EnglandUndertale came pretty close, on more than one occasion.
No, they don't. Or at least, they shouldn't.
There seems to be quite a disconnect between game communities about what a leaderboard is supposed to represent, and how it should be managed. Many communities, this one included, seem to view their game leaderboard as some sort of inclusive club where the community members can show off their times. With this viewpoint comes the belief that it's right to just block certain people or runs for whatever arbitrary reason they decide.
In contrast, we have the way that I, and other moderators, view the leaderboards we run: They are databases of existing runs, and the people who have done runs of the game. Community is irrelevant, status is irrelevant, fame is irrelevant. If you have a run and it conforms to the leaderboard rules, it belongs on the leaderboard no questions asked under this model.
What APPEARS to be occurring here is the former case; a leaderboard ran by a clique who want to keep specific people out due to some fear about negative associations or what have you. This is antithetical to how I believe a leaderboard should be ran, as moderators should not impose their own personal values onto leaderboards when it's meant to be an objective, level playing field. The only grounds for removing times and banning someone from submitting in the future is if it can be demonstrated that the player in question cheated, that much should be obvious.
Disputes about your conduct prior to these events just should not factor in, though. If I'm perfectly frank, judging from your profile and previous posts in the other thread, I have no doubt that you ARE a shitter, but that's not grounds to reject your runs if they're legitimate.
Honestly my advice to you would be to just move on to a different game, whilst wising up and mellowing out in the meantime.
Like Timmiluvs said, waiting "Double digit hours" is... NOT a problem that requires addressing. Do you think the game moderators do this as their full-time job or something?
Mods generally know what they're doing when it comes to making sure that submission details are correct.
There's no definitive answer to this, and people are just going to tell you to run the games they run. Just try and establish what your favourite genres of games are, and which you enjoy playing the most. You'll know when you've hit on the right one.
Guys, if it wasn't perfectly clear, this is not a place to have extended correspondence with KirkQ. There's no point in initiating a post chain where you expect quick and regular replies from him, because he's not going to do that. You get the weekly update, and that's all you're entitled to. Kirk's too busy to make this a constant thing for him to monitor. As has been stated a lot in this thread, this is meant to be a LAST RESORT thread, when all other avenues have failed. Don't give the admins any more work than they already have when you're capable of solving the issues yourself.
There's a reason I veto'd this shit for Sonic Adventure 2: Battle.
The rules for that category state "RUNS REQUIRE PICTURE OF IGT"
So maybe that's your issue.
Christ if you don't even know how to distinguish Super Mods then you REALLY need to lurk more and spend more time familiarising yourself with the site before attempting to grab power.
Hard to say when you haven't specified what game it is. If it's an obscure game with one mod, they're probably just blowing it off. If it's a well-established game with a big community and a team of moderators, it may be the case that they find the idea interesting, but need to discuss it and get the opinions of those in the community. Big communities won't change the setups of the leaderboards just because one person requests it.
There's nothing to address, you're just... Making a mountain out of a molehill.
"You'll notice that where the goal is getting a high score, it's called a score run; where the goal is going fast, it's called a speedrun; where the goal is having fun, however, it's called a casual run for some reason. Why?"
Literally tons of people in speedrunning use the term 'fun run'. Quit being a tryhard.
I like how your TL;DR at the end was almost as long as the main body of your post.
On a more relevant note though, "Who cares?" is a perfectly valid defence, even if you don't think so. We don't do what we do to cater to people with no appreciation for speedrunning and the culture surrounding it. Are you somehow implying that GDQs would be more successful and make more money if we policed our language more? That's just a laughable concept. If you're going to complain about the language used and how non-speedrunners perceive it, why not point out the usage of the term 'RNG' and ask that people refer to 'luck' instead?
tl;dr We are not going to compromise our hobby for people who don't appreciate it
@Racingmonster
Stats in a game say nothing about your character, trustworthiness, reliability, honesty, etc. All attributes that are very important in an effective moderator, because a moderator is more than someone who verifies runs. When you're a moderator, you're a representative for your community. You are who outsiders see as being 'in control' and making the decisions, and people look to you for advice and consultation on any issues pertaining to the game. Just because you can go fast in the game doesn't mean you're good at doing any of that, or dealing with people. If someone wanted mod in any of the games I moderate and simply cited their times saying "Look how good I am" my immediate response would be "This tells me nothing about whether you'd be a good moderator."
Moreover, far too many people see having mod as some sort of privilege or status symbol, and this is a toxic mentality to have. Mod is a RESPONSIBILITY, and should be treated with the appropriate respect. Now, all the cases in this thread of games that are totally dead with one inactive moderator, and someone wants to take over the reins? Sure, that's reasonable, there needs to be SOMEONE for the job. But when there already is someone, you need to actually bring something to the table, and far too many people make it apparent that they feel entitled to the position or can otherwise just ask for it and expect it to fall into their lap. Hell, I've been asked to take over moderation duties in other games and actively declined, because I don't want the responsibility and know I wouldn't treat the games in question with the respect they deserve.
tl;dr being a good runner =/= being a good moderator, and people are often way too flippant about what it actually means to assume the role.
Daily reminder (and this applies to a few people who've posted here lately) that if you think being a game's sole runner/best runner/router is grounds for automatically becoming a moderator, then you fundamentally misunderstand what makes a good moderator. If anything, being adamant on those basis' alone may indicate why you're NOT fit to be a mod.
That's not really relevant, a moderator should NOT be doing this. There is just about no situation where it's ok for a WR stat to not be substantiated with video proof, even if the game itself does not require video. If he's persistently doing this, he should not be a moderator.
You already made a thread about this in Talk.
