

Who really cares what 'DKF' think.

Guinness and mature people mean so much more.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 14, 2021, 06:48:09 am
And just like that, by not accepting a legit score, the DKF Scoreboard has become as corrupt as the Switch Scoreboard that has a 1.5m DK score at the top of it.

 <Billy> <Allen>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: jwade614 on June 14, 2021, 07:38:01 am
I think it's a mistake reject a legit score. The rule is that the score may be rejected, not that it shall be rejected. If the score's legitimacy is in question, reject it. Otherwise, accept it. Put an asterisk on it, if you must.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: TheKD on June 14, 2021, 07:50:04 am
The irony.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 14, 2021, 08:21:35 am
cheating often has two elements, intent and action. proving the score broke rules is often easier than proving if it was done on purpose on accident.  What i find interesting here is all the people that think intent is easier to prove than action. quite the narrative spun.  Can anyone point me to where Robbie said he wanted the score rejected?  Or do the mind readers just need to make that up to feel better about themselves.

i really could respect rejecting it for the wrong voltage.  but all this "he thought he was cheating" when it seemed to me he thought was leveling the playing field and he "wants a reject", wow.

again you guys club you guys rule. if you wanna reject a score because you dont like the color of someone's socks thats fine and i'd respect it, well, i'd respect it if that reason was honestly stated.

everyone is so busy pointing out what robbies words from facebook indicate -- where i noticed the responses telling him how votlages differences arent an advantages are left out, that i'm not sure any of you noticing that everyones words matter. 

lets say robbie "thought he was cheating" lets say he "wanted it rejected" (two premisses i reject by the way), well you know what else i'm seeing, i'm seeing DKF rejects score that by their own admission are valid. 

At this point i could see proof robbie cheated andall that would prove to me is biased people got lucky and made the correct decision for the wrong reason.

robbied "wants a reject" is even more absurd than the accusation he thought it was unfair advantage (he thought it made a difference but leveled the playing field, no different than when he thought different boards made a difference).  billy really did, and its not clear to me that jealous haters really did catch him. the two arent mutulaly exclusive. well done guys. i dont even care if this comment gets me banned cause i no longer care to even see the comments going on here other than to remind myself why tg should never ever this sites decisions and why we need to decidde foro urselve.s i've never felt more vinidcated in rejected scores 5 minute video of his killscreen.  now that i know the sort of people that vouch for him we were right to treat that word of mouth as meaningless.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: prok on June 14, 2021, 08:28:41 am
Hi.  I rarely post here and have only met Robbie once at a convention so I'm looking at this from a distance.  For whatever reason I watch the DK drama mostly for entertainment value.  However, this one has somewhat made me wonder a few things.

-  Robbie has been quite open about his supposition that some of the scores posted in the past exhibited what he felt to be unusually favorable barrel behavior.
-  He was also very open about his efforts to in his opinion replicate that behavior.
-  If that behavior could be replicated, not only could it demonstrate how much voltage means to scores, it would also demonstrate that some scores were obtained under potentially imperfect conditions.
-  A score achieved under imperfect conditions would not be invalidated I would think because nobody has truly proven it to be so.  Rules shouldn't change or be applied retroactively IMHO.
-  Once a new variable that some players may have never known was potentially assisted them is found it should just be added to the known possibilities for players past/present/future. 
-  In this case, any dk could be running a little low or a little high on +5.   All Robbie has done is point it out and attempted to replicate the scenario on a WR run.

There has to be more than simply a clash of personalities to erase someone from the scoreboard.  He found a new variable and used it quite openly (to his benefit or not I couldn't tell you due to the reality that he's capable of the score with or without some kind of barrel odds being altered).

I'd suggest just saying hey, thanks for pointing that out and demonstrating it with transparency.  Validate the score and impose whatever rule is needed going forward because you simply can't prove one way or another who might have submitted a score under those same conditions unknowingly.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 14, 2021, 10:24:28 am
Funny how I've gotten over Twin Galaxies rejecting my score years ago, but apparently one of the people who rejected it still hasn't.  ROFL
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 14, 2021, 10:24:41 am
Did Robbie state publicly that he was going to cheat?  Did he state it privately?  Without proof, claiming he wanted to cheat is mind reading, and that form of Loserthink(tm).  Scott Adams writes about several ways that people fail at debating, and mind reading is right at the top.

If I was playing a video game and I believed that playing loud music affected the gameplay in my favor, would that be rejected even if it had no effect whatsoever?  Is my intention to game the system enough to reject a score?

Very odd to see people so passionate about legitimacy of high scores doing two things: 
1.  Rejecting the very idea that voltage can affect game play.
2.  Rejecting scores because somebody believed the low voltage can affect game play.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 14, 2021, 10:28:44 am
Funny how I've gotten over Twin Galaxies rejecting my score years ago, but apparently one of the people who rejected it still hasn't.  ROFL

Hey George, as you know I was one of the ones who voted to reject the score because the rules required full submission.

You may NOT know that I spoke with TG leadership about making an exception for accredited tournaments.  My idea was to have a person on site that was highly trustworthy and sanctioned by TG to verify all the machines and the players, and not have to have every single game recorded.

My idea was shot down.  I still think it is a good idea, but TG seems to want to not have any volunteer employees at all, even if it is for tournaments.  Given the scandals and lawsuits, I can understand, but I still think it sucks.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: tilt on June 14, 2021, 10:32:06 am
Did Robbie state publicly that he was going to cheat?  Did he state it privately?  Without proof, claiming he wanted to cheat is mind reading, and that form of Loserthink(tm).  Scott Adams writes about several ways that people fail at debating, and mind reading is right at the top.

If I was playing a video game and I believed that playing loud music affected the gameplay in my favor, would that be rejected even if it had no effect whatsoever?  Is my intention to game the system enough to reject a score?

Very odd to see people so passionate about legitimacy of high scores doing two things: 
1.  Rejecting the very idea that voltage can affect game play.
2.  Rejecting scores because somebody believed the low voltage can affect game play.

He says he believes he's cheating in this attachment, and it is clear he thought it was doing something to modify the gameplay. This was not framed as a scientific investigation at any point. It was more of a "Everybody else is doing this cheating thing that I just now figured out about". It's possible to see why a score was rejected while still disagreeing with the decision. I think that's where a lot of people stand here.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Muerto on June 14, 2021, 11:55:07 am
Now, with sound:

"I uploaded the new video with sound in this submission, and on YouTube. I had to edit out excessive swearing, and other sayings that could be used against me later in the form of mockery, since other players have done that to me in the past. Thanks again everyone for being so patient!"
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 14, 2021, 12:21:13 pm
Nice little 'click' you have here.

I thought that his score would be accepted based on the score and not by your feelings towards him.
Don't try and smother your feelings with 'submission rules' either, you clearly only have your own agenda.
Any newcomer coming here should be directed to this thread. A new WR and that is littered with personal feelings towards a particular gamer and not the video evidence and subsequent voting up of his score.

As I mentioned earlier, you're a disgrace to your forum and your kind of bias behaviour and 'closed club' should be avoided.

Guinness will of course accept this score, like most open minded people out there will congratulate hard work and dedication in the face of bullying and harrasment.

Who really cares what 'DKF' think.

Guinness and mature people mean so much more.

I was responsible enough to preface my remarks by acknowledging that I'm not really a DK competitor (my highest score is just over 100k), and that it therefore doesn't really matter what I think. But I also can't help but notice that many of the loudest people in this thread attacking Jeremy's or DKF's character over this decision have no scores submitted here whatsoever, nor any DK scores submitted to TG.

The DK people can make their decision. They don't need my input or consent. But to the others, I say...

Jeremy works his ass off for this site and for this community. It's not just a case of "He's within his right to make this decision." It is simply the right decision. If Robbie wants his scores accepted by the community, he can stop acting on an expressed intention to cheat, while publicly bullying and attacking the character and legitimacy of the scoreboard adjudicating the scores (which I would argue is another, more toxic way of trying to cheat).

Anyone who thinks Robbie is the victim here is out of their mind.

Also, it's pretty silly to say Guinness cares about hard work and/or dedication when they still recognize a certain DK score as "first million", which is proven to have been cheated, and which the cheater himself still can't make up his mind on whether it was officially submitted it or not. Frankly, anyone who still supports that man is either a psycho, or hasn't looked at the evidence (or both).
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 14, 2021, 01:05:56 pm
He says he believes he's cheating in this attachment, and it is clear he thought it was doing something to modify the gameplay. This was not framed as a scientific investigation at any point. It was more of a "Everybody else is doing this cheating thing that I just now figured out about". It's possible to see why a score was rejected while still disagreeing with the decision. I think that's where a lot of people stand here.

Well, if he is cheating by lower the voltage then lowering the voltage is a cheat.  And a known cheating tactic. 

Moving forward will everyone have to show their voltage before playing?  I am certainly no DK expert, I am not saying it works.  I have always said I would not be surprised if it did work, and more importantly others have known about it and have been using it as a way to increase their odds.

Maybe this is why having an authentic / original power supply is so important.

If Robbie gets banned for cheating, but nobody can prove his cheat worked, things will get really weird.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: VIMikey on June 14, 2021, 06:27:17 pm
Kongrats on the new high score, Robbie!
Keep it Kong-in! &#128077;&#129421;&#128377;

DKMikey77
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Synappzz on June 14, 2021, 08:45:29 pm
Congrats Robbie,on, as you said, finding a way to play on a level playing field !
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: gstrain on June 14, 2021, 08:52:03 pm
Robbie, I have one question about your submission: Did you intentionally modify the original DK hardware in order to gain an advantage over using unmodified hardware?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Reinke314 on June 15, 2021, 02:26:59 pm
Seems to be alot of us are being pretty biased here. I thought we look at the video evidence submitted, gameplay, board set, so on and so fourth. Why even bring up whether Robbie or any other player has kissed babies and hugged mom's at conversations, and just left it at the video evidence at hand. Some of us have even stated that Voltage cannot and will not make a difference in gameplay. So why even bring it up?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Barra on June 15, 2021, 03:02:24 pm
How do so many people not have a problem with this?

Robbie:
"I'm going to cheat by manipulating the hardware" ..... "New world record!"
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Reinke314 on June 15, 2021, 03:12:28 pm
Honest question here. How is it "cheating" or " board manipulation" if others have stated in the past that it is simply a "placebo" effect (changing voltage, etc).
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 15, 2021, 03:17:37 pm

DADFKK  <Allen> <Billy>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: BillyGaines on June 15, 2021, 04:43:42 pm
I've been out of the loop for most of the DK drama.  Looking at this situation from a distance my BS detector is sounding off on the 'it's personal' setting.  With that being said, I am very grateful for the hours and hours Jeremy has freely given of himself to verify scores. 

This is just my opinion.  If differing opinions are no longer welcome at the DKF I guess you can ban me as well. 
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Barra on June 15, 2021, 04:59:32 pm
I've been out of the loop for most of the DK drama.  Looking at this situation from a distance my BS detector is sounding off on the 'it's personal' setting.  With that being said, I am very grateful for the hours and hours Jeremy has freely given of himself to verify scores. 

This is just my opinion.  If differing opinions are no longer welcome at the DKF I guess you can ban me as well.

You need to look a bit closer then

Jeremy is a man of integrity, moreso than most. Nothing about this is personal, he would do the same thing if it was one of his good friends.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 15, 2021, 06:32:10 pm
I'm still waiting for an explanation from the "This is personal" crowd as to why Jeremy and DKF accepted all of Robbie's previous world record scores, before Robbie started manipulating hardware for an attempted advantage.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: QAOP Spaceman on June 15, 2021, 07:25:52 pm
Quote from: Barra
How do so many people not have a problem with this?

Robbie:
"I'm going to cheat by manipulating the hardware" ..... "New world record!"

This ^


Quote from: ersatz
I'm still waiting for an explanation from the "This is personal" crowd as to why Jeremy and DKF accepted all of Robbie's previous world record scores, before Robbie started manipulating hardware for an attempted advantage.

This ^ x 100

Quote from: Barra
Jeremy is a man of integrity, moreso than most.

This ^ x 1000

Never mind the hours spent over the years making graphs, Jry's balls in putting forth the case against Ol' Girder Fingers shows how much he values the integrity of the scoreboard here.

All the ensuing harrasment, slander and ongoing legal grief from the Disgraced Former Video Game Champion and his band of hairy-knuckled, slow-learning followers was entirely predictable, yet xelnia did the right thing.

 I think he's doing the right hing now.



I made a chart:

(https://i.imgur.com/d6RbYeG.png)
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 15, 2021, 07:45:55 pm
Just putting it out there. A lot if us that disagree with Jeremy actually have tremendous respect for him and what he's done for the hobby.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: krehztim on June 15, 2021, 08:26:49 pm
What Spacey said.

Sorry, but anyone who aligns themselves and who fully and outwardly supports one of the biggest con artists in sport, especially gaming, does not deserve the benefit of the doubt, especially when they go so far as to make a public and obnoxious post about being perfectly fine with cheating. Is he capable of 1.272? Of course FFS. Should toxicity be a factor with score submissions? Of course not. Is he one of the greatest DK players of all-time? Hell yes, and he always will be. Was this whole game and submission anywhere in the realm of the spirit of the community? HELL NO. If you don't want to be questioned, don't align yourself with sycophants who worship a narcissistic bullshit artist.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ohrami on June 15, 2021, 09:31:18 pm
It is absurd that this score is not being accepted on the leaderboard if for the reason xelnia stated in his post, and it?s so unacceptable that I think no reasonable person can logically consider this leaderboard to be a whole or complete one anymore.

Yes, the video has no audio. Most of his old records also have no audio. They have sections of the game screen that aren?t even fucking visible, for Christ?s sake - huge portions, even. Yet, these scores were accepted just as every other score was.

Many websites and leaderboards have proof policies that require some acceptable level of video footage standards. DKF adopting such a policy would make perfect sense. A video lacking audio or not perfectly capturing the video feed in 2021 is unacceptable. However, as it stands, no such rules even currently exist for the site. Lakeman?s score submission was rejected purely based on spite, as a punishment for ?bad behavior?. This is incredibly unprofessional and absolutely not the way to go.

DKF has been one of the best websites in the world which is dedicated to classic video gaming for a long time. However, this sole decision has tainted its reputation in my eyes, and I will always question the veracity of the scoreboard as presented here on DKF. The only reason why I now know that Robbie Lakeman is the indisputable champion of Donkey Kong is because of a random Facebook post. Why should Facebook posts be more indicative of who is the DK champ than a forum completely dedicated to Donkey Kong players and their world-class achievements in the game?

I have great respect for this forum and its history, but the current attitude of its leaderboard moderators just isn?t up to the standards I would expect from a serious record-keeping body anymore.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ohrami on June 15, 2021, 10:25:59 pm
Since I can't edit my post, I will just add it in another post:

Because DKF's Donkey Kong leaderboard is no longer a leaderboard intended to display a ranked list of the highest-scoring games of Donkey Kong that have been played, and is now simply a list ranking the highest-scoring games of Donkey Kong that have been played by people who xelnia doesn't dislike for whatever reason he has for disliking them, will there be created another website, forum, or thread within this forum that in fact accurately keeps records of the highest-scoring Donkey Kong games that have been played? If anyone intends to do so, simply send me a DM or reply to this post in this thread with the URL to it. While I am not an incredibly active user of the site, nor am I even an active DK player in general, I have been checking this leaderboard at least monthly since I joined the site (which I did I believe the same week this website was even put online), so since this website is now effectively useless for the primary reason that I used it for and has become as worthless as (or perhaps worse than) TG when it comes to record-keeping, it is hopeful that some other website, forum, or even Google spreadsheet will be actively updated with actually accurate rankings of the best Donkey Kong players in the world.

I have seen another classic gaming leaderboard take the horrible approach of unranking players who say or do things they personally dislike, and disregarding the actual legitimacy of the records themselves, and it's always sad when an otherwise respectable and trustworthy community goes down that path. I truly do hope that DKF can be promptly replaced, just as TG was replaced by DKF so many years ago when it just wasn't up to the standards people expected of a record-keeping site.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Kibbey93 on June 15, 2021, 10:35:47 pm
 <snek>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 16, 2021, 03:52:22 am
Other website? I think TG will allow it.


And now for a more detailed philosophy of mine.

I've always said that principles and common sense are enemies of each other.

But I like to add a couple of things.

A person devoted entirely to common sense with no principle has no character. A person devoted entirely to principle and no common sense is a fool.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 16, 2021, 10:15:46 am
Other website? I think TG will allow it.

Twin Galaxies has accepted Robbie's submission after a discussion about the lack of sound.  As with all scores, it can be disputed after the fact if somebody with enough credibility (4000 points) opens a dispute.  They will have to make the case though, explaining why the score is invalid.

I don't think that is going to happen though because the people with that much credibility dont' have an issue with the performance itself -- other than the sound which was later addressed.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 16, 2021, 11:09:23 am
You'll never have uniformity between sites in regards to score acceptance.  I think that's perfectly fine.  Else, why have a different scoreboard in the first place?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: QAOP Spaceman on June 16, 2021, 05:36:50 pm
Quote from: sorry who
Because DKF's Donkey Kong leaderboard is ... now simply a list ranking the highest-scoring games of Donkey Kong that have been played by people who xelnia doesn't dislike for whatever reason he has for disliking them it. [sic]

Lol.

Do ersatz_cats and the rest of us a favour by attempting a response to this:

Quote from: ersatz
I'm still waiting for an explanation from the "This is personal" crowd as to why Jeremy and DKF accepted all of Robbie's previous world record scores, before Robbie started manipulating hardware for an attempted advantage.


Quote
While I am not an incredibly active user of the site, nor am I even an active DK player in general, I have been checking this leaderboard at least monthly since I joined the site


Do your own leaderboard then, for your own once-a-monthly benefit.

Quote
I truly do hope that DKF can be promptly replaced

'Promptly' replace it yourself big boy, and check in once a month to see how that goes for you  :-*
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 16, 2021, 10:29:46 pm
i was never gonna log in again but against my better judgement the alcohol got to me

you know what lots of people in casinos have good luck charms. if you walk into a casino and say "i think this good luck charm will give me advantage" they let you in and pay you off if you win. it doesnt matter if you thought you got an unfair advantage. in sports crazy christians pray and thank jesus for victory all the time and noone says 'he thought he was cheating he thought jesus helped him win, strip him of his award"

its your club your rules. my problem isnt even saying robbie cheated its saying he thinks he cheated or that he admitted to cheating . no no no no. he admitted to changing voltage. something you guys told him doesnt matter, something you guys told him wasnt cheating.

its utter hypocrisy to tell him its not cheating but then say it is cheating when he does it

strip his score all you want thats your right. but lying about him and saying he "thought" he was cheating that he "tried" to cheat. you're in your rights to remove him from your scoreboard but you're not in your right to lie

jeremy is a liar by saying he tried to cheat.  you're site is run by liars. i really dont care if i get banned, liars mean nothing to me. Billy is a cheater and jeremy is a jealous hater. both are true and not mutually exclusive. up till now i saw jeremy as honroable and billy as a cheat. but after this i realize outing billy was just a case where jealous hate and honorable exposure of a cheater were one in the same. the treatment of robbie and jeremeies own admiesson of not adding a score he admits he thinks he is real proves hes a jealous hater.

again you have the right to your own feelings you have the right to your own scoreaboard but you dont have the right to jeremys own alternative facts.  by saying robbie meant to cheat you cross the line to lying and slander.

congratulations, billy that cheater tried to undermine you and discredit you for years and failed miserably. but now jeremy undermines himself and discredits you all with his lies about robbie.

enjoy the hole you dug.

oh yeah and this whole "jeremy worked hard for us". well guess what walter worked hard for you. bily worked hard for you. billy and walter built this community. all billly syncophants point that out. so defending jeremy cause of his prior work is no different than defending billly for his prior work

jeremy and billy are one and the same. people who worked hard for a community and used that to rise up and promote themselves. and hardwork by billy, walter, corrupt tg refs, or jeremy in no way undoes their biased hate

and anyone that defends them due to friendshiop is also lettting their biases get the best of them

i agree with jeremy on ONE THING and one thing only. the right thing the moral thing is not always the popular thing. I really dont fucking care (well icare a little) if i lose friends over morality. this is wrong, jeremy arrogantly showed his bias. you can love a biased person, but if you're a good person you'll tell your biased friend he did wrong.

for morality everyone must stand alone. you guys all have to ask yourself if you're doing the right thing by standing by jeremys biased hate. and an answer of "well everyone else was doing it" just wont cut it
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Barra on June 16, 2021, 10:35:56 pm
FailFish
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 16, 2021, 11:43:15 pm
wow  <Billy> <Allen>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 17, 2021, 12:35:29 am
by saying robbie meant to cheat you cross the line to lying and slander.

Here are direct quote from Robbie Lakeman taken from the earlier provided screenshots, for anyone who either forgot they existed or didn't bother reading them before commenting:

Quote
We decided to experiment with dropping voltages, and once he dropped it, I told him this was the exact RNG John McCurdy gets. Once he dropped it more, we saw the pies glitching, just like in attached video. Once we got just enough voltage at 4.71, the pies came back correctly, and the RNG stayed the same. We both flew up to NH where my machine was, and tested out mine, which was at 4.68, which was odd. Neil brought both the PCB and power supply I was playing on in Florida, so he decided to set that up in my cabinet, and it read 4.74. Somehow the voltage went up without touching anything, but it was really cold where the machine was. We also werent getting the RNG results like we had at his house, where it was 72 degrees. We talked to Blake Reinke about this, and he sent us the video of the NES hot plate hack speedrunners were using to get a better RNG seed more consistently, so we tried putting a space heater on the cab, and dropped it to 4.64, and we got results. Once Neil left, I decided to drop it down to 4.6, and decided not to go any lower than that, and still saw no pie factory glitch, so I decided to put a hair dryer in my cab, and let it run while playing, and then I got these glitches on the pie board, with some of the easiest RNG ever.

Quote
First full day grinding out DK on modified hardware to keep the fireballs on the bottom for unlimited grouping. Got over a million well over pace within a handful of tries! One of the easiest rng games I've ever played.

Quote
Day two of manipulating hardware for easy rng, I pulled off this sweet attempt that was ahead of pace. Points just fell into my lap.

Quote
Nice warmup game on day four of cheating at donkey Kong! Had a very weak 132k start, but since the fireballs kept staying on the bottom for unlimited grouping, I was able to manage to get back on 1.277 pace. All the deaths were my fault too, but when half the game becomes easier by dropping voltage, you can still get deep games consistently...

Quote
I finally figured our how to manipulate the pcb to keep the fireballs on the bottom for unlimited grouping all day now. Going deep ahead of pace consistently these days.

Granted, I'm not oblivious to the facetious tone of Robbie's remark "Day four of cheating at Donkey Kong". But joking about cheating, while attempting to cheat (however ineptly), is still attempting to cheat.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ohrami on June 17, 2021, 12:39:15 am
Quote from: sorry who
Because DKF's Donkey Kong leaderboard is ... now simply a list ranking the highest-scoring games of Donkey Kong that have been played by people who xelnia doesn't dislike for whatever reason he has for disliking them it. [sic]

You misused the term "sic". This term is generally used when you are transcribing directly from a text or quote, and the term notes that the erroneous grammar, spelling, or punctuation is found in the original. In this case, the erroneous grammar was added entirely by you and is not found in the original text or quote, so the term "sic" is inaccurately used here.

Quote from: ersatz
I'm still waiting for an explanation from the "This is personal" crowd as to why Jeremy and DKF accepted all of Robbie's previous world record scores, before Robbie started manipulating hardware for an attempted advantage.

He accepted Robbie's previous scores because while he disliked him, he didn't have a good enough reason to attempt to justify his biased ban of the player and at least sound somewhat reasonable while doing so. It is the same reason why many of my world records were accepted by the-elite (another record-keeping site that has corrupt and biased moderators, similar to xelnia) until many users banded together to find as many reasons to disparage me to finally have some sort of justification to remove me.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 17, 2021, 12:53:32 am
Quote
He accepted Robbie's previous scores because while he disliked him, he didn't have a good enough reason to attempt to justify his biased ban of the player and at least sound somewhat reasonable while doing so.

"I'm sure he would have, but he didn't" isn't actually an explanation.

Only thing that changed is, Robbie started openly trying to cheat.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 17, 2021, 01:33:48 am
jeremy and billy are one and the same.

He accepted Robbie's previous scores because while he disliked him, he didn't have a good enough reason to attempt to justify his biased ban of the player and at least sound somewhat reasonable while doing so.

I appreciate the candor, as misinformed as it is. And I appreciate you going to bat for Robbie, since he never bothered to actually inquire as to whether his new approach was acceptable and has yet to defend himself here. But I'm going to make the very generous assumption that these opinions come from a misunderstanding of the issues at play, otherwise you guys are just making things up to fit your own narrative.

Since you don't seem to believe what I'm actually saying, then the only thing I can offer are my actions. Long after Robbie made his allegiances known, I still verified his WRs. I still provided private score analysis when he asked. I still attempted to help him submit a last-minute score to the Kong League Head-to-Head tournament. When Robbie submitted a WR, years ago, with chopped up video, I was sympathetic to his reasonings and verified the score when he sent me the full video.

Spoiler alert: Robbie is not the first person to speak ill of DKF or myself, and those people still had scores verified. Robbie has trolled, bullied and harassed other players for years, and I still verified his scores.

But, ok, none of that matters because I was just waiting for the opportunity to stick it to Robbie...because it benefits me somehow? I'm actually perfectly happy to say that none of the previous good will I've shown towards Robbie matters, because the action on this score is what we're all concerned about. It's sort of like players getting traded in sports: "what have you done for me lately?"

Robbie tried to modify the hardware to gain an unfair advantage. He failed. Robbie tried to cheat. He failed. That's unacceptable. That's grounds for rejecting a score. If that's not against the spirit of fair play, then I don't know what is.

You're perfectly happy to construct imaginary scenarios and motivations for me, yet specific, blatant, demonstrable claims by Robbie get ignored? Miss me with that bullshit.

I doubt there is a person on this Earth that cares more about the accuracy and integrity of the DK scoreboard than I do. Robbie certainly doesn't, and it truly pains me to have to reject his submission. But I'm not here to rubber stamp his fragile ego. He can stick with the Facebook circle jerks if he wants that.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 17, 2021, 01:57:01 am

Here are direct quote from Robbie Lakeman taken from the earlier provided screenshots, for anyone who either forgot they existed or didn't bother reading them before commenting:

Quote
We decided to experiment with dropping voltages, and once he dropped it, I told him this was the exact RNG John McCurdy gets. Once he dropped it more, we saw the pies glitching, just like in attached video. Once we got just enough voltage at 4.71, the pies came back correctly, and the RNG stayed the same. We both flew up to NH where my machine was, and tested out mine, which was at 4.68, which was odd. Neil brought both the PCB and power supply I was playing on in Florida, so he decided to set that up in my cabinet, and it read 4.74. Somehow the voltage went up without touching anything, but it was really cold where the machine was. We also werent getting the RNG results like we had at his house, where it was 72 degrees. We talked to Blake Reinke about this, and he sent us the video of the NES hot plate hack speedrunners were using to get a better RNG seed more consistently, so we tried putting a space heater on the cab, and dropped it to 4.64, and we got results. Once Neil left, I decided to drop it down to 4.6, and decided not to go any lower than that, and still saw no pie factory glitch, so I decided to put a hair dryer in my cab, and let it run while playing, and then I got these glitches on the pie board, with some of the easiest RNG ever.


This mean a setup with a hair dryer or hotplate are definitely not a standard setup using this in my book this is cheating.

That is the reason why a video showing the setup inside the cabinet is mandatory.

The basic number ONE unwritten rule is:  Arcade cabinet using standard components with standard setup.
Now, we all know what standard components and setup are. An hairdryer is not one of them.

One cannot expect 100's of rules for each different method of cheating. The basic rule is: Is standard setup been used: Yes or No (End of story)

One other thing: The reason why TGSAP process was introduced at Twingalaxies was just this, so that the community decide IF  submissions are valid.

My view is: Sound is a crucial component to identify if PCB are original.

More than one gamer raised a question on this forum why sound is off. Maybe it is a simple answer.

Could it be that when a score is accepted without sound that Billy ' s Lawyer team can use that as precedent predicament that Billy's controversial scores submitted in 2010 are acceptable without sound?










Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 17, 2021, 02:01:33 am
One other thought: I do understand that in some cases a gamer could play on a machine without sound, maybe sound is broken.
So my view is: That is a score is not TOP10, I am not bothering accepting a score without sound. But for a World Record, this is a different case,
those submissions must have sound ect..

So accepting previous scores on a leaderboard without sound not in Top10 is not a problem because it does not effect the ranking of the Top scores.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ohrami on June 17, 2021, 02:06:31 am
I doubt there is a person on this Earth that cares more about the accuracy and integrity of the DK scoreboard than I do.
This is actually false. I have been completely inactive from this forum and community for years and I care more about the accuracy and integrity of the DK scoreboard than you do. The way that I know that I do is that I believe that the best-scoring record that has ever been achieved in the game's entire history should be listed on the leaderboard, and you do not.

I actually don't care about your motivations for rejection at all. The fact is that you struck a legitimately-achieved score from the record on a leaderboard which is intended to display the highest-scoring Donkey Kong players of all time?or at least, I thought that was what it was for until a few days ago.

I understand that you may have worked around Robbie's eccentricities in the past, and even dealt with him saying mean things about you or the other users of the forum. While that is certainly noble of you, it doesn't grant you a pass to then later strike legitimate scores from a leaderboard upon which the only two factors that should be relevant are the actual score achieved within the game and the legitimacy of the practices used while playing.

Try to distance yourself from your own personal biases. In fact, distance yourself entirely from Robbie, his opinions, his personality, and everything about him. You have here a score that was achieved using, as far as you or anyone else can tell, legitimate, original Donkey Kong arcade hardware, using entirely legitimate and accepted practices within the game, with absolutely no evidence of foul play whatsoever, and the score achieved on it was higher than any player ever achieved in a single game before it. Despite all of this, you have rejected the record because of some personal issue with how the person who played that game handled himself, his own personal opinions (which are contradicted by facts) regarding the legitimacy of his own gameplay and actions, and your general personal opinion about the player's character.

If you decide to just completely ignore the above paragraph and insist that Robbie's personality and your personal opinions regarding his personality are somehow relevant to the legitimacy of his scores and whether or not they are deserving of being ranked, by taking a quick look into Robbie's personality and why he made the claims that he did, any rational actor with an unbiased mind can understand precisely the psychology behind why Robbie made the claims that he did. Robbie claimed that he was "cheating" in the game because he was frustrated by the (potentially false) belief that other players were using these hardware modifications in their own gameplay, and was also frustrated by his false belief that these hardware modifications had any influence on the gameplay whatsoever. Thus, he used provocative language by claiming that he himself was cheating by engaging in the same practices as everybody else (implying that many others before him were cheating, and that it is the only reason they were able to achieve better scores than he could in the past) to try to stir up emotions among the users in the community, due to his own frustration, which, admittedly, stemmed entirely from his own irrationality and hubris.

Looked in the objective manner described in the above paragraph (and I'm certain that you or anyone else reading, unless they are intentionally trying to frame the situation into something it is not because they have some bias, would indeed agree is in fact precisely what was occurring), even in a world where they somehow are relevant, Robbie's own personal opinions and public Internet posts are in no way grounds for punishment on the scale of completely expunging his records and stripping him of his rightful title as champion. Your decision here is completely wrong, and it's no wonder that many users are coming out of the wood-works to cast judgement upon you for it. If you check my post history, you will see that I came out of the wood-works years ago, to praise you for your expos? on Billy Mitchell. I have had nothing but the deepest of respect for you for many years. I hope that some day soon, I can return to praise you for reversing your terrible decision on this matter, too.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 17, 2021, 02:58:05 am
First off, I love what Jeremy has done for the scoreboard. So what I'm about to say is a complaint I have that hasn't really been addressed.
I was hoping the Robbie defenders would have said something, but it slipped passed their argumentation as well.
So I guess I have to present the argument.
What Robbie did was not a surprise. This low voltage game was months in the making. Everyone knew Robbie was attempting this. It was a big topic of conversation.
So I'm pretty sure Jeremy knew about this months ago.

So my biggest problem is this. Why didn't Jeremy say anything?  All he had to do is say. "Look, I have learned that there are attempts to buck the system by using low voltage games. While I'm uncertain of the validity of this method, I will outright reject any blatant attempts to do so. There will also be the possibility of an outright ban."
But instead Jeremy kept quiet. I do see he touches this subject by saying he didn't ask.  But a clarification of the rules in this particular situation might have adverted this whole thing.
Now Robbie might very well have said, "screw it I'm submitting anyways", but at least he would have given fair warning.

I waited forever and a day for his defenders to make this point, but for some reason it was a blind spot for them.

Again, I am behind Jeremy, and think he's a great scorekeeper but this point needed to be raised.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 17, 2021, 03:12:50 am
I doubt there is a person on this Earth that cares more about the accuracy and integrity of the DK scoreboard than I do.
This is actually false. I have been completely inactive from this forum and community for years and I care more about the accuracy and integrity of the DK scoreboard than you do. The way that I know that I do is that I believe that the best-scoring record that has ever been achieved in the game's entire history should be listed on the leaderboard, and you do not.

We actually want similar things. The difference is that I want a scoreboard based on fair play and at least a modicum of integrity from the competitors. You seem to just want a list of numbers, as evidenced by:

I actually don't care about your motivations for rejection at all.

Which pretty much gives up the game for a lot of the other objectors in this thread. In other words, you already had an end result in mind, without any consideration for what came before. You didn't get what you wanted, so you tell yourself a story where poor, frustrated Robbie (boo fucking hoo) is just misunderstood and graft on some malfeasance on my part. I'm biased because I rejected the score, because only a biased person would reject it? Am I the chicken or the egg in this scenario?

And so our paths diverge. I'll continue to do what I feel is right for the community (active and inactive members alike) and the scoreboard, and you can do whatever it is you do.

Your decision here is completely wrong, and it's no wonder that many users are coming out of the wood-works to cast judgement upon you for it. If you check my post history, you will see that I came out of the wood-works years ago, to praise you for your expos? on Billy Mitchell. I have had nothing but the deepest of respect for you for many years. I hope that some day soon, I can return to praise you for reversing your terrible decision on this matter, too.

I am grateful for the support I've received over this and other issues, both in public and in private. But I don't require, expect, or desire it. I am mindful of the criticisms I have received because, when valid, they allow me to better serve the community.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: xelnia on June 17, 2021, 03:24:34 am
So my biggest problem is this. Why didn't Jeremy say anything?

This is a valid point, and there are three reasons. 1) I'm not Robbie's babysitter. While I do try to keep apprised of what's going on, I generally don't chase people around and force the rulebook down their throat. Especially people who should know better. But if I need to start doing that, then so be it. 2) I truly hoped Robbie would move on and leave all this nonsense behind. 3) I assumed if he didn't move on, he might not even submit to DKF, based on his **gasp** clear bias against me and the forum.

So, maybe I should have tried harder to head it off, but that certainly doesn't excuse his later actions.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Scoundrl on June 17, 2021, 07:56:10 am
Jry, I have a question.

Now that Robbie has release the audio for his game so it can be fully scrutinized, why hasnt his score been accepted? I know he tried to cheat in a lot of peoples eyes but cheating really isnt the right word. He seems to have a sincere belief that Johns games have better RNG and thinks this may be a way to even that up. I talked personally with him and Neil about this, even gave advice on how to make that change easier so that proper testing could be done on their hypothesis. Am I banned from the HSL now too?
If the game stands up to scrutiny, why would it not be accepted? If the thought is he simply tried to cheat, that is demonstrably not true. He tried to verify or disprove that voltage matters or doesnt and since he has now offered a proper submission it seems the right thing to do is verify the score by normal means and accept it or reject it on its merits.

-Ken
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: LMDAVE on June 17, 2021, 08:26:07 am
One question I have is if he didn't show the voltmeter and voltage reading, would there even be a question? I still have no idea why he added the voltage in the submission for no other reason just to suggest a topic to scrutinize the score, is their an ulterior motive with that? who knows. Should have just left it out.

As for audio, I don't know where that even became an issue. Mainly at TG, because I know I refuse to play a game of DK without some jamming music in the background, and TG basically required me to silence the submission so they didn't get copyright claims on their site (that was several years go). So, I submitted a youtube with no audio for that reason. Never was a problem there. But, I know audio is not the issue here, some just keep bringing that up like it is.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Scoundrl on June 17, 2021, 08:35:45 am
As for audio, I don't know where that even became an issue. Mainly at TG, because I know I refuse to play a game of DK without some jamming music in the background, and TG basically required me to silence the submission so they didn't get copyright claims on their site (that was several years go). So, I submitted a youtube with no audio for that reason. Never was a problem there. But, I know audio is not the issue here, some just keep bringing that up like it is.

The audio is an issue because its one way to tell if the game is functioning properly. Since this seems to be a test it would be more important all the evidence be there. There have been other notable scores that hid certain parts of the recordings and those turned out to be important.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 17, 2021, 10:27:31 am
Quote
Here are direct quote from Robbie Lakeman taken from the earlier provided screenshots, for anyone who either forgot they existed or didn't bother reading them before commenting:



oh i'm fully aware out of the context carefully cropped screenshots jeremy included.  what he left out is how people here told robbie that it wasnt cheating and ok and he should go for it.  Robbie expressed concerns it was cheating, was told its not, went on to try to prove it was (and honestly i think robbie failed to prove it was cheating just like others thought), and was repeatedly told it wasnt and that he should just try to get the wr with it. 

when someone says something is cheating and then is told its fine, and they believe it and then submit, no thats not cheating.

now anyone can say maybe my screesnhots are equally out of context. maybe. so i guess then disregard all screenshots or go look for yourself. but to only accept jeremy's cropped screenshots isnt really fair

i wanna be clear the attached files arent meant to embarass or "gotcha" ken george or robbie, i respect they put the time in to publicly discuss it with robbie, my point is the people grabbing facebook snippets knew dang well what they were leaving out

anyone who believes robbie was cheating should open a twingalaxies dispute. i'm not gonna waste much more time here on the argument, i regret my post already cause now i'm stuck defending it when i dont even know if this comments will be deleted in order to help the narrative against robbie.  Funny how the people with the ability to open a dispute, who also accuse robbie of cheating wont go offsite and do so, its almost like they know the embarassment waiting them if they try these accusations in a forum they cant control

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 17, 2021, 11:07:26 am
I gotta agree with Ken on this one.  I always saw Robbie's voltage exploration as an investigation into how other people may have gained an unfair advantage.  All along the way, most other people said things like "that isn't how it works" or "that is so stupid don't bother" or "go for it, it won't do anything".

To say now that Robbie cheated in this official submission is wrong.  To say he attempted to cheat is iffy.  I say he was investigating the possibility of influencing the RNG.  If he didn't show the voltage nobody would be the wiser.

He showed the voltage.  People say it means nothing.  Yet Jeremy will not accept the score because it goes against the spirit of play.

Convenient that the person he beat doesn't even show his face.  Talk about violating the spirit of open competition.

If one person can stop another person's score from being accepted, then that person might as well be called the Chief Referee of the Donkey Kong Forum.  Not much better than the old referees at Twin Galaxies.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Yegman on June 17, 2021, 01:27:58 pm
Quote
Welcome to the Official DKF Donkey Kong High Score List, peer-reviewed by the DK Community!

Why does the Donkey Kong High Score List, say "peer-reviewed by the DK Community!", because from this thread, it seams that the comments and concerns of fellow DK Community members have no standing whatsoever?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Yegman on June 17, 2021, 01:32:30 pm
*seems
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 17, 2021, 01:32:51 pm
Quote
Welcome to the Official DKF Donkey Kong High Score List, peer-reviewed by the DK Community!

Why does the Donkey Kong High Score List, say "peer-reviewed by the DK Community!", because from this thread, it seams that the comments and concerns of fellow DK Community members have no standing whatsoever?

I do believe the scores are peer reviewed, but in this case it seems that Jeremy has more weight to his vote than others.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Kibbey93 on June 17, 2021, 04:16:28 pm
To say now that Robbie cheated in this official submission is wrong.  To say he attempted to cheat is iffy.  I say he was investigating the possibility of influencing the RNG.  If he didn't show the voltage nobody would be the wiser.

He showed the voltage.  People say it means nothing.  Yet Jeremy will not accept the score because it goes against the spirit of play.

Robbie said he was attempting to cheat. There is evidence of this. There's nothing iffy about it. Whether it was a viable cheating method or he succeeded is irrelevant. Attempting to cheat should be a clear violation of the spirit of fair play.


Convenient that the person he beat doesn't even show his face.  Talk about violating the spirit of open competition.

Also choosing not to show your face or reveal your identity while streaming live or engaging with people online is nothing new, and there are many top players in many games with unknown IRL identities. Someone deciding to live with some degree of privacy in no way violates the spirit of open competition.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 17, 2021, 05:39:16 pm
Also choosing not to show your face or reveal your identity while streaming live or engaging with people online is nothing new, and there are many top players in many games with unknown IRL identities. Someone deciding to live with some degree of privacy in no way violates the spirit of open competition.

Sure, some players want to remain anonymous.  Other people want to keep their techniques hidden.  I say that for public recognition you need public display.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 17, 2021, 05:41:42 pm
Robbie said he was attempting to cheat. There is evidence of this. There's nothing iffy about it. Whether it was a viable cheating method or he succeeded is irrelevant. Attempting to cheat should be a clear violation of the spirit of fair play.

I must have missed that statement in the footage of his game.  I don't recall him saying "I am now attempting to cheat". 
How many people on this very forum mocked his idea of voltage manipulation?

"IT CANT WORK"  "THAT IS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING"  "YOU KNOW NOTHING"

But now?  Oh well.  Since you got top spot again and you were rude, we are going to ignore  your score because reasons.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: yamnitz on June 17, 2021, 08:10:53 pm
I SUCK at Donkey Kong!  Literally like 60k, don't care.  I joined this group because I found a google link "Pole Position and How to get better" on this forum.
 https://donkeykongforum.net/index.php?topic=2259.0

It did make me better. 

But ya'll have lost your mind.  It's an acceptable score. The game happened, the score happened. The player is that good.  If the game plays long enough to get to lvl.22 I'd say the voltage was fine.  (trust me I play Pole and 0.1 voltage is the difference between having a working game and a 450lb. paperweight.  If the game works who gives a shit if it's 5.13 or 4.69.  Nintendo built boards to withstand tolerances.  What is the problem with the score?

If you're worried about attempting things, I attempt to figure out how a WR Pole Position score from 1984 didn't end up in Guinness EVER and didn't end up in print until 1990.  There are many more mysteries in arcade high scores than that of someone you don't like getting a score you want to discredit. The player did it, the player will probably do better, this site looks sus by ignoring the best score ever at the game the freaking forum is named after. 

It's a legit score.  Put in on the Board.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 17, 2021, 09:02:56 pm
Quote
We decided to experiment with dropping voltages, and once he dropped it, I told him this was the exact RNG John McCurdy gets. Once he dropped it more, we saw the pies glitching, just like in attached video. Once we got just enough voltage at 4.71, the pies came back correctly, and the RNG stayed the same. We both flew up to NH where my machine was, and tested out mine, which was at 4.68, which was odd. Neil brought both the PCB and power supply I was playing on in Florida, so he decided to set that up in my cabinet, and it read 4.74. Somehow the voltage went up without touching anything, but it was really cold where the machine was. We also werent getting the RNG results like we had at his house, where it was 72 degrees. We talked to Blake Reinke about this, and he sent us the video of the NES hot plate hack speedrunners were using to get a better RNG seed more consistently, so we tried putting a space heater on the cab, and dropped it to 4.64, and we got results. Once Neil left, I decided to drop it down to 4.6, and decided not to go any lower than that, and still saw no pie factory glitch, so I decided to put a hair dryer in my cab, and let it run while playing, and then I got these glitches on the pie board, with some of the easiest RNG ever.

Quote
First full day grinding out DK on modified hardware to keep the fireballs on the bottom for unlimited grouping. Got over a million well over pace within a handful of tries! One of the easiest rng games I've ever played.

Quote
Day two of manipulating hardware for easy rng, I pulled off this sweet attempt that was ahead of pace. Points just fell into my lap.

Quote
Nice warmup game on day four of cheating at donkey Kong! Had a very weak 132k start, but since the fireballs kept staying on the bottom for unlimited grouping, I was able to manage to get back on 1.277 pace. All the deaths were my fault too, but when half the game becomes easier by dropping voltage, you can still get deep games consistently...

Quote
I finally figured our how to manipulate the pcb to keep the fireballs on the bottom for unlimited grouping all day now. Going deep ahead of pace consistently these days.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 17, 2021, 09:05:42 pm
what he left out is how people here told robbie that it wasnt cheating and ok and he should go for it.  Robbie expressed concerns it was cheating, was told its not, went on to try to prove it was (and honestly i think robbie failed to prove it was cheating just like others thought), and was repeatedly told it wasnt and that he should just try to get the wr with it.

So if I go over to TG, of which I am a site member, and I egg someone on to submit a spliced speedrun, that would make it not-cheating, because technically a site member gave them permission?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 17, 2021, 10:26:10 pm

GIRLS PLS THE BOARD WASNT TAMPERED WITH SO THERE YOU GO SCORE ACEPTED GG.

 <Allen> <Allen> <Allen> <Billy> <Billy> <Billy>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 17, 2021, 11:26:45 pm
Changing voltage within acceptable range so that a boatd play 100% functional with 100%  sound will not be cheating but without sound it is not proven,  the execution of the rom code was consisyent during the whole game.

I had two mspacman pcb and one pacman pcb, each one did play on different voltage, one at 4.7, another 5.0, another5.15 to prevent the boatd notgettig eough amphere to not reset. BUT THE SOUND IS 100%, with no other equipment like a hairdruyer or some form of heat manupulator, bare pcb, that is acceptable

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 18, 2021, 08:11:56 am

So if I go over to TG, of which I am a site member, and I egg someone on to submit a spliced speedrun, that would make it not-cheating, because technically a site member gave them permission?

Site members do not have the capacity to grant permission.  TG members can vote on submissions.  Each submission stands on its own merits.  Members can vote their conscience.  There is no ringleader, no chief referee.  There are rules for each track and a few site-wide rules which are all documented.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 18, 2021, 08:15:51 am
Quote
I finally figured our how to manipulate the pcb to keep the fireballs on the bottom for unlimited grouping all day now. Going deep ahead of pace consistently these days.

"No Robbie, that is impossible.  You are delusional.  It makes no difference."

"That isn't how RNG works.  That isn't how any of this works."

"Wait a minute, if this is true, do we ALL have to show voltage and internal temperatures?"

"Environmental conditions may have an affect on 40 year old hardware??  That's crazy talk!"

It goes on and on and on.  Twin Galaxies has accepted Robbie as the world record holder, so has Guinness (different score, but they are behind the times).  2/3 is good enough for me.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: muscleandfitness on June 18, 2021, 05:23:36 pm


i need more  points to put up my 992 k score PLS SIR CAN I HAVE SOME MORE  <Allen> <Allen> <Billy> <Billy>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 18, 2021, 06:06:30 pm


i need more  points to put up my 992 k score PLS SIR CAN I HAVE SOME MORE  <Allen> <Allen> <Billy> <Billy>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 20, 2021, 07:58:04 pm
what he left out is how people here told robbie that it wasnt cheating and ok and he should go for it.  Robbie expressed concerns it was cheating, was told its not, went on to try to prove it was (and honestly i think robbie failed to prove it was cheating just like others thought), and was repeatedly told it wasnt and that he should just try to get the wr with it.

So if I go over to TG, of which I am a site member, and I egg someone on to submit a spliced speedrun, that would make it not-cheating, because technically a site member gave them permission?
oh please use tg analogies, cause unlike the copie kong forums, tg does things the right way. you'll notice tg approved the score so if you wanna use a tg analogy, yes, tg approves this.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 20, 2021, 08:00:24 pm
also i've been meaning to ask, exactly how does you guys hypocrisy on sourced scores work?

i noticed you inclded billy's score, and have the nerve to list TG as a source even though TG redacted it. Isnt that liking claiming vaccines cause autism and citing the lancelot as a source despite the lancelot redacting?

i also noticed you dont list robbies new score with tg as a source

you're standards for whether or not TG is a valid source seem very inconsistent.

just saying
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: wolfman24 on June 20, 2021, 10:57:35 pm
If you don't care why do you care so much snowflake  ROFL
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: dnickolas on June 21, 2021, 12:16:53 am
also i've been meaning to ask, exactly how does you guys hypocrisy on sourced scores work?

i noticed you inclded billy's score, and have the nerve to list TG as a source even though TG redacted it. Isnt that liking claiming vaccines cause autism and citing the lancelot as a source despite the lancelot redacting?

i also noticed you dont list robbies new score with tg as a source

you're standards for whether or not TG is a valid source seem very inconsistent.

just saying

That's because TG did a blanket redaction because of the evidence concerning later games, and dkf went out of their way to give credit for the legit performance despite future shenanigans.

And do you even play dk? Why do you care?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 21, 2021, 12:27:33 am
also i've been meaning to ask, exactly how does you guys hypocrisy on sourced scores work?

i noticed you inclded billy's score, and have the nerve to list TG as a source even though TG redacted it. Isnt that liking claiming vaccines cause autism and citing the lancelot as a source despite the lancelot redacting?

i also noticed you dont list robbies new score with tg as a source

you're standards for whether or not TG is a valid source seem very inconsistent.

just saying

Are you okay?

TG is allowed to be wrong sometimes.

DKF retained Billy's 933K because it was actually done at an actual live event, and is genuinely believed to be real. Oh, AND because it predates any proven cheating. (You'll notice they haven't added Billy's later Twitch scores, which happened after the cheating, even though there's no particular evidence against those specific scores. The spectre of cheating is enough.) The "TG" has just been retained is all - I think Dwayne Richard, who was TG at the time, witnessed it.

Keep in mind, I don't really agree with that approach. In my opinion, once someone cheats, everything they've done is suspect, unless they provide some full contrition and accountability. Speaking as a verified 100k player (which, given the participation I see in this thread, might as well be a god damn kill screen) I think Billy's name shouldn't be on the scoreboard at all. But the fact that I disagree with DKF's approach to that doesn't mean their approach is not rational or consistent, or that the people who agree with that position are somehow conspiring in bad faith.

I'm just not sure when so many of the TG crew got so soft on cheaters. What happens when someone just says "I cheated this run I'm submitting, but since you won't be able to prove it, you have to accept it"? Will you verify that, too? Where exactly is the line, if not openly attempting to cheat?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: homerwannabee on June 21, 2021, 04:43:55 am
TG accepting the score might come back to bite them later on.  I wouldn't be surprised to see this as evidence brought up in the Billy Mitchell suit.
Lawyer for Billy, "As you can see TG is wildly inconsistent. They'll accept scores to people openly admit to cheating, but won't accept scores by people who have proven they can get the score."

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 21, 2021, 08:47:34 am
ok, i guess with shorter answers i opened myself up to misinterpretation

My issue with the TG source, is although yes tg was the source at one point, its no longer the source. If dkf reevaluated the score and still believes it, then its dkf who believes it not tg.  TG is no longer a valid source for billys score.  It was at first but isnt now.  Some people still believe vaccines cause autism even after the lancet retraction, theyr'e allowed to still believe that, but they shouldnt be using the lancet as a source.  Anyway, my only real point there is i see some inconsitency but thats admmittedly the less important of my points.

TG can of course make mistakes.  It didnt just make mistakes in the old days, it makes mistakes now and score gets disputed all the time.  I was provided an analogy and following up.  Perhaps analogies should be discontinued and the focus should be on the facts if analogies create more confusion instead of clarity.  George, i'm curious as to why you think it bites tg in the ass, the community accepted it, dont see how that hurts TG itself, especially when it was the right call.  Still at least you seem to be at least hinting at things that matter and i respect that.

finally i'm loving the "why do you care" angle.  yeah, how many people complained about todds scores played any of the games he played?  Dragster was one of the worst games ever, if any of you did play it, i'd wager it was only because of the dispute and most people wouldnt even know dragster existed if not for todd.  First its about if robbie cheated, then its about if he thought he cheated, then its about if what he thought was true and didnt think is cheating would you view it as cheating if he was right, now its about why do i care.  not sure why my feelings are the new goal post but making it all the person and not the facts is par for the course here.

 but i thought i made clear before i cared because robbie is being accused of cheating.  i dont care the score isnt listed, i care about the reasoning being given.  Once all this focus on the person and not the score is invovled, well guess what, i'm not the one making it about people, jeremys comment and you guys follow up make it about the people, and you better believe i care about robbie.  and between questing why do i care, as well as all the focus on how mean and rude robbie is, this was never about the score this was always about robbie, so as long as its made to be all about robbie and not about robbies score, then yes i care.  once it actually becomes about the score and not the person i'll stop caring.

This isnt the first time robbie was accused of cheating either.  I believe it was his 1260 score dwayne was saying robbie cheaeted on? if it was a different score thats not the point, the point is accusations of robbie cheating are nothing new. Heck he didnt even submit the score at first (and a practice game cant be cheating you can outright use save states in practice so cheating accusations make zero sense there), he only finally submitted to give his detractors a chance to dispute it and instead they smartly shut up.  People have been trying to get robbie on cheating for a while, and failing, and now seem to think this is the golden ticket to hold onto. 

does it all make sense now why i might care?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: ersatz_cats on June 21, 2021, 09:54:46 am
finally i'm loving the "why do you care" angle.  yeah, how many people complained about todds scores played any of the games he played?  Dragster was one of the worst games ever, if any of you did play it, i'd wager it was only because of the dispute and most people wouldnt even know dragster existed if not for todd.  First its about if robbie cheated, then its about if he thought he cheated, then its about if what he thought was true and didnt think is cheating would you view it as cheating if he was right, now its about why do i care.  not sure why my feelings are the new goal post but making it all the person and not the facts is par for the course here.

but i thought i made clear before i cared because robbie is being accused of cheating.  i dont care the score isnt listed, i care about the reasoning being given.  Once all this focus on the person and not the score is invovled, well guess what, i'm not the one making it about people, jeremys comment and you guys follow up make it about the people, and you better believe i care about robbie.  and between questing why do i care, as well as all the focus on how mean and rude robbie is, this was never about the score this was always about robbie, so as long as its made to be all about robbie and not about robbies score, then yes i care.  once it actually becomes about the score and not the person i'll stop caring.

Don't tire yourself out, putting up all those goalposts everywhere.

The actual circumstances have been beaten to death, but basically, lowering voltages (and using shit like hair dryers) should either have zero effect, or be wildly obvious. I'm not sure if this entirely rules out the momentary bit flip, say in a current score, which could go unnoticed over the course of the game. I'll leave that to the experts.

The point is the expressed desire to cheat. That's not DKF's word. That's Robbie's word. "Cheating", "manipulating hardware", "modified hardware", etc. I'm more than happy to quote those yet again, if you've forgotten. Just give me the word. If you can't see why that would be a viable grounds for disqualification, then you're just not looking at this objectively. (And no, that's not making it "about you", the person. It's just highlighting your poor arguments, which you don't seem to have thought through.)

To be clear, any score is inseparable from the person who claims it. Here, I'll give you an example:

"I just found in an old newspaper, someone scored one million on Donkey Kong in 1985!"

"Woah, that's cool! Who was it?"

"Todd Rogers."

"Oh..... Never mind, then."

Otherwise, you're left with a situation where you can only remove specific scores/times proven to have been cheated, which means a cheater can exhaust a moderation team with endless bogus submissions, on the hopes that some of them will not be able to be proven cheated. Again, this isn't even that complicated. There's a reason TG isn't going to be accepting any new submissions from Billy, Todd, Rodrigo Lopes, etc. Moral of the story: Don't cheat, and don't make a big deal out of the fact that you're attempting to cheat, even if you also think you can argue that you technically aren't.

Robbie has only one person to blame for all of this. His name is Robbie Lakeman. If you care about Robbie and want to help him, talk to him. You're not helping him by enabling his "I'm the victim" complex.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Snowflake on June 21, 2021, 12:20:01 pm
i'm only bouncing between the goalposts that others keep putting up.  Kinda weird to complain about me humoring the bad logic and going with each ridiculous goal posts others raise.

as for the analogy to todd the major difference there is catching him cheating, versus and out of context snipped facebook posts talkingabout the desire to cheat using a method that noone considers cheating and not even in reference to the submission in question. world of difference.  I've already provided examples of where people think they're getting an unfair advantage (praying before sports, good luck charms at casinos) where as long as the organizers dont think it makes a difference then its no reason to DQ.  thats not even remotely close to someone who actually does cheat, is caught, and leaves us with the question if they did it elsewhere and not caught yet.

to flip your own words on you, if you cant see that simultaneoulsy claiming a score is valid while also DQing it then you are not looking at things objectively.  I would agree by the way that your logic here isnt making it about the person per say by slipping in the claim i'm (or turned around on you, you) am not objective but i would call it along the lines of weasel words where you just declare something correct without explaining it and even worse declare those who disagree lack objectivity despite no good reason being given to agree when full context is given and not just a few out of context quotes.  I would absolutely love people to objectively discuss this actual point since that was the original reason for reject as well as the reason we keep coming back to when all the other moving goal posts keep getting knocked down.

i wouldnt call Robbie a victim per se, thats a strong word, but for lack of a better word, and the point your making then actually yes, robbie is the one getting shafted here.  Everyone is to blame for their own actions.  Robbie is to be blamed/credited for his performance.  Jermy and only jeremy is to blamed for the reject, not robbie, jeremy.  And you and I are responsibile for all our comments.  Unless robbie has some secret admin access here, then hes not responsible for any decision made here, sorry it just doesnt work that way.  I will absolutely encourage/"enable"/commiserate/sympathize or any other word that may be appropriate with robbie on this one.  Until the people here, who i know have the abiltiy to luanch TG disputes because they've done so before, launch a tg dispute against robbie then i'll know that they know the score is valid.

This will be fun

Every score i have is cheated, and every future score i get i intend to cheat

note: the above is not true, i'm just curious if i'll see a carefully cropped screenshot of this comes up in the future.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Scoundrl on June 21, 2021, 02:50:38 pm
The chicks read thru this thread yesterday and I caught it on camera!
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Fly on June 21, 2021, 03:21:01 pm
The chicks read thru this thread yesterday and I caught it on camera!

Subscribed!

Fly
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: datagod on June 21, 2021, 05:48:59 pm
The chicks read thru this thread yesterday and I caught it on camera!

Accepted, even though I was expecting chicks as in broads.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: bensweeneyonbass on June 22, 2021, 11:44:15 am
I say accept the score. I have a hard time convincing myself, in this particular case, that an attempt to cheat is either tantamount to cheating or grounds for a DQ despite the outcome of that attempt. I think the outcome is important, and the attempt to cheat is as well, but ultimately the outcome is what I think holds more weight because the attempt to cheat is arguably impotent. We have the video evidence and the context of the performance. If something were to arise that made the attempt to cheat more important, then the score can be pulled. At this point I think the performance outcome is the most important thing to adjudicate, and that outcome does not appear to be manipulated by the attempt to cheat.

Is this some bullshit? Yes absolutely and I wish Robbie would knock this shit off pronto. But here I am saying to accept his performance because what he's doing isn't just bullshit it's pointless and ineffective. Ineffective on the outcome of the game and ineffective in putting egg on anyone's face except his own.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 23, 2021, 01:34:50 am
It could also be viewed as an attempt to intentionally provoke some thought and teasing those finding this on the borderline of "did he cheat" or "intent to cheat" or "display bad sportsmanship" ect.... the list can go on...

Are these valid grounds not to accept a score? Debatable..

Could these type of "teasing" be have a negative impact on a forum's public view?

Can one compare this to having a "sport team" and one of the members continually boast he/she will murder someone and also tweet things that to murder someone is OK.
So this mean an analogy on this will obviously have an negative impact on the TYPE of players a sport club/team will employ.

Given the above: Will accepting Robbie score have a negative impact on the public facing value of the DK Forum accepting score of people that intend to cheat or show the inclination to cheat or even joke about it, whereas cheating is a very serious offense in scoreboard keeping.

Your thoughts?





Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: D.B. Cooper on June 23, 2021, 06:04:32 pm
Just wondering if anyone has thought to test the voltage on the DK machine at Funspot.  Rumor has it the game plays harder than most.  Maybe the voltage is running a bit high <Pigger>
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Ohrami on June 24, 2021, 03:42:30 am
If a sports player not only threatened to murder someone, but did actually murder someone, that player?s past achievements and legitimate achievements in his sport would not be stripped from record. They would likely be barred from play in any sort of major league, but since DKF can?t exactly stop anyone from getting their hands on their own personal copy of a Donkey Kong ROM, anyone, regardless if they are a murderer or a rapist or what have you, can compete in Donkey Kong. If Adolf Hitler came out of hiding and put up a DK world record, I would expect it to be accepted. Any legitimately achieved record, regardless of who achieved it, should be registered and ranked on the leaderboard. If it isn?t, the leaderboard isn?t a real leaderboard.

DKF?s leaderboard, as of now, isn?t a real leaderboard. Until Robbie Lakeman?s score that Jeremy admits was legitimately achieved is ranked, the DKF leaderboard will continue to be a joke and a circle-jerk.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 24, 2021, 06:33:33 am
If a sports player not only threatened to murder someone, but did actually murder someone, that player?s past achievements and legitimate achievements in his sport would not be stripped from record. They would likely be barred from play in any sort of major league, but since DKF can?t exactly stop anyone from getting their hands on their own personal copy of a Donkey Kong ROM, anyone, regardless if they are a murderer or a rapist or what have you, can compete in Donkey Kong. If Adolf Hitler came out of hiding and put up a DK world record, I would expect it to be accepted. Any legitimately achieved record, regardless of who achieved it, should be registered and ranked on the leaderboard. If it isn?t, the leaderboard isn?t a real leaderboard.

DKF?s leaderboard, as of now, isn?t a real leaderboard. Until Robbie Lakeman?s score that Jeremy admits was legitimately achieved is ranked, the DKF leaderboard will continue to be a joke and a circle-jerk.

It all depends... I know for a fact that , a club had people with bad behavior, which impacted the clubs reputation, therefore the player was banned from using the club.

In another case a player's photos was removed from the walls inside the club.

What I am asking here is about "reputational risk" for doing business... Getting sponsors (i.e. Money) depends what view(s) are portrayed.

No one wants to invest in a club where there is low return...

So back to scoreboard: If one do accept scores from anyone that have negative impact on a companies reputation, is that a risk, will that have a negative impact on the credibility of the leaderboard?

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: elbee85 on June 25, 2021, 03:58:28 pm
Pretty clear he was attempting to manipulate hardware to gain an advantage over others. He even said he was cheating in one of his facebook posts when trying this tactic. I agree with Jeremy that it's pretty clear violation of the of the list submission rule "Any score may be rejected if a player uses a technique or method not mentioned here, if it violates the spirit of the game and the spirit of fair play."

In a case of fraud (cheating or unfair play would be classed as fraudulent) you need to show intent, otherwise it's just "carelessness" or "accidental" and classed as non-compliance, less heinous and more forgivable. Well he has clearly shown his intent to gain unfair advantage, I mean he he wrote it in a facebook post. That's practically a written confession.

Logically this score isn't valid as it violates a rule of submission.


Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Rolledcigs on June 26, 2021, 07:21:13 am
Is it searching for an unfair advantage if he "believes" the record score to have been done the same way? Not defending anything but it either makes a difference or it doesn't. This is all arithmetic. If it's a good score it's a good score. There's no "spirit" in math. Some people just need to test it out. It's not like half of this community doesnt believe in conspiracy theories and make believe shit. Dont really see what the big deal is.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: GILLYKONG on June 26, 2021, 09:40:50 am
Is it a right? or a privilege? To have your score on the DKF list just wondering?
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: elbee85 on June 26, 2021, 03:41:58 pm
Is it searching for an unfair advantage if he "believes" the record score to have been done the same way? Not defending anything but it either makes a difference or it doesn't. This is all arithmetic. If it's a good score it's a good score. There's no "spirit" in math. Some people just need to test it out. It's not like half of this community doesnt believe in conspiracy theories and make believe shit. Dont really see what the big deal is.

If he was searching for the advantage and researching the effects of the change of voltage then why did he submit the score? Seems like a "win at any cost" mentality. I disagree that this is all just arithmetic. As soon as you have a leader board there is competitive sport at play and thus some form of rule system needs adhering to including that of fair play, especially for the top spot. Also, speculating what Robbie might believe or what his intentions are is aimless and superfluous. Only he can clarify and elaborate on these, and currently he hasn't posted further to do so.

These are just my thoughts anyway. And with anything competitive, when something polarizing like this occurs rules can and should be looked over and amended if need be. I think we are at that point now.

Is it a right? or a privilege? To have your score on the DKF list just wondering?

Depends on how one sees the forum, another mans trash is another mans treasure.

Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Mitch Mitchell on June 28, 2021, 10:56:53 pm
I looked at the video, it had sound, was complete, had no cuts or edits, boardset stack appeared factory unmodified or tampered with in any way, dips were correct and the board set had normal voltage after the typical drop through connectors and harness. If Robbie truly had been researching with putting hair driers for heat on the pcb and very low voltage until glitches occur etc all that stuff he told us about; I didnt see any of those things here, not a hair drier to be found. He apparently gave that up and just grinded out a score like he has done for years, everything looked good in this submission to me.
Congrats Robbie, insane score man; I understand you were testing if other players were cheating and thought you were onto something, which is an admirable mission, but im glad to see a stock DK here again. Vote is a yes from me.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Flobeamer1922 on June 29, 2021, 05:02:38 pm
I looked at the video, it had sound, was complete, had no cuts or edits, boardset stack appeared factory unmodified or tampered with in any way, dips were correct and the board set had normal voltage after the typical drop through connectors and harness. If Robbie truly had been researching with putting hair driers for heat on the pcb and very low voltage until glitches occur etc all that stuff he told us about; I didnt see any of those things here, not a hair drier to be found. He apparently gave that up and just grinded out a score like he has done for years, everything looked good in this submission to me.
Congrats Robbie, insane score man; I understand you were testing if other players were cheating and thought you were onto something, which is an admirable mission, but im glad to see a stock DK here again. Vote is a yes from me.
>Normal voltage
>4.7V

Pick one.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: Scoundrl on June 29, 2021, 06:28:15 pm
Quote from: Flobeamer1922
>Normal voltage
>4.7V

Pick one.

"TTL gates operate on a nominal power supply voltage of 5 volts, +/- 0.25 volts. ... ?Acceptable? input signal voltages range from 0 volts to 0.8 volts for a ?low? logic state, and 2 volts to 5 volts for a ?high? logic state."

Both.
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: francoisadt on June 30, 2021, 12:07:47 pm
So if TTL chips operate on 5V +- 0.8 volts difference up or down, then this mean correct output are driven between these variances?
So any lower could mean an input logical flow into a gate could have been not processed to output incorrect output?

Example, if a chip depends upon:
-THREE inputs
-logical flow between these INPUTS
-provide an OUTPUT

if one of the INPUTS fail, then only two inputs are used in the arithmetic of 1,0,1 instead of 1,1,1 in input?

Please explain per example if you can
Title: Re: Robbie's 1.272
Post by: serphintizer on July 06, 2021, 06:45:35 am
(https://i.imgur.com/QJ55tvl.gif)
When you find out 2nd place couldn't hake it anymore and foolishly makes the poor decision to suicide his DK career. Whoops!