United StatesIan07: I asked one of the other site staff members to sort out some of the Minecraft tags. They seem really inconsistent across the series.
Quivico: I'm not a huge fan of games being in a series just because a developer made a couple games. If my perception is not correct, please provide details.
UbuntuJackson: I'd probably personally rather it stay in one game if possible as to not clutter the searchbar when we look for Mario games. Map packs of a PC fangame of a really popular series doesn't seem like something that really warrants a series in my opinion.
ReverseVideo: Having series for individual Minecraft servers seems a little over the top.
The site doesn't impose a hard requirement on having video, and context and community opinion is relevant. This user has 55 runs on the site where most or all seem to have had video at one point. If all the Contra players felt this time wasn't legitimate there would probably be good reason to take it down. This game has about 4 runners in total, which is not very many. In my opinion there's about a 99% chance the user did the run based on the context, and I'm guessing the other runners don't have a strong opinion on the subject.
Things happen like Twitch deleting VODs, youtube copyright claims, etc. For this reason I would always advise keeping local copies of all runs you really care about.
scoagogo: You can link a run in this thread if you can't submit it.
PixelFuzzVibes: Added due to inactivity.
Duders: As far as I can tell your run has been pending 5 days as of my post, and the mod has been offline 6 days. This doesn't seem to line up with what you're saying.
ufotekkie: The form says "Well-known users or moderators of other games in a series may request unreleased games two weeks prior to launch. In rare cases, unreleased games may be accepted by well-known users and only at site staff discretion." I personally redirect practically everyone that would ask me to the game request form.
RockField: Please discuss it with the moderator.
joka: Havoc has been online recently, please discuss it with them.
lozplyr89: I don't have the details, but the claim seems more accurate than not with consensus and/or deleted runs, etc.
Jesse_Lee_Porter: Added
chryoyo: I added you to the ones with inactive mods.
IschmarVI: Mod inactive, ok.
osukarui: I moved mods around and removed some highly inactive mods.
Snerck_: I removed users without runs and moved some people around accordingly.
Faulheit: I think we're good.
Trout: It looks like you were added.
Hi all, my perception is that a few of the users posting in this thread are just posting to stir up controversy. It's difficult to gather a consensus on category sorting in this thread when a few users are seemingly just starting shit on a whim. The consensus is not defined by how many of your friends you can get to post here.
Site staff generally doesn't want to moderate Twitch streams, but when it's devolving into slurs about mods and directly leading to forum mobbing, site staff gets stuck dealing with it. It's especially a problem when users who moderate other boards on the site are creating conflict in this manner.
Either site staff can deal with this or you guys can cut the shit.
With regard to some of the discussion within the thread:
We're still looking at some minor changes regarding this. I don't personally think the default state of the checkbox actually does that much in practice, and I'm advocating for changing that back to not be inconsistent between regular moderators and super moderators, which in my opinion just creates more confusion about how the site actually works. "Why is my checkbox unchecked and his checked? What is the point of that if I can just click it?"
1: We're trying to add a "verifier" position for boards. 2: I'd like to add a setting that lets boards self-impose "no self-verifying"
I don't personally think it's practical to impose self-verification on most boards, but if boards want to self-impose it I think that's fine.
I think the mentioned issue of general quality of data is still an issue regardless of people self-verifying or not. Preventing self-verification sitewide incentivizes people adding friends to verify their runs, not to mention that a lot of boards only have one moderator as it is. In my opinion, if the moderation is so bad that you can't moderate your own run objectively, you probably shouldn't be moderating other people's runs either.
Dugongue: I added you since they aren't verifying runs.
Avery1D: That game has plenty of moderators.
Cuttyflame: It looks like your run was added. If this continues to be a issue we can look into it.
Sagaz_14: Please discuss it with the super mod.
bill_play3: Promoted the other mod and added you as well.
Lazar181: Runs pending, inactive mod, okay.
ufotekkie: The game request form should clarify this. I would rarely if ever add a game that wasn't out through this thread. (I think I'm missing the previous posts for context.)
scoagogo: If you do a run, we can probably add you. You don't seem to have a run or a pending run.
Mitsunee: It specifically directs to pending actions so that users know where they can monitor their run status.
Drakodan: The site has a lot of ambiguity with what should and shouldn't be tracked and what should and shouldn't be deleted. What would you propose the criteria for whether or not a webgame be tracked be? For a parallel discussion, even steam has lowered the bar for what they track extremely within the last couple years. Should we track all steam games? What should be the criteria for whether or not something is tracked? What should be added, what should be on the front page, what should be searchable, what should we delete? I'm not looking to be facetious here, it's difficult to quantify. Currently, webgames don't show up on the front page if they're marked as webgames, which these weren't but are now. We can discuss privately if you want, either way.
The mods for the game can handle that if they think that's more correct, or the user can ask here. I don't have a good way of knowing if the user who registered the account is the user who owns the video.
PojeBunny: Just request the games. I've responded to this multiple times in the past.
plankboii: You don't have a run and that game has numerous moderators, also mod requests should go through current moderators.
Weekenders: I'm not not totally clear why you remade the board, maybe I'm just not seeing the reason, but I'll delete the old one. I'm also trusting that you're accurately representing the consensus here.
Slevanas: Seems fine. One mod isn't typically enough, and he's somewhat inactive.
KomradeKontroll: Yeah someone's been trying to troll boards and has been banned on numerous accounts.
Ewcongogamer: Okay, run pending, user inactive.
PerkiePie: Other super is inactive, ok.
Tron_Javolta: User is highly inactive, ok.
MaturedSinner: User is highly inactive, ok.
fawxplus: The guideline for inactive moderation is 3 weeks.
Alcowe: The users are inactive and/or don't have runs, ok.
ZanasoBayncuh: I added you, please add a couple more mods as well. That series is weird compared to most of the series on the site and my perception here is that parts of it don't operate so well hierarchically.
PresJPolk: I deleted all runs by those users because they mostly didn't follow the rules of the games they were playing.
eyuzheng: I added you since the board is out of date and the user is inactive.
EvanGrill: I added you since the board is out of date. The other user you mentioned is also relatively inactive.
KamB8s: It looks like you were added.
PorkinsStandinBy: The guideline for inactive mods is 3 weeks.
HowDenKing: Added.
Super327: One of the users is active enough.
weather368: They're plenty active and I don't think the game really needs more mods.
NaoTheSillyDuffer: There's only one mod for the small game and he's been offline 3 weeks, ok.
RoyTheGamer70: Board was proabbly going to be deleted in a couple days automatically from not being setup, so I added you.
Sacred_Lotus-iOS: Discuss it with the current moderator.
ItsMaximum: 3 of the 4 mods have been online in the last week. It looks like the run in question was rejected, please discuss it with them. Inactive is defined by last login time.
KaiserKreuz: Run pending and inactive mod, ok.
Dugongue: First one I'll wait a little longer because the game has 4 mods. The second one I'll add you, but this is like bare minimum crappy flash games that we're not adding to the site any more.
Dazziv: Added due to inactivity.
gchierico91: Added due to inactivity.
tonic: Pac is the only one that touches that support e-mail. If you want something private you can contact me.
weather368: Mod requests need to go through active mods when possible.
Jesse_Porter: I'll add you as a regular mod for now since from the logs and what you're saying it seems like the categories are somewhat messed up.
muikula: It looks like you were added.
MrJimmysteel25: I moved the mod up to a super
crisdoile2: 2 months inactive ok
Trisepmaster: 2 of the mods are active, please discuss it with them.
Pearstrike: I moved one of the mods to a super, please discuss it with them if possible.
Loki_Khan: Mod inactive, ok.
revolucion/SuccinctAndPunchy: Removed, ok
Lonne: It looks like you were added.
Only one runner total and requesting deletion seems fine to me.
atari2.0: Added since inactive and you run the other one.
RamVal: It looks like you were added.
Corsaka: The implied rules seem at least defensible in my opinion. The game has a few runners and two mods. It's basically their consensus against yours, which we pretty much have to side with the consensus. I don't think this situation warrants admin involvement.
MooseEatsBear: Added since run pending and inactivity.
KevínDieSeegurke: User is somewhat inactive, ok.
Gliperal: It looks like you were added.
rias: It seems like the mod is active enough, at least now.
AbandonedSatan: It looks like you were added.
Kromer: One of the users is inactive, I'd recommend discussing it further on the forums.
kyten44: Seems fine since he doesn't seem to want to verify the run.
Smelly_Mctroll: Mod is somewhat inactive, seems fine.
Trisepmaster: It looks like your run was added. I don't know the details.
Kazumin: Seems fine since the mod is inactive.
Traviktox: This seems fine by discretion since it seems like the board could use some restructuring.
scaz.zaf: Added since highly inactive.
DoctorSaki: That user is very active.
Sonicman2005: Another user with a pending run asked first.
Dugongue: One of the users was online shortly before you posted the runs, going to go with the 3 weeks guideline here.
popbob0: It looks like your run was added. I bumped the other mod up to a super.
scrubcasual: He's inactive a month, so okay.
VeliØr: Read the last reply. You have not supplied a run. "this is like the second time"
7thArmstrong: Added the other user(s).
1-up: "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."
PrinceRallis: Added.
Oxknifer: No runs, okay.
JohnToThePast: A user named "John" has runs, so we're not deleting that account.
Buffet_Time: If a moderator of those games wants to request it, they can do so, and they should use the game request form.
Hexlooter: Use the game request form.
Granolant: I responded in another thread on the forum.
Gustavo.Predador: We've been adding the other games as they are run.
SpicySNES: I responded in the other thread.
That board has been through a wide array of users getting banned for doing ridiculously stupid things with it.
Items in the API prior to certain dates lack certain properties. Creation dates prior to 2016 or 2015 aren't listed. Series aren't required to have moderators. Particularly, some series get so large and have such wide communities that having people agree on moderators becomes impractical. I added it to Super Mario.
A bunch of NES runners have voiced opinions to me that the recently added misc categories suck. Using a debug cheat as fast as possible to do an arbitrary thing seems like pretty awful category bloat, and people get really annoyed at the quality of the boards resulting from "adding everything you could possibly do with the game". It doesn't seem like there's value in these categories other than this week's 60 second meme.
It also seems to be confusing that beating the game is listed to the right of beat level 20. Viewing the runs I don't really understand why level 20 and 50 are a thing, since they don't really appear to beat the game or be a notable stopping point.
The first thing my eyes go to is a category that doesn't beat the game; if I look further I find hilariously arbitrary 1 minute categories. Can we add "beat level 1"?
There's some balance here between the board being what the runners of the game want and the board being something more presentable to the people using the site. I don't think partial game categories are the worst thing in the world if people are racing them and things like that, but they shouldn't replace beating the game.
I updated my script to make resetting easier.
This page briefly describes how to use a script: http://tasvideos.org/LuaScripting.html
