[quote]Sure this is less of an issue for the console games but for the DS games I'd rather not deter more runners from already dead games. [/quote]

The DS games are kind of a different ballgame because DS recording is a pain in the balls, but that kinda goes around to the point I had earlier about desiring some kind of game-specific rules/mods to decide this type of thing. Days has those unique rules, because DS capture is a weird special case.

Local recording/streaming a 10 hour run and being harsh on no skipping is obviously totally unreasonable (even though I think some of the final fantasy games still pull this off but eh idfk?), hence timer rule.

But having a bunch of skipping or missing minutes in runs that are about an hour or two long in BBS is kind of wildly inappropriate, It's not asking a whole lot for an hour of unbroken footage, I don't think.

[quote]Before I make any sort of decision within this community I always ask "Will this get more people interested in the community and running the games".[/quote]

If you wanted to get more people to run the games regardless of their technology standards, you'd just disable verification entirely. So clearly, some changes are motivated by desire for tangible proof. I don't really feel like my argument about how computers and internet connections historically just get better was really refuted (an argument about a roommate buying a tablet computer is possibly the most asinine attempt at a counter-argument I've ever seen in my life), so KH having such a low standard globally across all its games feels like reverse future-proofing, it's going to get less of a problem over time, not more. Some people will be inconvenienced at initial implementation, but they will figure it out.

Historically. if you make the standards, people will generally find a way to adhere to them. They'll record locally, they'll get their capture cards working and eventually the end result will be much cleaner boards and much better reference videos unlike the two BBS runs I've posted where there are outrageously large chunks missing.

I'm not surprised that this would be initially a difficult to justify change, since yes, it asks more of both mods and runners alike.

[quote]considering how different the kh series is and the fact that the communities you compare ours to, dont have categories on the ps4 in the first place.Which ps4 streaming is how this entire thing started in the first place.[/quote]

I brought up Resident Evil 7. A PS4 Game. RebelDragon brought up Ratchet and Clank, a PS4 game. Nah.

[quote]Then bring up some possible desired changes.[/quote]

Sure.

Change #1: Runs under about an hour and a half shouldn't be allowed to have minutes missing

You can hash out how long is too long later, but the point is more that it's abject madness that runs as short as BBS's are allowed to have multiple minutes missing off their runtime and still get verified just because the person put a timer on the VOD. That's a significant chunk of video game going missing there which besides being horrible to compare against or use as reference material, it opens the door for cheating.

Actually, not even necessarily cheating, just mistakes. Runners do daft shit like pause their timers all the time by accident, if someone happens to accidentally pause the timer for even a brief amount during one of these missing segments, you would never have any way to know and that run would be forever inaccurate.

I mainly state this for the sake of BBS various Any%'s, but a rule like that would also apply to 0.2 and some of the shorter handheld games.

Change #2: If a person's video is in one piece and doesn't skip around there is no real reason to force them to put a timer on it

Timing off the vod isn't as difficult or time-consuming as I feel its being made out to be here considering I do it all the time and there are numerous communities working with much more granular units of time than KH (SMB1, Zeldo) that ignore the on-screen timer entirely and retime your runs anyway because people make countless mistakes with their timers.

Hell, if you want to be super lazy about it, you can just go with RebelDragon95's suggestion about requiring proof of splits via screenshot or splits.io to verify timing for a run that has no onscreen timer. That would be an additional moderator convenience though, and apparently that's never considered when making changes.

Change #3: Game-specific mods

Part of the argument in favour of timer rule was that it exists, at least partially, for moderator convenience. Drazerk even said that outright, which amusingly contradicts JHobz but I appreciate the honesty.

So, this implies that you guys have a lot on your plate, right? I can understand that for sure, having 22 game pages of varied video games solely handled by the one group of moderators is quite a lot.

As it is right now, no one single mod runs every single one of the games they moderate. That's not an attack or an insult or anything, just of course you don't, there are so many fuckin games and no human being should be expected to run all of those games. Thus, you need some game specific moderators to handle that workload and discuss changes on a per-game level for games they are personally invested in and understand.

No other large series on the entire website organises itself in a way where there's just global moderators for the entire series and nothing else and for very good reason, it's kind of a bad idea. Zelda and Resident Evil have no global moderators, Final Fantasy only has two. Generally, that's about all you need if you have game-specific mods allocated appropriately. Speedrun.com itself made changes to where global mods do not inherit moderator of every game in its series automatically precisely to try and prevent this type of scenario from occurring. Even the site itself is engineered against the set up currently present and if that's not a cue to stop doing it, I don't know what is.

You have several people in this thread alone who've stated now and previously in the past, their open willingness to shoulder some of that burden by moderating individual games. If making some of the above changes you think would be too much work, then consider accepting some more help and delegating it to individual games. You won't be displeased with the results, it's historically worked out very well for the series I moderate for! Less individual burden, games get verified faster, the moderation is more decentralized so you end up with less of this goofy "Us Vs Them" horseshit I've seen from this community. I literally can't think of a downside to doing this, if any of these get done, choose this one. It's a win for literally everyone involved.

Now, about most game series only having one or two global mods...

Change #3.5 REMIX: You honestly need to drop most of your global mods

Most, not all. Some of them would also probably be fine as mods of some individual games. But over the whole series, some of them just don't really do a whole lot? This is where I get to be incredibly mean and make enemies by doing specific callouts, so here we go!

From ROMMaster2's Site Moderation Statistics updated last on the 1st of March 2017:

Most KH moderators only moderate KH. So the data is pretty pure in regards to how much this actually applies to KH.

Does Actually Quite A Lot: Sonic: 628 runs JHobz: 429 runs

Kinda In The Middle-Ish: FayeLilac: 159 runs KHFan169: 76 runs

ehhhhhhhhh: Tojimaru: 33 runs Drazerk: 29 runs (modding Days though would probably be a good idea!)

Does Literally Nothing: Bizkit047: 1. And it was self-verified. Drop.

Ninten, Dax and BB have been excluded because they're new. The data isn't there yet. Saiyanz has also been excluded because he moderates a ton of other crap so the data is impure and hard to read. He's probably about in the middle.

With this data publicly viewable and all, I suspect part of the reason rules for "moderator convenience" even exist is the just the fact that two of you are shouldering about 90% of the entire workload. That's not OK at all, no wonder you seem to struggle. I'd be pissed if that was me. Drop some global mods, add some game-mods, split that workload, baddabing, baddaboom. Efficiency.

Those are just off the top of my head, couple of them are structural changes to the leaderboard moderation, some of them are game rule changes. Maybe I should start a new thread with that stuff as the OP rather than it being buried 4 pages deep in this thread....

[quote]but why do people like punchy have to take up the mantle for them??? [/quote]

I'm not. I don't speak for anyone besides myself and I don't claim to. There are like, 7 or 8 other people who are not me in this very thread alone who spoke for themselves about it. I know other people like them exist because I've heard their goddamn whining about it over a period of 2 years, I hope they can get over themselves long enough to make their voices heard, but I'm not and can't do it for them.

[quote]that's like asking the mods to check time stamps because someone doesn't want to put a timer on their VOD. It's doing someone else's work for them. [/quote]

Yes, you know. God forbid the KH mods be held to the same standard of work ethic as literally every other leaderboard on speedrun.com. You know, I only hear this from people/mods who only run/moderate KH. Absolutely nowhere else would this be considered unusual or asking too much.

I literally do this for people all the time on every other game I moderate. It's unthinkable that all KH mods combined can't deliver the same type of work that I do on my own.

[quote]The whole conversation has run around in circles with argument into counter-argument into counter-counter-argument, but why though?[/quote]

Because the reasoning from the moderation themselves has thus far been pretty circular and evasive. If you intentionally lead a conversation in a circle, you do not get to point to it's circularity as an argument for the entire discussion being moot. That is a stalling tactic and I'm not having it.

As it stands, there have been multiple arguments from me, Rebel, Abandon and Swift that have basically been ignored and gone entirely without decent answers.

If one finds themselves unable to answer them satisfactorily, then really search inside yourself why you're trying to give an answer in the first place.

[quote]None of our active community members who talk in the discord with each other, and who pop into each others streams to help people just get through the run have seemed to complain about this rule we have. [/quote]

ah ok so only certain people count, gotcha

bunk

I don't like talking in the general discord because timmi moderates it and he basically told me in no uncertain terms earlier in the thread to go fuck myself for daring to criticize certain aspects of the leaderboards. When the people who are dissatisfied or have problems are treated with open hostility, it is completely unsurprising that the general community spaces look like nobody has any issue.

also this isn't even true since apparently rebeldragon, abandon, swift all don't count as active posters for some reason?

[quote]if so many people aren't against this rule but a small minority are, then why are we having this discussion?[/quote]

"Small minority"

the number of people in this thread against it vs the number of people for it is actually in the against camps favour so no, I don't think it's a small minority at all.

Furthermore, silence is not equivalent to agreement at all and it is not to be taken as such. Most runners of any video game don't really engage with the administration discussions, doesn't interest them, doesn't mean they all automatically agree 100% with everything.

And we're having this discussion because there's honestly numerous issues to be solved here, this is just one such place to start. Game-specific mods seems to be the topic of more concern for most people, so that might be a better place to start tbh.

[quote]Now if you really want to be civil about this, then how bout we put it up to a vote? For or Against?[/quote]

I honestly don't think a straight vote at this juncture is an amazing solution to a problem this multi-faceted since I don't even think most people who want change would be able to unify on a type of desired change. It's too early to vote on anything, since we haven't even really decided what to vote on. Polls are, in my experience as a long-time moderator of other games, a great way to feel out what people think, but not an excellent thing to actually make substantial decisions with.

Enough people at this point (and numerous times in the past) have expressed interest in seeing things changed that at this point the discussion should really be about what that change should look like and then if people want to go ahead with it.

It's worse than just segments being missing. Remember that run of Ven Crit I was talking about earlier where there was 30 minutes missing?

It turns out I was completely wrong, it was Ven Beginner, but it wasn't 30 minutes missing, it was /only/ 30 minutes present in an hour and twenty minutes of gameplay which means a staggering well over 50% of this run was missing:

This run isn't on the leaderboards anymore presumably having been pulled at some point but the description of this video ltierally reads: "Highlighting for Leaderboard purpose" which means it has to have been on the boards at some point in time. It was 2 years ago, which I'm sure will be used as the fourth excuse in a row to dodge having to actually answer for it, but the rules have basically barely budged an inch in that time frame so I don't doubt something like this could happen again.

Given that I've been accused of lying about this run's existence by an actual leaderboard mod, it's pretty satisfying to be vindicated over this one. And multiple people besides me have told me they've been effected by this happening in the past and it's likely to continue occurring without some shift in what's an acceptable run.

Also, 2 days without a proper mod response is a bit worrying considering you've got like 11 mods. I can only assume you guys are trying to talk it over amongst yourselves and arrive at a compromise. There are many members of the community within this thread who've vocalised their intent to see change as per JHobz's initial request, and many more who also want change but are afraid to speak up because of past unpleasantness in trying to get things like game-specific mods implemented over the past year or so.

This problem isn't going to go away by ignoring it anymore. So, at least drop us a line that you're talking about it so we know we're not yelling into a vacuum over here.

As an additional point about the timer rule's lack of general necessity. I raise the further point that it's unnecessary because WR runs literally exist on the leaderboards right now without a timer. I've been having a private Discord convo without Ninten about this but I'm bringing this public because I'd much rather conduct this one in full view of the community.

At first I didn't want to post the runs or the runners name for fear that I'd screw the dude over or "snitch" and I'd rather not make enemies, but I met a response of generally not hearing the argument out unless I could show the runs, so that's kind of a shitty position to be put in. So I ran it by Nanners first and got his approval to snitch lmao. What an awkward fucking place to be put in.

Anyway yeah: http://www.speedrun.com/run/8yvp82oy http://www.speedrun.com/run/2ywrgj3m

literally the ps3 aqua crit record for 10 months and the 2nd place Aqua beginner times. It's not like these are obscure categories in games nobody cares about. But all of his videos are of high quality, do not skip and are totally in one piece.

It'd be utterly, UTTERLY mad if these runs with such clean, crisp quality got a retroactive reject because of the timer issue when runs like this: http://www.speedrun.com/run/oy28956y

Would be allowed under the current ruleset, despite the fact about six minutes are missing from the WR run for Ven Beginner and in 3 different chunks, just because it has a timer. That's like, 7% of the entire run. That /really/ isn't a small amount of time at all for a run that short. I raised this issue to Ninten in this private convo and got told to find another one with 5 minutes missing? Which no, I don't really feel I should be obligated to do at all, one example of this happening on a long-standing WR is bad enough because I seriously doubt it's just gone unnoticed by everyone besides my stupid ass.

But literally just for the sake of argument, I found multiple other runs anyway, and it wasn't really that hard: http://www.speedrun.com/run/nz1go09z

28 minutes missing from this 3D run off the start. You could make the argument that this was done for the KH relay and so people verified it live by seeing it. I think this argument is bunk for a leaderboard, but fine, moving on.

http://www.speedrun.com/run/9yoe2rdz

About 5 minutes missing off this KH1 JP run, and this one isn't even especially old?

I do not have to look particularly hard or very far to start finding multiple examples of runs with large (large in this case being defined as "above 5 minutes" which is totally arbitrary and varies in meaningfulness across games but that's the range I was asked to work in by Ninten.) sections of actual gameplay being missing. It is just absolutely constant across the boards to varying degrees. Ninten's own Sub-3 in 2FM is missing about 2 minutes 30 seconds, which I argue is significant, but since 5 minutes seems to be the bar to pass....

So there you go, two examples, one of them being a currently standing WR of the timer rule being unnecessary to actually verify runs since ya'll seem to have done just fine without them and several examples of runs missing bonkers large chunks of their run time and I didn't even look very hard. You clearly do not need this rule to function and the rule itself invites a poor standard of verification across other games.

(P.S Abandon and Rebel's posts really do deserve responses. I appreciate that I'm getting answers but it's a little frustrating seeing them go without being engaged.)

That would be a start, but still wouldn't really address my point where runs with a timer are given carte blanche to just have chunks missing.

Part of my problem with this is how the same rule applies to every single game in the series regardless of length or appropriateness. When you get into the really long KH categories that take like 10 hours or more, some technical blip resulting in an inconsistency or missing minutes is very whatever because of just the sheer ratio of gameplay involved. In BBS or 0.2 and possibly some of the handheld games in the middle length brackets, a blip like that eliminates a significant portion of the run and honestly probably shouldn't be admissible timer or no. The "long-game" proof standard is being applied globally across an entire series of varied games, some of which really don't warrant it.

Which kinda goes back to the thing I said earlier about how if you're overwhelmed, you probably need game-specific mods at which point they can decide how best to run those games. KH is a series that encompasses too many games for global ruling to fit perfectly for all the games within it. It's part of why speedrun.com made the change recently that series mods do not inherit mod of every game in the series automatically (hence why Dax and BB were stuck in limbo), the admins of the site itself are trying to nudge people off doing that because it historically doesn't pan out especially well.

Bold texting does not make the thing true. You yourself said the rule was added to make you able to verify multi-part vods with missing segments. How is that not a moderator convenience? Otherwise, yes, you would have to reject them and deal with the fallout therein.

Abandon and Rebel also had plenty of other points that are valid outside the assumption that the rule exists, at least in part, for moderator convenience.

You're kinda leading the conversation in circles and then going "this conversation is going in circles". Like, yeah. Of course it is.

There's two more paragraphs in that post as he later expands his point to be more general.

Abandon's huge And Quite Good post also seems to have largely gone without comment.

I actually have no idea how to quote on speedrun.com but it's this post: http://www.speedrun.com/kh/thread/90qg3/1#g511h

"This is what first led me to think that the "timer being required" rule was being intrusive upon peoples enjoyment on speedrunning."

plus like, abandon and nanner outright saying they don't like the rule either for their own reasons (their posts do contain more than just PS4 streaming stuff and I'm getting the worrying sensation you're not actually /reading/ the posts from that)

"If you don't agree, then sorry."

I mean it ain't just me considering like, three or four other people posted in agreement with me. I'm the loudest but they do exist.

"because at this point I'm just going to bring up computer crashes, CPU encoding overloads"

The former is rare enough that it can be discounted, the latter is caused by not getting your settings right. Neither of those are of enough concern that the moderation should bother themselves with it.

"You seem to be caring about the case of someone with all the hardware capabilities able to add a timer but doesn't want to for aesthetic reasons"

I'm also caring about the case of people who get offline PBs, and then have to restream their runs to add a timer, in the process introducing errors in the video from Twitch's unreliable streaming and downgrading the video quality. This results in strictly worse videos being uploaded onto the leaderboard than if you just took their raws and timed it. The rule actively lowers the quality of submissions and makes those people waste their time to make their runs look worse for submissions.

or adam who came up with his insane dual-stream to Beam + window capture set up to not do the process twice

"I've already stated that we find a minimal timer to be non-intrusive enough"

There is a post in this thread by someone who is not me who literally stated that he found it intrusive, so this clearly isn't a unanimous thought among the community.

if you exclusively stream and do not use any other method to record

Local recording makes like 99% of that concern vanish. Capture card fails happen, but they're rare and unfortunate.

"If you haven't experienced any of these issues, consider yourself one of the lucky ones, but you're coming from a very biased standpoint."

No, my internet sucks huge balls and dies for hours at a time for seemingly no reason. I just local record stuff.

"Internet drops are a very common issue"

Yeah, if that is a common issue for you, maybe don't use streaming as your only means to archive your runs? Why is streaming the only way even being considered to record a run? If you can stream, you can local record, by definition. If you can't do both and your connection is dodgy, why is the person who /only streams/ the one the ruleset is being constructed around? Local recording is the more reliable option. It seems like an incredibly common sense thing to not use streaming as your only method if you're afflicted by these problems.

"because the majority of people who are direct streaming from PS4 do so specifically because they do not have a capture card."

Then it's a risk, because PS4 streaming is dodgier than ordinary streaming. One of the games I moderate is a PS4 game, we field this issue all the time. It's not a big deal.

Considering one of the arguments in favour of the timer comes from a place of "it's the runners responsibility to put a timer on", how is moving that responsibility from "place a timer" to "record your stuff in one piece" any practically different?

"Rejecting an 11 hour run due to a 10 second internet failure is incredibly harsh "

Runs of really really long lengths are kind of a different ballgame, but that being said, local recording would fix this problem in like, 99% of cases.

"Other communities are ok with rejecting and excluding runners with worse internet or computers. We are not. Period."

If you have a computer made after the turn of the decade you can probably manage local recording. Whether or not you can manage streaming at the same time is another thing, but you can almost certainly manage an unbroken raw video file. I cannot imagine this is asking too much, especially since these are all console games. I moderate modern PC games that are harder to stream and record at the same time with better proof standards, the "bad computer/connection" argument just doesn't hold water? I don't think it should be moderation's responsibility to concern themselves with other people's tech issues even if it were a major issue, which I really don't think it is at all. Local recording is an option and has been option for longer than streaming's been around.

The fact the entire proof standard for this series revolves around the inconsistencies of notoriously unreliable streaming and internet connections is really backwards. If you can stream, you can local record, your internet connection doesn't even enter the picture.

" The following two cannot happen at the same time: "

Yes they can. Most every other game in existence pulls this off,in fact? This is absurd to suggest and ignores every other leaderboard in existence that manages just that. I literally moderate boards that pull that off.

"If you allow runs without a timer, then the moderator HAS to sit and watch the entire run, start to finish, paying close attention the entire time."

No they don't. Download the VoD, trim to the start frame and the end frame. If you've got a decent download speed, this takes like 5-10 minutes. That's the most efficient way, but if you want to be more basic you can just do math on the start time and end time on the video player, but it's a little clunky.

Nevertheless, I'm absolutely not suggesting a moderator individually watch every single run and pay attention the entire length, because that's insane. Logistically impossible and absurdly unreasonable, but there are certainly more efficient methods to time runs that ya'll can use.

"Without a timer we would have to reject any run that is missing any amount of time"

Yep. Missing gameplay is kind of a big deal for a competitively focused leaderboard anyway, no? I've talked a lot before about why missing gameplay is bad from multiple angles so I don't see why this is being presented as a negative. It's ok to raise the proof standard.

I don't think there's anything contradictory about this at all.

That sounds like someone requesting it to me. It seems like a fairly reasonable addition as well since it's not really a different category, it's different hardware for an existing one.

Scrolled back through the forum, found this thread where he literally requested it 11 MONTHS AGO: http://www.speedrun.com/kh/thread/icqp8

bruhhhhhhhhhhh

Yeah, I reckon it'd be easier to cheat under the current ruleset than it'd be without the rule since the rule exists to allow runs with chunks of game missing which is way easier to cheat with. I don't think anyone's actually ever done it mind you, but I don't see how it stops cheating at all.

"but we've got mods who won't do the work because they just want to do runs - especially when I heard from BTrue that the job of reviewing runs REALLY isn't that taxing"

Just to kind of addendum this, I moderate Resident Evil 7 (literally the most active game on the entire website), the entire Silent Hill series and a reasonably active IL game and between all of that crap I very much understand what it's like to have a lot on your plate. But how long it actually takes to do and the burden of run verification is IMO kind of greatly exaggerated. I mod all that junk and still find plenty of time to do runs of stuff and I don't really feel stressed or overwhelmed at all. I think part of the issue with that is only having mods for every game and not compartmentalizing a little bit and having some game-specific mods. A bit more delegation would probably go a long way with more comfortably splitting the work of run verification, instead of making rules like the timer rule that make it easier on global mods but kind of annoying for everyone else.

"Succinct I'm curious to know why you and some other members aren't too keen on the idea of having on screen timers?"

Because I moderate a bunch of really active games and in my experience runners are huge fuckups and make timing mistakes literally all the time that I then wind up having to fix, so relying on the runner and their timer (people are idiots and pause timers all the time) to keep the timing consistent if footage is missing is a /huge/ gamble. A gamble that honestly I don't think is worth taking when the end result is accepting runs that would be below verification standards for just about any other game.

Plus I just dislike forcing people to put crap that isn't Video Game on their video. That's a broad aesthetic preference but I dislike it when forced on people via LB rules.

Additionally, going back to the Ven Crit thing where the video was missing 30 minutes in the past but verified because of the rule. This makes it super difficult for new runners to learn off the videos. I got RebelDragon95 to sit in a fucking teamspeak and verbally tutor me over the medium of voice to learn the run instead of just taking bloomin notes of the WR like anyone with sense would do. This is a constant recurring issue to varying degrees across a bunch of games. It's just kinda sloppy?

"Succinct the idea that other leaderboards do it one way so all leaderboards should do it this way is an incredibly flawed mind set"

Usually yes. But we're talking about like, nearly every single other leaderboard. Almost all of them. KH is the only game I have /ever/ seen with this rule.

It stands to some semblance of reason that if literally every other speedrun community is doing it a different way and their runs are generally in one piece, there might be some merit in their approach. Doing things because other people do them is bad, but ignoring what everyone else is doing because "This is Kingdom Hearts we do it our way" is just as bad and possibly worse.

" If a runner cares so little about their own run that they can't even be bothered to put even a basic timer on their run"

Some people (like me, as it happens), generally prefer having just a clean game feed and nothing else where possible so the video can be in the best quality and occupy as much of the video player as possible. I.e All of it. It's not laziness or "not caring", it's actually about the precise opposite.

"then I don't see why a mod should have dedicate their own time towards verifying the run."

because the video game is still all there and present and this is the entire point of having moderators in the first place? Why should any mod dedicate their own time? Because...they volunteered to? This argument is super nonsense, man.

"Ninten's run being accepted has nothing to do with him being a mod."

I mean, not currently. The rules were like that before and after he got added. But far be it from me to suggest a reason for the reluctance to change in this regard is because it would have a substantial effect on the runs of a couple of the existing moderators?

I'm not instantly calling bias or that this is the WHOLE REASON KH MODS ARE CORRUPT BLARGH as so many other fuckwits do. But I can't overlook that as a potential factor. It's something that will inevitably be considered.

"Again, kindly, go fuck yourself and your shitty insinuations about our community."

Dude, seriously. Relax. I wouldn't be posting if I didn't care and just hated all of you.

"Feel free to run those games if you disagree with the simple necessity of a timer on screen."

I would like to point out this is incompatible with TImmi's argument about it not putting people off.

"couldn't support streaming and locally recording at the same time."

Yeah, but it's a leaderboard, not a Twitch-integrated platform. If people can't stream and local record at the same time, you accept that just streaming is a risk when you run because if your internet dies you might lose a chunk of the run and make it invalid. Or, you don't stream and just local record. I dunno why it has to be both.

"Lastly, just because another game does things one way doesn't mean we have to. "

Not just "another game", like 90% of all other games.

"the first sub 3 in KH2FM wouldn't be allowed under your ruleset, which I'm sure would be disagreed with by a large number of people."

¤the run that is also done by a mod¤

Thinking emoji.

"Sonic is not the only member of this community who suffers from poor Internet and it pisses me the fuck off you would insinuate that as if we baby him or something."

Joke. Apparently in poor taste, so I apologise. But I still stand by what I said about it. I don't think it should be moderation's responsibility for other people's technical issues. That may have been acceptable a few years ago, but not so much anymore. And just about every other game reflects this shift.

" the only people who actually complain about the timer rule we've had in place for years are people outside of the community."

I am not outside the community, I've just been quiet for a really long time lol.

Seriously though, this happens because it's only KH that has this rule and it occasionally takes someone with a broader perspective to sanity check some of this stuff. Games are different, but that's also no reason to turn a blind eye to the standards of your peers.

"What we are doing here with our LBs works for us."

This is a cop out. You can always do better.

"It hasn't discouraged any new runners either. "

I can tell you this is bullshit because it literally discouraged me when I was trying learn the route for Ventus Critical by taking notes off the WR as I usually do for a new speedgame and had difficulty because 30 fucking minutes were missing from the world record.

I persevered regardless, but it was off-putting. I can tell you that I felt put off by the sloppiness. People who are put off or discouraged will likely never speak about it, which makes it difficult to gauge. It's not really a strong argument because it's a silent thing.

"So fuck right off with your high and mighty condescending attitude about how we should run our LBs. "

Chill.

"but I don't complain about it because I understand why it's in place and realize that Im in the minority in disagreeing with it within the community"

Or, you could make the argument like I'm currently trying to do? The entire point of discussion is to share ideas.

Gonna back this up a bit because I want to reply to this:

"- Take on new mods (2017 has already seen 3 new mods) "

One, I think. Just Ninten. Dax and BB were added as global mods but not to any individual games so they can't actually verify anything?