Donkey Kong High Score List General Discussion

[lakeman421]

Thanks Corey for making this decision, because I know it wasn't an easy one.  The HSL is a huge responsibility and accepting or rejecting a score can bring a lot of heat your way.  I havent been on the forum that often over the past couple months and was not aware that there was a new rule for inps.  Previously there werent too many rules about getting a score on the HSL, and seemed more laid back than TG.  In the statement about additional evidence, I was hoping that all the live requests and showing proof would be enough along with all the viewers.  The explanation for why inps were brought into the rules makes a lot more sense now, and brings even more details into the rules of submitting to the HSL.  Like I said I didn't want a big controversy about it, and I was just more thrilled I had such a great game live with a substantial amount of viewers.

[giv]

That Robbie Lakeman, always starting trouble!

 

[homerwannabee]

Nevermind.

[corey.chambers]

Thanks for your thoughts, Dean. I have thought about making a section under the HSL for limited verification. Fortunately I have not had to do this. But as for the purpose of this list, and the kind of list I understood people wanted to have, I have written many lengthy posts explaining and defending where it stands on the spectrum. This is an evidenced-based list so claimed scores or rumors will be excluded. I have spoken concerning levels of certainty, accountability, etc. If a new format can be found I would like to find a way to pull those posts out so that they can be found or pinned jut underneath the HSL post that I edit. I am not certain that everyone has read everything that I have written through out the development of the criteria and most of my defense of it is contained in those posts. I think that the way the list presently functions has worked very well, and I intend to maintain the integrity of the list. The clarifications and the distinctions between different streaming formats was good development even if it has upset a few who may not understand or appreciate the subtleties involved. I don't want to reject anything if I don't have to, that is why I work very hard to keep the list relevant by including real scores. But protecting the list against falsification also keeps it relevant. And in all fairness, I have to avoid favoritism or double standards. I think that I do this rather well.

Great job with this project Corey.

Just my two cents -- try to avoid having this whole thing stray too far in the direction of "verification requirements" and make sure that you are maintaining a list of high scores.  From what I can tell, that's what the community wants.  If you start going down the road of "rejecting" scores that obviously happened, then the list starts becoming a list of people who were able to follow the rules as opposed to a list of high scores (which is pretty much one of the major problems with those other guys' lists).  You'll start getting Twitch chat conversations and DKF threads pop up all over the place where people are saying stuff like "yeah he's really good, remember his PR is REALLY this -- it just doesn't show up like that in the High Score List because the day he made that score this happened or that happened -- but we were all watching and he obviously did that score".  "Oh really?  Jeez, that makes a half dozen or so really high scores that aren't on the High Score List because they were "rejected" -- it's almost like we need to make another list to keep track of the actual high scores ..."

To me, a good rule of thumb is if a score happened and the person wants their score on the High Score list, then it should go on the High Score List.  You could consider tagging each score with different categories of verification such as Full Verification, Limited Verification, Claim, Rumor, etc to differentiate between the questionable and the ironclad scores, but going too far in the other direction will turn out to be a mistake IMO.

I think you've been doing a pretty good job so far in trying to accomadate the various situations that come up -- just remember that people just want to know what scores happened -- if it happened, it should go on the list.

[joekassel]

I am submitting my 327,700 score on DK on MAME (achieved 7/5/13) http://www.twitch.tv/summeraino/c/2525944

[corey.chambers]

The following scores have been updated:

Robbie Lakeman
Kayla
Chris Bean
Christian Van Meter
Dustin Pease

I am still working on Joe's score. Later this evening I will be reamping how everything functions. I liked Jeremy's suggestions and now that this thread is functioning within its own Sub-Forum we can make some things more visible. If you have more suggestions then please let me know.

EDIT: Jeremy proposed three threads 1) List Rules, 2) The actual HSL, and 3) Submissions. Any other possible arrangements.

I will also be re-writing the Auxiliary Rules to include the additional evidences required to fulfill the purpose underlying the .inp and .wlf rule.

[ChrisP]

I really love the auxiliary rule thing (if you don't do "x", "y" will also work), which just saved Joe Kassel's last submission.

TG could learn from that.

[corey.chambers]

Me too Chris. This was one of my better ideas. I had mentioned this in a facebook discussion: "The criteria was created to help keep the list honest and to keep us accountable. The point is that we evaluate scores for acceptance and the criteria helps us assess these situations. As new situations arise then we need to use the criteria but the situation may actually require further development. " This was true for Svarar and Robbie too. I had updated my post in the score submission thread but this is what I said: "We do have the inp file that we can see which matches Joe's stream. We have known Joe for awhile and we have watched his streaming, can see him, hear him and the inputs. There is sufficient evidence here, especially because of the .inp file which matches the stream. If we did not know Joe that well, or if there was no .inp file and he was a new streamer, and if it was a higher score, and we have not seen him play long before the score happened, etc, there would be more question. If someone suspect streamed the start up process only of a game without an inp where we could not see the programs that are running on the screen then it would probably be rejected, pending further investigation. Even if it was rejected, I would allow some way for the player to offer support, such as play another game which was at least 80% of what was done before with a proper stream with the inp. And perhaps after consideration it could be accepted even if it were pending at one time. If it was real, I want it on the list, but if it wasn't then I don't. Nothing in this post is an update to the rules but perhaps one day soon I will have to incorporate this process to help the player authenticate his skills. The list will not be relevant if I do not advocate for something that really happened. And if it didn't then I keep the list relevant on the other side by filtering out what is not real.

[Monstabonza]

As to not be the one to derail the submission thread i will post my respose here.

Haha.

Corey, I was actually going to mention the other day that you might want to institute a rule about submission limits. However you wanna do it, but maybe limit it by time, or by score threshold (ie, if you're below 600K, you have to beat your best by 50K or whatever...)

I Agree with Chris here that something needs to be put in place to help Corey, but i think 50k wont work, Take me for example 379800 (I know i gotta update my signature) now if i break 400k it does not matter by 100 points or by 29800, i want that on there, its my score milestone for the moment.
In light of this, may I propose
That for players under 500k score That only 1 high score be submitted to the High Score List in any 7 day period, the exception being scores that are done in a sanctioned DKF competition can be submitted on the date achieved.

Well thats My 2 cents for the high score thread, other than that Good job Corey and everyone that submitted ideas, It has turned into a wonderful thing.
Nick

[marinomitch13]

Geez! First thread over 10,000 views!

[corey.chambers]

Nick, I was thinking something similar. In fact, I am going to sit on the recent submission by Jason because I believe that this will be the 4th submission in like 2 weeks. I told him just to beat it in a couple days and then submit the new one, lol

[stella_blue]

The median score on the DK High Score List now stands at 718,700.   

The next few months promise to be an eventful ride.

[stella_blue]

Hey Corey, when you update Chris Icenhour's score, there are a couple of other minor changes you may wish to make:

(1)  Duplicate Ranking (Donkey Kong High Score List)

Jeff and Shayne are both listed at #29 (below):

Rank		Source		Score		Player		Date		Platform
29		TG / Youtube		907,100		Jeff Harrist		06/15/2013		Arcade
29		Youtube / Peer		905,700		Shayne Black		08/14/2012		Arcade

(2)  Mismatched Introduction Line (Donkey Kong Wild Barrel High Score List)

The  Donkey Kong Wild Barrel High Score List  topic begins with the intro:

Welcome to the Official Donkey Kong Forum No-Killscreen High Score List peer-reviewed by the DK Community!

It appears that the text was copied and pasted, but has not yet been edited.

[ChrisP]

The links to TG's DK high score lists need to be fixed. TG put up their scoreboard-overhaul at some point in the last couple of days.

Way more usable now, with cross-references by player and such.

Also Mike G's game is now official!

Arcade (points): http://www.twingalaxies.com/scoreboard/donkey-kong/arcade/22/
Arcade (no-hammer): http://www.twingalaxies.com/scoreboard/donkey-kong/arcade/10815/
MAME (points): http://www.twingalaxies.com/scoreboard/donkey-kong-us-set-1/mame/7721/
MAME (no-hammer): http://www.twingalaxies.com/scoreboard/donkey-kong-us-set-1/mame/10814/

[Fast Eddie]

jeez, i hope thats not the final look of the scoreboards!