United StatesRvBAidan: I can't change account creation date through the site interface.
Sumuni: Can't do spaces in usernames.
CriscoWild: Twitch has direct messages, though they seem to be hiding them in the interface more and more over time. Alternatively my Twitter DMs are open currently, but I shut them off from time to time. I'm at SGDQ next week and probably won't be online much.
larathen: The CMR community seems to have at least a partial consensus on what they want done with the games. I generally have to go with the consensus. I'd recommend discussing this with one of the other CMR active users/moderators that isn't as involved in the situation. I tend to agree there are some stupid things, but I think what was presented as the consensus is the consensus, regardless of who was presenting it. The board doesn't really have "owners" so much as "maintainers"
plankboii: Added due to run pending.
Soulcloset: This seems fine since the other user is inactive.
buffalax: It looks like your run was added. Discuss it with the moderators please.
TheZombieMan16: Discuss it with the moderator, they are active.
drybones81: Discuss it with the moderators please
Descension: I added you for ZAT, the others have active moderators so please discuss it with them.
I cleared the entirety of the game requests earlier today. Most of staff is going to be at SGDQ and may not be processing requests much until we get back.
There was an issue with a moderator being added and destroying the board. The board was then recreated. There's a pretty good chance blackpliff wasn't intentionally involved in that.
PojeBunny: I made that specific change.
ProInfernape: That moderator is active enough, try discussing it with them on the game's forum.
Thegamerland seems to have issue with ban evasion, numerous alt accounts, spam, threats, harassment of site staff, and whatever other crap we've been dealing with. I don't even know if his videos are his or just impersonation of other people who have nothing to do with the site tbh.
Capridog_: They're all quite active on the site. It would like work out better if you discussed it with them.
ThePinkStrategist: It looks like you were added.
Flutterparty: Added.
SpiderSponge87: I mirrored what's in a majority of the games to the series.
moarkraps: Please discuss it with the moderator if possible.
Castlevania stuff: In retrospect I should've just asked the series moderators to sort this out. Twitch DM box is open if there's anything more to say, I don't think dragging it out further in this thread has benefit.
Caught up to here.
I don't really care what people's names are as long as they aren't racist / bothering others users / not suitable for even an R rated movie, or similar to stuff like that. The common sense test.
EduardoRN: Category Requests go through the moderators for the game. GaryJ: Added, this is the correct thread to request that. ciccioDM: Game request form for future reference. Include the games in the "notes" section.
Pac and I discussed this. Since there's not really a viable short-term middle of the road solution on our end, we can put up redirect pages until the API better supports synchronization or something of that nature. We need a list of Mega Man games that want to go this route. Unfortunately I can't promise the pages will be up by SGDQ.
Turtles_are_Love: Added due to no mods
PojeBunny: Super mods can add other super mods if that is what people want to do. I do not want to add series moderators at this time due to past conflicts, and I think the moderation is relatively stable as it is. If users want to self-remove or add people, I think you guys are capable of handling that without me making all the executive decisions on your behalf.
Serpykologicl: Added due to long pending runs.
CriscoWild: I'll retract my original comments to some extent and rephrase to "Regardless of the actual intent, you seem to be getting caught up in things that appear to be patterns of behavior that are particularly annoying to other users, regardless of whether or not they are actually intended as such" Maybe you just asked for the board to be created because you noticed it didn't exist or you were thinking about running it, and maybe you didn't ask for mod, and maybe you just got mod by consequence, and maybe you thought that was weird, and maybe you tweeted about it because you thought it was weird, and maybe you didn't want to add the series moderator who (like you) didn't run this specific game, and maybe you thought the other mod who did run the game should mod it. Or other people might well see it as intentionally undermining and bypassing series moderation and creating unnecessary conflict, which is a frequent problem on the site. Or maybe it's halfway in between; life's not so black and white. At the very least users in different communities got annoyed twice in two weeks, which brings a bunch of annoyed people to this thread asking why these things happen which site staff gets to deal with. I don't think you have an inherent need to moderate that game in a series that you have zero runs in; it's just a lightning rod for controversy.
I'll delete these comments and/or take them to Twitch DM if you want to do the same. Or I'm just as fine leaving them here for posterity. I don't find it particularly enjoyable spending my free time on this, and I'm sure you don't either.
Xelna: I bumped the active mod up to a super.
CriscoWild: https://twitter.com/CriscoWild/status/875866097706205186 https://twitter.com/CriscoWild/status/876115160242540547 EDIT: The rest of this comment is removed due to inaccuracies.
I deleted it. I don't have an easy way to recheck what the video with the original game request was, but on re-examination this just looks like bait out of someone's alt account. It slipped through, sorry about that. If someone has proof that this game actually exists in some form on DS, feel free to post it.
Shienjeru: Added due to inactivity.
FireFox2000000 / thebpg13 : I moved stuff around in an attempt to help fix this. You guys can add people where you see fit. If there is general consensus after a while, we can look at adding series mods again.
EduardoRN: The mod is active, please discuss it with them.
Racingmonster: Since the mod is here I guess some discussion occurred. To your other point, getting more people involved in a way such that the site day-to-day tasks are still run in a semi-consistent manner is quite difficult. I'm well aware this is a problem, and I'd actually really like to get myself out of handling so many requests. It just hasn't happened yet.
Castlevania Stuff: (EDIT: Comments removed)
tocaloni1: Removed due to inactivity.
FluffMaestro: It looks like a moderator logged in and reviewed the run. Feel free to discuss it with them.
Racingmonster: It doesn't look like there are any pending runs for that game and the moderator is active.
Nolcolem: Since the run is pending a long time I'll add you as a regular moderator. I'd recommend not changing the board other than to approve runs without discussing with other runners.
ShadowZero81: Regarding Tekken 7, the mods have all been online in the last day as of right now at least.
ZeldaCrasher: The mod seems relatively active, but the runs haven't been pending all that long. If they stay unverified for a while longer we can look at adding another mod.
pjplustwo: It looks like you were added.
Xheno: It doesn't appear that you've run this game.
PojeBunny: If someone else wants to moderate, I'd love to hear their opinion. As it is you're just speaking on behalf of people, which seems to be a recurring thing.
DryYoshi: It looks like you were added.
HowDenKing: It looks like he was online recently.
frathebes: It's like 1 day from being deleted for not being set up, I'll just add you.
Yajijy: Okay, seems sensible.
Castelvania stuff: It looks like one of the series moderators added the game, added a mod, and then self-removed, so I don't know the details of that discussion.
Gave2haze: Just had to set the "Show unofficial games by default" flag for the series. Webgames and mobile games are controlled through that mechanism right now with the other types.
Options 1, 2, and 3 are all in different ways bad for various reasons; I wasn't intending to imply that wasn't true. I agree that inaccurate leaderboards maintained on SRC are a large problem for the Mega Man community and submission lockout is a large problem for SRC. Similarly, the lack of a synchronization API developed by SRC is a large problem for the Mega Man community and SRC. Comparing the weights of these problems is subjective and dependent on perspective, and I think that is reflected in the discussion.
In regard to BaronHaynes most recent post, with emphasis on point "c":
When I previously posted I didn't read into the point well enough to catch the nuance, my mistake. I interpreted "Put up banner, let people submit runs." It looks like you were specifically speaking towards "Put up banner, don't show runs, let people submit runs", which creates complication in implementation.
They way the site is set up, it is difficult for a run to exist without showing on a game and without being accessible through the existing API for runs and still showing up on the profile and still allowing submissions. If we were to "hide" the board behind a messsage, the WR Twitter and Twitch bots will still be very confused by the existence of these runs, if the runs were to exist in this state. The existing API for runs doesn't know the difference. The user profile would also have inaccurate rankings under the base assumptions such as 1st place on a run that most likely isn't actually the MMLB first place. It's certainly not impossible to implement something that works like this, but I think it's an amount of effort going quite a bit beyond just hiding the page. I don't think we can get that to happen in a week or two right now. I also question whether implementing this specific method would actually help the underlying issues or just create more confusion overall.
Point "a" and "b" of implementing a redirect would be low effort to implement. It's just some small site code changes.
Point "d" of requiring submissions to be verified on MMLB requires moderator effort and some cross-compatibility of moderators, which seems to be an implied necessity for any sort of "host some runs here" type solution.
Editing for the third time: Pac and I are trying to line our schedules up to discuss this. The time zones are such that he's asleep when I'm not sleeping or at work on weekdays. I concede that it is stupid we haven't found a time yet.
I apologize in advance if any of the tone here sounds poor. These are mostly my opinions, which in some cases may not translate to "site policy". Writing this up with accurate wording is time consuming, so please try to consider it holistically instead of focusing on wording. I deal with this issue on a semi-regular basis, and so do you guys. We're on the same boat for similar reasons more or less.
I sent the following paragraph to a couple people asking yesterday:
"The site is stuck in a constant unstable cycle where site users can't have runs listed on this site because of the combination of the site not having API functionality to do this and the community not wanting boards here without the API. I understand that the primary issue for the community is the lack of site functionality. The issue on my end is that the current circumstances put site staff in a position where we are saying it's okay to prevent users from tracking their runs on our site for certain games, which I really fundamentally disagree with on a personal level and from a precedent perspective. So originally it's fine to delay this until we get an API for this, then we never get an API for this, so then it's like this forever, which really isn't a fine way for the site to run day to day, and isn't a situation that I support."
I'm not going to say point 1 "Isn't an option", so to speak. I wasn't consulted when it was put on the DKC boards and it is still my opinion that preventing people from submitting runs on this site for any game is a bad solution to a complex problem. I've been minimally complacent towards, aware of, or tolerant of those circumstances since the issue is complex. I totally get the "If it's okay for A, why isn't it okay for B" argument. From my perspective it wasn't a good solution for "A" to begin with. I personally view the "only redirect" solution as antagonistic to a generic user of this site. The sources of that problem certainly relate to the fact that the development hasn't happened for an API. I certainly wish we had functional ways to deal with this.
Hard coding option one is probably relatively trivial, but from a coding perspective, it's Pac who would have to do that right now. It certainly could be made to happen with low effort. The ideal solution still remains to be API synchronization that everybody wants but never gets developed on our end, so we're here still.
In response to joka's point, the API combing to generate the runs on the profile in my opinion doesn't get at the root of the issue. Any generic API usage of the site would likely not be populated with a simplistic solution. If we were to tackle most of the additional hoops to populate the runs in the API, I think we'd already be halfway to synchronization.
I still agree this site is missing some desirable features you guys have over there, and I agree that the development cycle has been quite slow as of late, and these are fair points.
I'm not saying option 1 isn't an option, I'm more saying that I personally view it as a continually bad option for the users of this site. My opinion is just my opinion. In a similar vein, I also view the lack of API synchronization as a continually bad option for the users of this site.
BaronHaynes third paragraph is actually closest to what I would find more stable. If there is some variant of that that would be considered acceptable, I would greatly prefer something in that direction. If additional functionality is needed to make it acceptable, it may be more feasible at the moment than full API synchronization.
komakino: Everyone is aware of your opinion and your posts don't contain any new information and are just insulting other users. The only way we have to prevent someone from posting here at the moment is by banning sitewide, so if you continue posting stupid crap that everyone is tired of reading I'm not at all against handling it like that. Last warning.
CriscoWild: If the majority of the community is going to make an effort to fix the dissenting situation I have to go with that. MMRTA is largely the majority of users running the game, and they don't seem to agree with who was running the board, regardless of any specific details. I also get that people don't like each other, and have poor ways of expressing that at times. I don't think some of the people of the minority opinion are any better in that regard. I don't know that a personal explanation would change anything pertaining to the circumstances in this instance.
Zewing: Category extension board requests have to come from moderators of the base game. Splitting the moderation across boards for the same game is a recipe for failure. See also this other thread's first post, which I edited slightly just now: http://www.speedrun.com/mmx3/thread/8lunf/4 Potential category bloat is a problem to be handled by the moderators in conjunction with the opinion of the majority of the community.
I moved mods around in an attempt to create a more stable situation after talking to a couple people. The situation prior to this post is definitively not stable.
Orsa's method here seems fine with the current status of site functionality, if people are okay with that: http://www.speedrun.com/mmx4/thread/apovd
I will note that I somewhat disagree with Hetfield's point 4 in his initial post. The moderation logs show the user metaphorically pouring some gas on the fire, much like some users on the other side of the aisle also like to do. I think it would be misconstrued to imply we moved things on a whim.
