There seems to be quite a few runs on this site - including WRs - where speedrunners:

1. Have "verified" their own runs
2. Are mods of forum for the game they have run
3. Are expected to "verify" competing runs against theirs

To have the same runner(s) control the rules, forums, submissions and verifications (their own and competing) for a game they hold the record(s) for is a blatant conflict of interest.

Runs being verified and modded by the same tight cliques raises the same problems.

Many games have literally 1-2 runners and 1 mod, so there is really no other option.

1. Thats to be expected, especially on games with only 1 runner/mod,
2. usually Mods are people who have a good understanding of the game, so it makes sense that they mod the board
3. Well thats what moderators are supposed to do. they are supposed to verify runs, rejecting runs because they are better than yours is simply bad moderation.

I dont see how its a conflict of interest. would you rather have a moderation team that has never heard of the game before coming up with rules and verifying runs? it makes sense that the runners of the game also mod it, since they are the ones with experience of running the game and can assist others.

I only self-verify if I'm the lone active mod.

OP's idea is predicated on having a WR being a thing to give a shit about, which, LUL

General consensus on modding is if there is another mod to verify your run then most mods won't self-verify. Doesn't mean that all mods will follow this but it's the most common stance I see taken on this subject. I don't agree with self moderation unless it's the only possible option.

My opinion has already been echoed in here; if you're the only mod for the game, then whatever but do try to find another moderator for the game.

If you're not the only mod, don't do that.

I'm a mod on the games I run, but I let another mod verify my runs. But yes, for some games, mods have to verify their own runs because it's just them.

People get mod status if they're thought to be trustworthy. A good mod will gladly verify a run that beats them.

Lone mod or other mod being pretty much inactive I say self verification is okay :) I don't want mods who know nothing about the games I love. How can they judge a run fairly, and why does it matter if a mod verifys a run faster than theres its what being a mod of a board is about making it up to date and a place for everyone to be able to submit there runs. :)

The only game I moderate right now is a solo operation, so I don't really have any choice. If there was another (active) moderator then I would leave it to them to verify my runs. Though that's not because there's a conflict of interest or that I might cheat, it's because it's possible that I made a genuine mistake in my submission information.

But in any case, inaccurate submission information and invalid runs can be corrected or rejected after the fact, and if a moderator is blatantly misbehaving, such as rejecting any runs that beat their PB for no apparent reason, then it's pretty easy to have them removed and replaced.

I don't see the point when you say self-verification is not okay. I sometimes do this just to save other mods the work. Because I know that my run is fully legit. If there is any doubt, though, other mods still have the right to check out my video footage and proof me wrong and if that should happen, reject the run on their own. Of course I am strictly against self-verication when it is to try to slide a fake run in there. But the other mods would find out eventually, anyway. Whoever tries to cheat like this shouldn't be a mod in the first place anyway, so measurements would need to be taken, no matter if he did self-verification or let other mods find out directly. Also, a properly spliced run for example would get through the verification of the other mod anyway, unless the creator wasn't carefull while splicing. Therefore you should still watch out if something seems suspicious, no matter who verified the run.

"Because I know that my run is fully legit."

... Nobody is going to own up to their run being illegitimate. It means absolutely nothing to assert that your run is genuine, that's what the verification system exists for.

As much as I can see where you're coming from, self-verification doesn't instantly put one in the mould of Todd Rogers. People can check the run after it was verified anyway, and dispute it later. Just because it was self-verified doesn't mean it isn't legit.

Even if the run itself is legitimate, the submission details can be incorrect. We're much more prone to missing or overlooking our own mistakes compared to when examining others' mistakes. Again, this is what the system exists for, it's healthy to have an extra pair of eyes looking at the data because we're not infallible.

Whenever this point comes up it always reminds me of why every teacher in any writing intensive course always tells you to have someone else read your papers - our eyes are prone to glossing over mistakes because we knew what our intentions were.

Same can happen in a run. You can make a mistake and accidentally break a rule of the category, but you won’t notice because your mind knows/thinks you’re following the rules. That other set of eyes can catch mistakes like that. When people mention that having another person watch your run is the ideal way to go, it’s not to imply you might cheat, it’s so that honest mistakes can be caught.

Once again: those mistakes can still be found afterwards. Good mods should be aware of what happens on their leaderboard, so they would find those mistakes, if they happen. Also when it comes to very long runs, then there is a high chance that they won't even watch the VOD in the first place. (Don't tell me you watch every 4 hour video which you are verifying, I'd assume that you are lying) I don't really see why I should wait for them to press the verify button when I can do it myself aswell. Especially when the chance is low that they do any actual verifiying besides maybe checking if the given time and the time in the VOD match up. (which is a thing they can still do after my self-verification if they want to be sure)

Pro tip no matter if you are a moderator or not: Double check if you're submission details are correct! This saves the moderators some work and if you are the moderator yourself then it makes sure that your leaderboard is in a good state and you don't have to correct your own mistake after someone else pointed it out to you.

I think the opinions on self-verification might be a bit too nitpicky. Especially when I see leaderboards which have real timing issues, don't require video proof or "no rules have been defined" etc. stuff like that annoys me honestly. If someone verifies his own run - who cares. I can still look over it myself and PM a mod for example, write in the forums, stuff like that. I don't even need to be mod for that game just to point that mistake out. If there are people who refuse to correct that mistake, then yes that would be bad moderation, however it is not the fault of auto-verification. If you don't do mistakes or at least correct them afterwards, I don't see any negative aspects of self-verification, unless that people with trust issues could think his run is spliced or something. (Which, oh wonder, could still be the case even if someone else verified the run).

Yeeeeah there's nothing wrong with self verification.

I do it. I'd rather have someone that runs the game (me) verify my run than someone that doesn't.

Even if it's a small game with only a few runners, you can't just force verification duties on other runners. Besides regardless of mod status they'll probably watch your run anyways, and if you DID cheat, then they can proceed to bitch about it from there.

This knee jerk reaction to the latest exposed cheaters is getting old. The verification process doesn't matter that much if the run can still be viewed and proven illegitimate. This isn't TG. We're not accepting ZERO evidence for a run, telling everyone evidence exists, but ehhhhhh who knows where that is. There exists proof for most runs (runs worth your time anyways), so if you suspect they're cheating, maybe... show that to be true?

Just reading through this thread and all this talk about self-verification got me thinking about what it would look like if someone self-rejected. I just picture this mod submitting a run, then immediately hitting the "reject" button like "yeah this can't be accepted. There's definitely cheaty bits right there.. and I know they're cheaty bits because it was me that did the cheaty bits so it's pretty obvious. Anyways, rejectamundo!"

Personally I think that self verification is fine no matter what because the player was promoted and trusted to be a mod. If they were trusted to handle the boards, forums, and help people in the community then I think they are also trusted to verify their runs.

Only in a large community. In a smaller one all it means is they're the one who submitted the game to the site.

It's foolish to think that moderators are infallible, that just because they're moderators and therefore trusted (which isn't even always the case), they're incapable of making mistakes.

I had two runs rejected rather recently because I made a mistake of how I ended it-turns out I didn't finish the run at all. Another moderator checked it over and found out it was illegitimate.

If you're the only mod for the game, obviously you're forced to verify your own runs. If there's other moderators, I'd say it's down right arrogant to assume you can't possibly make a mistake with the verification process. There's nothing wrong with a second set of eyes.