^ There is generally no reason it shouldn't be a public request. This isn't a sneaky process.

Start with the background? (Please?)

It's possible that admins can help with mass migration of runs. Contact them directly if they don't notice this thread.

Keep in mind it might take some time, as they have other priorities.

If push comes to shove, if you're a moderator for the target game, you can create runs on behalf of each user with a run then remove them from the old board. This can be messy though, you'll want to proceed very carefully.

PBs that were played on the same day appear in reverse order on user profiles.

Just to illustrate how much your mileage may vary...

I regularly contact mods for games I don't run, since that's my specific role for a speedrunning group with several hundred members. The most successful method of contacting them out of the blue has been Twitch, for me.

My own preferred contact method would be Twitch.

I don't even know how to contact someone on YouTube, other than commenting on their video, which can be disabled just like Twitch whispers, and which most sensible people avoid anyway. Seriously YouTube comments are the cliché worst thing on the internet.

I don't use Twitter. I only have an account so that I'll get notified by email if people try to contact me there.

And if I don't share a Discord server with someone... Well, my first reaction when someone I don't know adds me as a friend is confusion. The new Discord server field on the game page alleviates this issue fabulously, and this might even make Discord my preferred contact.

Steam is probably worse than any of the above.

Everyone is different, so unless there's some sort of universal sitewide message system that can be enforced, (i.e. if we have requirements that mods check their PMs or face consequences, which is reasonable if email notification works properly) then all social media contacts have to be presumed valid until shown otherwise. Ranking them is projecting your preferences, imo.

And it's also reasonable for a moderator to be expected to keep their links up to date. If they don't want to be contacted on one of them, they should remove it.

The staff is asking mods to put up a social media link. If they submit a useless or dead link, then they are unsuitable mods and they are identified as such all the more quickly. Like, @Twan_Jones what this changes is that mods are clearly being told what's expected of them when they take on the responsibility instead of having them find out long after, often when they're inactive to the point of being problematic. At the very least. I get that you're pessimistic about mods, but this is definitely a huge step in the right direction in improving moderation as a whole. If people are going to try to find a way around it, it's a clear disqualification.

Umm... Staff is actively checking whether the links are valid right? If not then forget anything I said :P

@EmeraldAly Twitch whispers are very easy to use. If someone has all non-friends blocked, then it's not a valid social media link and won't count. If they can be reached by whispers, it counts.

Idk, seems simple to me.

Would it be appropriate to have All Worlds as the main full game category, have each individual world as a misc category, and each individual level as ILs?

There are plenty of games with non-full-game categories under the full game section, such as StarCraft, which has several different campaigns. Are they doing it wrong?

@xarkae

I can see why you thought this was the right place given the topic title, but if you read the first post you'd see that that's really not what this topic is for. Take it up directly with the game mods, they are both active on this site and elsewhere.

@ staff Could it help if the topic title was changed to "Report problematic or inactive mods here"? Or something?

Admins can do mass migration of runs, but you can probably get it done before they get around to it :)

Is there currently a rule that new moderators who take over from unreachable moderators should themselves have valid contact links? It's not listed in the original topic post.

I don't mean to waste anyone's time by posting this here instead of in site feedback, but I think it would help create fewer problems in the future for just a bit of extra work per request, and foster a good moderation practice right off the bat for new mods.

@groupoutou if you are French or Russian, send me a message on Discord I'll help you out.

?

I think the lesson there is that you shouldn't tell other people how they should verify their games. People don't really like that, and it's not how the site works. Also, what works for one game doesn't work for every game. There's no need to get combative here, nor spill it over onto the discord. People disagreed with you, no one was attacking you. Just your absolutist ideas.

"I am not high and mighty. I believe that lazy moderation (which is to not watch the whole run) is a blight on the site and needs to be cut out as much as possible. If you want to come at me further that's on you. I've said my piece; I'm done here. Good luck." This is the kind of rhetoric that entrenches both sides of the issue while also attracting trolls.

Watching a game at 2x speed is fine for games with slow action, if you know what to look for and if you're conscious of the risks you're taking. The same can be said of watching only segments of a long run for a non competitive time on a busy board. This happens, and it happens for a multitude of reasons. It shouldn't surprise you.

(Personally I watch full runs at regular speed with my own timer, and rewatch certain parts after on a slower speed if I can. I can do that since my games are short and I'm still fascinated by the variations people bring. It also helps me find new strats and ideas. And I don't have a high volume of runs to go through.)

Mods can choose to take a runner's credibility into account like Liv suggested. They can also choose to be blind to the user's reputation--plenty of cheaters were reputable competitive runners who got desperate to improve when the diminishing returns of hard work caught up with them.

Mods have to volunteer the time and effort to keeping the leaderboard functioning. That's their role, and that's where the job description begins and ends.

The fact is that right now, there's no single specific practice that everyone must apply. Stop calling other volunteers lazy or a "blight" and maybe you won't have to live life on the defensive. Lighten up :)

Here's another issue that was brought up. Forgive me, it's one of my favourite topics... I'd love to see stricter standards like more proof options, forcing mods to "follow" their games, forcing mods to have valid contact info, something like the "run accepted but not verified" state, automatic inactivity layoffs, a crackdown on leaderboards that have deadweight mods... Speaking of which...

@Liv

Since you mentioned that you were bothered by runless mods... Did you know that 38% of all moderators do not have a run in a game that they moderate? Did you know that 42% of all game leaderboards have at least one mod with no runs in the game?

ROMaster2 compiled these stats for me a few months ago. They might have changed slightly since then, for better or worse.

Are you asking if you can remove the feature? You can't delete that option. It's what allows you as a moderator to submit runs on behalf of other users.

Or are you having trouble submitting a run for yourself?

You can't seriously argue that all runs must be watched, and simultaneously encourage moderators to watch it on double speed.

Visual novels are explicitly ineligible. I'm not sure why you're bringing them up tbh.

"But GeoGuessr? It's a game, with speed strategies, plenty of runners... It's a perfectly fine speedgame on all counts, and keeping it off the site makes no sense to me" Yeah me neither. I think it was dismissed much too quickly. The rule should not be an arbitrary "no map games", it should be "no low-quality browser games".

So here's the plan, ok? Listen up.

1. Join the Geoguessr Speedruns discord.
2. Help foster the community.
3. Contribute to the existing parallel process for verifying runs on a leaderboard.
4. Show your support when the game is resubmitted at a later date.

See you there! :)

(If you're referring to another game that was rejected for similar reasons and you don't actually care about Geoguessr, you should say so.)

@PearlPalkiaGaming In addition to what Timmiluvs said...

"Please keep in mind that using this thread is a last resort, in case the current moderators are not responding or refusing your help without justification. You should always start by asking the Super mods of a game/series as they are also able to add mods. Best way to contact game mods is probably through Twitter for now. Also try the game forums, many users get notifications when threads are created for games they follow.

Moderator inactivity doesn't apply until around 3 weeks, depending on other circumstances, and it is expected that you try to contact them (exceptions may be made if they have been offline ~3+ months.) "

All three mods are active, ask them if there's changes you'd like to make that you can't do yourself.

Also, a small reminder:

Even if someone appears inactive on a particular social media platform, you should still try to reach them there if you need to.

For example, I don't use Twitter, but I do have it set up so that if someone @'s me, I'll get an email and two phone notifications.

Staff, it would be great if users could identify which social link is their preferred method of contact.

Undermining the integrity of a board is an affront to the site and its purpose as a whole.

Hear hear!

Again, hate to be a nag, but the more you link, the higher the price goes :)

top score no space