Discussion about poor moderation and leaderboard management

[xelnia]

I'd rather not use my poor moderation skills to lock this thread, so let's try to keep it on topic. 

[TheKD]

Following your logic, I just yelled at my mom for watching old Tyson matches.  I mean hell, she doesn't even BOX!!!  How dare she enjoy watching.

That?s your mistake. She can watch, but she can?t comment.

[datagod]

I fail to see how the two situations are comparable, but whatever, dude.

It is an analogy.  People seem to get a high amount of hate thrown at them if they don't actively play donkey kong, but are showing an interest in the high score chasing and possible issues that arise during those pursuits.

If you don't want spectators, keep up the attitude.

[Ohrami]

It does suck that I can?t edit my posts, since this information being added to the OP would be useful, but as anyone can glean from a cursory review of my back-and-forth with xelnia (which he halted prematurely), it appears that the primary issue at hand is that xelnia is of the personal belief that a leaderboard which only measures Donkey Kong scores as its sole heuristic should primarily measure the ethics of the player submitting a score before considering the score the player achieved in the game. Clearly, that is a fundamental disagreement between just about every person who understands a leaderboard?s purpose, and xelnia?s own personal beliefs.

That leads me to a question that I suggest others propose, as xelnia publicly stated he will not engage with me: Are there other ethical concerns at hand? Would a murderer or rapist be accepted on the leaderboard if he submitted a score? How about if George W. Bush, who is arguably accountable for the deaths of millions of people, submitted a score? Would that be allowed? What if it?s proven that a person had lied about various things related to their personal life while posting online? Perhaps they said they were a rich businessman with a beautiful wife but were actually a loser with no job who is single. Would that person be allowed to submit Donkey Kong scores to the leaderboard? After all, once they?ve lied about that, there?s no way to know if they thought they tried but failed to cheat and simply lied about it. You would have no way to really know their intentions since they are dishonest about so many other things, so perhaps you could simply ban anyone who was proven to have ever lied before from submitting?I?m sorry, not from submitting, but from actually having their score accepted after submission. Those pointless semantics really matter a lot to xelnia, you see.

You could have a leaderboard that just measures the score achieved and ranks players based on their score as well. I quite like that system.

[xelnia]

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!"

It does suck that I can?t edit my posts, since this information being added to the OP would be useful, but as anyone can glean from a cursory review of my back-and-forth with xelnia (which he halted prematurely), it appears that the primary issue at hand is that xelnia is of the personal belief that a leaderboard which only measures Donkey Kong scores as its sole heuristic should primarily measure the ethics of the player submitting a score before considering the score the player achieved in the game. Clearly, that is a fundamental disagreement between just about every person who understands a leaderboard?s purpose, and xelnia?s own personal beliefs.

That leads me to a question that I suggest others propose, as xelnia publicly stated he will not engage with me: Are there other ethical concerns at hand? Would a murderer or rapist be accepted on the leaderboard if he submitted a score? How about if George W. Bush, who is arguably accountable for the deaths of millions of people, submitted a score? Would that be allowed? What if it?s proven that a person had lied about various things related to their personal life while posting online? Perhaps they said they were a rich businessman with a beautiful wife but were actually a loser with no job who is single. Would that person be allowed to submit Donkey Kong scores to the leaderboard? After all, once they?ve lied about that, there?s no way to know if they thought they tried but failed to cheat and simply lied about it. You would have no way to really know their intentions since they are dishonest about so many other things, so perhaps you could simply ban anyone who was proven to have ever lied before from submitting?I?m sorry, not from submitting, but from actually having their score accepted after submission. Those pointless semantics really matter a lot to xelnia, you see.

You could have a leaderboard that just measures the score achieved and ranks players based on their score as well. I quite like that system.

If you brush off your untrue statements as "irrelevant" and "pointless," then why should I continue to engage you?

If you don't believe my justification and continue to create your own narrative full of my supposed beliefs, then why should I continue to engage you?

For the bajillionth and last time, my decision was not based on my personal feelings about Robbie or his overall character. It was based on his attempt to cheat.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're confused about the difference between a person's overall character and their individual actions. Otherwise you're actually saying that attempting to cheat should not be a consideration for any leaderboard.

[muscleandfitness]

?

[bensweeneyonbass]

SNIP
it appears that the primary issue at hand is that xelnia is of the personal belief that a leaderboard which only measures Donkey Kong scores as its sole heuristic should primarily measure the ethics of the player submitting a score before considering the score the player achieved in the game. Clearly, that is a fundamental disagreement between just about every person who understands a leaderboard?s purpose, and xelnia?s own personal beliefs.
SNIP

You keep making this point. You're really making this the center of your argument? You're mischaracterizing the situation and then using that mischaracterization to cry foul. The only foul is how you are spinning the situation. If I were to enter any competition and I carried with me a reputation of intentionally trying to manipulate the competition, I would deserve every ban every moderator/judge/organizer would care to throw at me. They are doing that in the direct interest of competition. They are not doing it because Cheaters Are Bad because if I cheated on tests in school and I told them they'd probably not ban me from a pie eating contest or wtf ever. Now if I told them I had cheated on pie eating contests they'd probably ban me. Its about the competition not about the ethics.

[datagod]

You keep making this point. You're really making this the center of your argument? You're mischaracterizing the situation and then using that mischaracterization to cry foul. The only foul is how you are spinning the situation. If I were to enter any competition and I carried with me a reputation of intentionally trying to manipulate the competition, I would deserve every ban every moderator/judge/organizer would care to throw at me. They are doing that in the direct interest of competition. They are not doing it because Cheaters Are Bad because if I cheated on tests in school and I told them they'd probably not ban me from a pie eating contest or wtf ever. Now if I told them I had cheated on pie eating contests they'd probably ban me. Its about the competition not about the ethics.

What if I told you that I intended to cheat by praying real hard before the game for some favorable RNG?  Is it cheating or intending to cheat only if I believe it will work (even if you are sure it doesn't work).

What if I believed that carrying magnets in my pocket would give me better RNG.  Is that cheating / manipulation?

My point is this:  if it has no affect whatsoever, how can it be considered cheating?  What if the only goal was to cause people to question their own beliefs?  What if the goal was pure mischief?  Is that still cheating?  Attempted cheating?

Too much of this revolves around personal opinion and bias against Robbie.  That is what lessens the value of this score board in the eyes of non competitors.

You can't be taken as a world authority when the best DK player to ever live has been banned because you don't like him.

[bensweeneyonbass]

You can't be taken as a world authority when the best DK player to ever live has been banned because you don't like him.

You were so close to not giving us any bullshit. So close.

[Ohrami]

He made all perfectly reasonable points, in fact similar points to the ones I would have made, and you disgraced him with that shitty of a response. The only bullshit in that exchange is how terrible and pointless your own reply was.

[bensweeneyonbass]

My reply was actually not bad. I quoted the part that was bullshit. The rest was perfectly reasonable which is why I did not "disgrace" him because of those parts.

Please tell me how "You can't be taken as a world authority when the best DK player to ever live has been banned because you don't like him" is perfectly reasonable and in line with the points you're trying to make.

You still have yet to address my prior quote of yours. It's cool though you can take your time.

[Ohrami]

Datagod already addressed what you said sufficiently enough and you agreed with him, so I saw no point in formulating my own response. It?s reasonable to say what he said because despite xelnia?s thin facade of genuine concern for the leaderboard and its integrity, it is so obvious that he is wrong, and xelnia is so obviously not a very stupid person (he manages this website?s high score list and is an admin for it, he managed to expose a major fraud that fooled millions of people for decades, and he clearly has the organizational skills and intelligence to manage a community in a relatively orderly fashion), that any rational person viewing this thread will come to the obvious conclusion that datagod came to: The reason for Robbie Lakeman?s ?punishment? is personal. Regardless of how many times xelnia absolutely insists it isn?t the case, to me, and to datagod, it?s clear that it is.

Go pull some random somewhat stupid person from your life, maybe a dumb family member who is anti-vax or something, or just a random person online who you can tell through discussion with them that they just aren?t that bright but are otherwise somewhat normal. Explain to them the entire situation and everything that happened, exactly as I described in my OP, and then ask them who?s right. I would be willing to bet money that they give the right answer. This isn?t rocket science. It?s extremely obvious who is correct, which is why xelnia?s insistence that he is correct despite being obviously wrong and while obviously not being a stupid person leads to datagod and me to conclude what we did.

Note that before this thread, I in fact still had given xelnia some benefit of the doubt on this. However, all of his replies were very clearly just attempting to attack my character and make sure that he can end his interaction with me as quickly as possible. It is very clear that he simply doesn?t want to have a discussion about this and just wants voices of dissent gone as soon as he can get them to go away without doing something very obviously wrong like banning them or completely ignoring them. This is yet another reason why it is obvious to datagod and to me that there is some personal bias against Lakeman being displayed here.

Absolutely nothing he said was unreasonable, including the final statement he made, which is why your post in response to him was disgraceful. You in no way addressed anything he said and just said it was bullshit without giving any reason. Go ahead and explain some other rationale for Robbie Lakeman?s rejection when it?s so obvious what the correct course of action is and given that xelnia obviously isn?t a moron. You gave none.

[datagod]

You were so close to not giving us any bullshit. So close.

I am not sure why you are ALWAYS being so rude to me.  I have been nothing but pleasant and welcoming to you for the past 2 years.

Anyway, I'll rephrase just to make sure there is no confusion.

In my humble opinion:
Robbie Lakemen dominates Donkey Kong Arcade.  He routinely ups his own world record, defeating anyone who takes the top spot from him.  Nobody else in the history of Donkey Kong retakes the throne like he does.

Wen Wes got the world record and Robbie took it back 6 hours later, I was kinda pissed.  I was cheering for Wes and felt it was mean to not let him have his day.  But hey, that is competitive score chasing for you.

Over the years I have come to respect Robbie's passion and dedication to this game.  He is a true champion.

The Donkey Kong Forum claims to be the world authority of high scores for Donkey Kong.  That same forum banned Robbie for "attempted cheating" which on the surface might seem ok, but when you really look at the details the argument falls apart.

1.  Robbie had a theory that low voltages could lead to a variation in RNG which could lead to easier game play or more opportunity for scoring.
2.  Robbie made it clear that he was not hiding his theory, and that he was in fact testing it out.
3.  Robbie achieved a high score using this method (lower voltage).
5.  DKF members as well as players from across the world claimed outright that it is IMPOSSIBLE to affect gameplay by lowering voltage.  The code was analyzed by a great young man (Tanner) and it was confirmed. 
6.  Nobody knows the affect that power voltage could have on the inner physics of the electronics on these 40 year old machines.  Not unless they take multiple machines and study them forensicly, running test code through them over and over.  I would seriously love to take part in that.
7.  Robbie was not the most polite person on stream when talking about members of the DKF, and they were offended and insulted.  No surprise there.
8.  People would come into Robbie's streams to mock him.
9.  Tensions escalated.  Feelings were hurt.
10.  The DKF members and leadership decided that Robbie's lowering the voltage now constitutes attempted cheating -- despite having no discernible affect on the gameplay (according to DKF the world experts at Donkey Kong gameplay).
11.  A ruling was made that Robbie "Attempted to Cheat" and his world record score (Recognized by Twin Galaxies and Guinness) was thrown out.
12.  That ruling appears to me and others to be personal in nature and biased.

Cheating either occurred or it did not occur. 

Officer:  I saw the man attempt to speed, your honor.  He smiled at me, gave me the finger, then floored it!
Judge: what was he driving?
Officer: A moped. 
Judge: Top speed?
Officer:  It was a 2 stroke, so top speed was about 30 in a 80 zone.  But he WANTED to go faster.  I could see it in his EYES!  HE LOOKED RIGHT AT ME AND GAVE ME THE FINGER!!!  I DEMAND HE BE PUNISHED!!
Judge:  Holy shit dude.  Case dismissed.

TLDR: Robbie good.  DKF bad.

[homerwannabee]

While there is something to be said about meeting the challenge and retaking the thrown.
There's also something to be said about setting a score so high that you don't have to retake the thrown for over a decade. 

[QAOP Spaceman]

You were so close to not giving us any bullshit. So close.

I am not sure why you are ALWAYS being so rude to me.  I have been nothing but pleasant and welcoming to you for the past 2 years.

Anyway, I'll rephrase just to make sure there is no confusion.

In my humble opinion:
Robbie Lakemen dominates Donkey Kong Arcade.  He routinely ups his own world record, defeating anyone who takes the top spot from him.  Nobody else in the history of Donkey Kong retakes the throne like he does.

Wen Wes got the world record and Robbie took it back 6 hours later, I was kinda pissed.  I was cheering for Wes and felt it was mean to not let him have his day.  But hey, that is competitive score chasing for you.

Over the years I have come to respect Robbie's passion and dedication to this game.  He is a true champion.

The Donkey Kong Forum claims to be the world authority of high scores for Donkey Kong.  That same forum banned Robbie for "attempted cheating" which on the surface might seem ok, but when you really look at the details the argument falls apart.

1.  Robbie had a theory that low voltages could lead to a variation in RNG which could lead to easier game play or more opportunity for scoring.
2.  Robbie made it clear that he was not hiding his theory, and that he was in fact testing it out.
3.  Robbie achieved a high score using this method (lower voltage).
5.  DKF members as well as players from across the world claimed outright that it is IMPOSSIBLE to affect gameplay by lowering voltage.  The code was analyzed by a great young man (Tanner) and it was confirmed. 
6.  Nobody knows the affect that power voltage could have on the inner physics of the electronics on these 40 year old machines.  Not unless they take multiple machines and study them forensicly, running test code through them over and over.  I would seriously love to take part in that.
7.  Robbie was not the most polite person on stream when talking about members of the DKF, and they were offended and insulted.  No surprise there.
8.  People would come into Robbie's streams to mock him.
9.  Tensions escalated.  Feelings were hurt.
10.  The DKF members and leadership decided that Robbie's lowering the voltage now constitutes attempted cheating -- despite having no discernible affect on the gameplay (according to DKF the world experts at Donkey Kong gameplay).
11.  A ruling was made that Robbie "Attempted to Cheat" and his world record score (Recognized by Twin Galaxies and Guinness) was thrown out.
12.  That ruling appears to me and others to be personal in nature and biased.

Cheating either occurred or it did not occur. 

Officer:  I saw the man attempt to speed, your honor.  He smiled at me, gave me the finger, then floored it!
Judge: what was he driving?
Officer: A moped. 
Judge: Top speed?
Officer:  It was a 2 stroke, so top speed was about 30 in a 80 zone.  But he WANTED to go faster.  I could see it in his EYES!  HE LOOKED RIGHT AT ME AND GAVE ME THE FINGER!!!  I DEMAND HE BE PUNISHED!!
Judge:  Holy shit dude.  Case dismissed.

TLDR: Robbie good.  DKF bad.