[quote]Posts about it are also being deleted in the re4 forums.[/quote]

Kids these days. >_>;

It looks like the times are down for now. The general lack of agreement even between the moderators (and also the community) seems to be a large problem. I unfortunately won't have time to look at fixing things until this weekend.

Apparently at least one user was being an idiot on the forums doing things that probably warranted being deleted, I don't really have time to go figure out who started what.

"checked by a moderator to be reasonable" is probably accurate enough, runs can be taken down after the fact.

I don't like the word "verified" either. "Accepted" is probably more accurate.

Ideally we'll have a feature to auto-accept times under a certain threshold eventually. There's plenty of complication to overcome in the code with categories/consoles/etc though. If you want to just accept non-notable times without reviewing them, I doubt anyone cares. (We want to make this a feature anyway)

You have to add an "Individual Level category" to make the table 2 dimensional. (Probably should have some sort of notification for this maybe?) I added one for you.

soloman: Moderator was literally just online and I'm pretty sure he submitted a game request earlier this week. He's certainly not "inactive", feel free to contact him.

Auddy07: If you or others want to contact me on Twitch I can look into it more. I need a lot of details though. There's literally 6 people moderating the board, so I have no idea who has what opinion and why or who disagrees with who. I really don't even know where the disagreement starts.

Cyberdemon531: I'm not really interested in getting involved in your personal turf wars. That board has been there for over 3 months. The Megaman community seems to include a bunch of people you seem to routinely get in disagreements with, so I don't have any productive way to change the situation without creating more issues at the moment. I would need some evidence that the majority of the community wants something changed besides simply you telling me so. A forum thread in the game forum would be the appropriate place for that, discussion doesn't need dragged in here other than a link to relevant discussion threads.

frogyfro: I wish I had site PMs, plain and simple. They haven't been implemented yet, so we're kinda stuck with this informal route (which probably has room for improvement.) I generally review as much information as I can before changing things. Does the moderator have a run of the game, when was the person asking for moderator last online, does the person asking for moderator have a run of the game, how do the categories look, how many runs do they each have on the site. Have they tried contacting that mod, does that mod appear active on Twitch/Twitter?

Many of these requests fall well within reason by this criteria in my opinion. A few of them are grayer, but "contact the mod" only goes so far. There is no way to guarantee the moderator of a game is reasonable, most of the time he just got there first.

Ideally people should work together to find some common ground, I can't exactly defer to the current moderator all the time. Best practice IMO would be if moderators would get 2+ other moderators for each game so numerous people are available for moderation and contact. More people available also increases the likelihood that the board is reflecting community opinion.

Janomoogo: A couple things relating to this

1: You can contact moderators to do this. 2: Generally only notable runs or runs the runner wants documented should be added. I think the goal is to maintain top times and times people want added. Not to maintain every time in existence.

It's probably a desirable feature, but the implementation needs to get the purpose across. It could possibly become a burden on moderators if not implemented appropriately.

[quote]2. If a level has a tied record, order the names by date of submission, oldest to newest.[/quote]

This should be date of run, not date of submission, correct?

There's been a lot of discussion on "public knowledge" and "reporting" in the past.

The rule should be: If the time is not notable (say like top 1-3 runs), it should be removed upon request.

As far as top times, it is a very complex issue. If you do not want it attached to your profile I am fine with that. I'd probably rather anonymize the runs than put in fake names. If you don't want it embedded, we might be able to accommodate that with a site update. It is a bit of an overreach for me to prevent people entirely from objective documentation of a publicly listed notable time. Communities can handle this how they choose for now, and this thought may change eventually.

I had added SilenceErupts as a series moderator to add the other two games in the series upon request.

He opted to change timing on one of the games or something, and probably should've reached out to the moderator through additional mediums to discuss that change, but I somehow doubt that would've solved the problem in this case.

That sequence of events probably could have happened a bit more formally, but the resulting attitude given was in my opinion out of line, and the site really cannot functionally have moderators acting like that or things do not work. I removed the other series moderator.

This game seems to be like 10 button presses, it seems like serious business.

Discussion taken to game forum

Green_Dreamin: Dang I don't even get a day to respond. Could you try contacted aisforandis, I gave him super mod so he can actually add people now. 5 days isn't bad really, but getting more people involved would be good. Contact him first though please.

Moo: Discussion taken to game forum.

Arthur9078: Added due to 4 months inactivity. If you want to contact the other players of the other games I can add someone to the series.

Beardy: He might not have seen your message or he might have been too busy to review your run today. Runs don't have to be reviewed literally the next time people visit the site. I'd recommend contacting him through another medium (Twitch message) and/or waiting a few days.

I've mentioned the idea of an option to "require" the user to select a value for a variable in the front-end before the runs are listed. (With a user option to override that feature.)

Let's define this variable as "locked" Then I think when comparing run placements you generate the placing based off all runs with the same locked variable values. Maybe there's complication here as well.

I think avoiding utilizing the modularity of the category system is generally suboptimal, and I'd rather look into ways to get better use out of listing things under the same modularity. Using an IL table to separate platforms and things really isn't optimal in my opinion, and the site should ideally have features to not cause any need for that in my opinion.

If that idea isn't clear I can elaborate more. Obviously the current situation isn't great at the moment. I really do think the "locked" idea would improve the ability for organization a lot.

Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light: Added since moderator hasn't been very active Lara Croft and the Temple of Osiris: As far as I know you should be able to add yourself to the game since series moderators have power there. Let me know if you can't. Tomb Raider Underworld: Can you try contacting the current mod and seeing if you guys are on the same page, he's fairly active. He has the ability to add you. I'd rather you reach out for discussion before any major changes are made there.

Raxa7: Resogun moderator Last online 2 months ago and no runs - added

SilenceErupts: The one game looks okay but the series could use improvement for sure, (also verified you had a run of a game in the series) - added.

I like the idea.

It probably should be grouped as 1: Theme (Don't separate this out any further IMO) 2: Favicons 3: Trophies 4: (Anything else?)

Not to be a total downer, but I personally don't really like giving main area forum space to everyone that asks for it. Just look at the last two boards that were added. 0 threads and 1 thread.

Really we should just have a general community marathons board people can add threads to and also the ability to create a marathon schedule page and tie it to the user instead of the whole site.

I also don't like the idea of using the site to specifically promote smaller marathons. It's user generated content that the admins have no insight to, so it doesn't make sense to sanction causes. (Especially if it's for charity, I have no way to guarantee it's for charity other than people telling me so.) Giving it it's own forum makes it look like we're sanctioning it, which is okay for larger stuff, but for smaller stuff could cause issues.

I do want to provide resources for marathon organizers. I do not like using site space to promote and/or sanction marathons I know nothing about.

Nothing personal at all.

TheGlitched64: Missed your request the first time sorry. Try contacting the current moderator on Twitch, he seems fairly active.

Destiny: [removed, discussion was taken aside]

Destiny: Nacho did you check your Twitch spambox? Twitch defaults all messages to the other box unless you've opted out. (The worst feature I've ever seen in my life.) I didn't see the message may not be the same as he didn't contact me. Separately, why should you maintain sole control of the Destiny series and/or what would make him not qualified to help? It's worth noting the other two moderators have zero runs of the game. Having only one person who runs a game maintaining the board is not the ideal situation in my opinion. Getting more active people involved should generally be helpful. Since the question was brought up, if the moderator is generally uncontactable (not saying that's necessary the case here), I can't exactly go by the "needs to contact a mod" criteria. It generally makes sense to me to add the most active submitter of runs to the game as a mod when there's only effectively only one moderator (as far as I can tell) currently.

KomradeKontroll: Mod has no runs of game listed, so okay.

Link's Awakening: The moderator was online 2 weeks ago, which isn't awful. I'd probably need someone to add. Could you try sending the moderator a Twitch DM for now asking about accepting your run and maybe getting a couple more people involved as moderators?

Discussed some things with Digimon series super mod.

The assertion is that someone was screwing with the theme multiple times, and he didn't know exactly who or have a better way of dealing with it. I can have another admin spend time verifying this or someone can just tell me so I don't have to waste their time.

He says he discusses with numerous people in a Digimon Skype group, I asked him to add them all to super moderators for the series, and recommended they take discussion to the forum once in a while. He was a bit annoyed with some of the super moderator bugs and decisions people had made with "series moderators have power here". I asked him to restore mods to super mods and contact full mods or admins if he needs help handling something.

The other issue was with a disagreement on partial game categories, which is probably a discussion for another day, or perhaps just use the forums. There are now multiple people to discuss issues with in the series.

I encourage people to use the forums for discussion/documentation, and I am well aware that not having PMs makes moderation annoying at times.

I like i_o_l's numbering personally. I think it makes sense to do globally without an option.

I'd get more feedback before implementing. Does anyone really see the need for an option for it to not do that?

FishermanFV: I'll add you to the series after a bug gets fixed that is preventing me from adding series moderators. :| Zecora_MLP_1: You have more runs than half the moderators, so ok. PKSCUBE: I'd say 3 weeks is pretty long, added you. HeyItsBentley: Added, and I also gave series moderator power there.

I'll PM the series moderator and look into it. There was a bug letting super moderators remove super moderators, which pretty much fits the topic title. There's still something weird going on with the series moderators have power here button which may or may not have been fixed yet.

Did you have runs up on the board that were removed?

I'll follow up in the next couple days.