Joel asked me to post this regarding the situation. While I personally do not agree or in concert with Joel on many matters that have nothing to do with this dispute, I feel there are some points addressed in this message and questions that have yet to be answered that everyone should take a look at.... Thank you...
It is important to look at two areas of salient points from Robert Childs’ Video Analysis:
Relating to using a RGB to NTSC Converter to a camera:
1. The visual Billy saw on his monitor was the same as Steve Wiebe saw on his monitor.
2. Billy could not see the feed going to the saved tape while playing.
3. Billy had no advantage by using a video converter.
4. The only advantage to using a video converter was to the camera owner. A camera could not be knocked over standing on a tripod behind the player.
Relating to the legal and common-sense aspects:
1. Looking like MAME is not MAME, nor a violation that even approaches “cheatingâ€.
2. The accusation of using MAME doesn’t make sense. It would be too much work.
* The risk would not present enough gain over the possibility of being discovered.
* Any player who could get 1 Million nearly 8 years ago on MAME would be able to probably get more on arcade than a mere 1,062,800 points. This is speculative but a highly possible speculation.
* If Billy was so well versed on MAME, when arcade scores became beyond his current reach, why did he not “retire from arcades†and go onto mastering “another platform� Cheaters love attention … that is WHY they cheat. No one was close to 1M in MAME at that time. Why did he not do this? Fear of discovery? No. If he had put a computer inside an arcade cabinet, he would be brazen enough to switch platforms … because he craved the attention. Cheating is like an addiction … once you “get away with it’ the next time is easy, and oft times bigger. Billy has submitted nothing since 2010.
* If I remember correctly, MAME had a certain amount of lag on some games at that time. That would have been a negative for using MAME if it applied to DK.
3. Even IF …
* the prescribed method of verification at that time was put aside (which would be “changing the rules after the acceptance of proofâ€), changing the standard of proof after acceptance is an unfair standard.
Even IF …
* multiple eyewitness testimony is discounted (which it should not be) … when a dispute is involved and the tape is missing from TG “archivesâ€, as it is in this case, when representatives present of TG at that time are not consulted or even “trusted†to comment their remembrance … then other standards that HAVE been used in the past (eye witness testimony, etc.) MUST be used.
This situation is NOT to certify a NEW record/score, but to confirm an OLD, ALREADY EXISTING score. Therefore, TG would NOT be violating their current standard of accepting video only to verify a record because this is NOT a new record.
The goal is to establish the validity of THIS record/score, already once certified by older standards.
Using the standards of the past when current standards cannot be met, mainly because TG cannot find the tape in their “archivesâ€, that is NOT the fault of the player.
4. Even If ...
TG would dismiss the effort to find the video footage that was in their possession WHICH IS TG’s RESPONSIBILITY to produce since they initially certified the record … if they dismiss THIS record because they can’t “find the tape†then how many THOUSANDS of OTHER records/scores MUST they AUTOMATICALLY dismiss upon any challenge?. That act alone could start an avalanche of revenge seekers seeking to remove whatever they can because the rules “allow itâ€.
HIRE MORE STAFF, cut into the profits, the floodgates are about to open!
* TG has a responsibility to honor tapes that were once in their custody, regardless of ownership changes, especially if they cannot “find†a tape that was in their charge to protect. Once in their “archivesâ€, whether they deny this duty, real or implied, it is their legal fiduciary duty.
SIMPLY PUT: NO SCORES involving once submitted tapes should ever be removed should TG not be able to put their hands on the tape they once certified as a legitimate score. Once they have it, it’s their responsibility. NO EXCEPTIONS. This is an ALL or NONE precedent.
If TG allows “challenges†without reasonable proof, they essentially are allowing accusations of innuendo and/or suspicion. That is NOT what the Dispute System should become … a grudge system to punish those whom one is jealous of and does not like.
I propose discussions to change this system. While one may agree or disagree with the Todd Rogers decision, the challenge issued to his situation involved a standing world record. Billy Mitchell’s score was no longer even in the Top 10. This leads to strong belief that this served no purpose other than to harm Billy and TG allowed it.
I propose that TG ONLY allows challenges:
1. On standing World Records
2. Require reasonable proof, not speculation, suspicion, or innuendo.
3. Examine the motives of the one submitting the challenge … search social media for harassment, threats, or promises of “getting evenâ€. This is preliminary work that TG should do to prevent the misuse of the Dispute System, a “due diligence†to prevent “frivolous†challenges and to PROTECT ITS MEMBERS.
Example: one World Record that was thought “a fake†was the former (now #2) world record on Q-Bert. George Leutz struggled mightily but overcame that score after 84 hours and 48 of play. Even tho EVERYONE thought the previous record was fake.
Billy found out about this challenge as when most people did who do not frequent the forums by a TG Facebook post on Friday, February 2, 2018. Billy isn’t on Facebook, so someone had to alert him about it via email.
As it stands now TG does not notify the owner of the disputed record. It is up to the challenger to “prove his caseâ€, and then the record is removed. It would seem that TG should have the interest of both the challenger and the challenged member at heart. Now, if a member is not on the TG forums and/or Facebook … they essentially could have their record removed without knowing about the challenge or having a chance to defend themselves before removal.
How FAIR is that?
The challenge of Billy Mitchell’s old DK world record, not currently even in the Top 10 is a prime candidate of jealousy and vindictiveness. Oh, Billy DID THE SCORE, but there is wide-spread jealousy because of the movies, personal appearances, the persona, fame and attention. Current Top DK scorers will NEVER achieve the fame the Pioneer did, no matter how high they score. TG should take challenge disputes rooted in emotion and personal attack into account and not allow them.
I propose these ideas as the basis for an improvement in the Dispute System. We all know how things will work out if Billy is proven guilty. How will Billy recover from the personal attacks, the embarrassment, the loss of respect, the loss of business and the toll on him and his family when he is proven innocent? Will TG or the froth-filled forum members even apologize? If they did, what would it be worth? Remember, video games are supposed to be fun, not blood sport that harms your personal life..
