Forums  /  The Site  /  Rejecting slow runs
  12_Kelvin12_Kelvin

Rejecting slow runs is literally the dumbest thing you can do, the person went out of their way to get a time just to submit to the leaderboards. Regardless of whether its shit or not, at the end of the day, as long as they made it obvious it was a speedrun, DONT reject it. There is literally no downside to rejecting slow runs, you get a new run on the board and potentially a new active runner. This happened to me a couple hours ago and because someone is taking the boards too seriously, I wont decide to run the game again. So, dont be an arsehole when it comes to verifying slow runs, theres no reason to reject them unless you're taking the boards way too seriously...

ImaproshamanImaproshaman, DareDare and 4 others like this. 
  KomradeKomrade

lmao the only difference between a speedrun and a lets play is if you call it a "speedrun" or a "lets play"

both are still beating the game. even the lets play has strategy put into it to beat it. so even if your strategy isn't optimal, and you're not particularly good at the game, so long as you call it a speedrun and make an attempt to at least time it, it's still a speedrun.

There are speedrunners that make a career out of just snagging "wrs" in games that have zero competition, thus requiring zero effort. They pick up and put down a game within the same day. There's also some games where just being able to complete a playthrough is a task in itself, regardless of how you do it or how sloppy the run looks. Are these speedruns? As long as the person submitting their run calls it a speedrun.

 
  CriscoWildCriscoWild

@12_Kelvin12_Kelvin Speedrun.com's page on Moderation Rules seems to take a stance on this, writing "A minimum effort requirement is reasonable. It is recommended to at a minimum accept a first playthrough done in one sitting with an intention of playing the category quickly. Runs that are clearly not making an effort to beat the game's category quickly may be rejected." With this in mind, perhaps you can convince the moderator of the game in question that your run is acceptable and get it on the board, or barring that, get them to define what a minimum effort for that game would look like.

 
  ShikenNuggetsShikenNuggets

I can completely understand moderators not wanting to waste their time verifying, like, 12 hour long playthroughs (relative to, say, a typical 2-3 hour first run) that are making literally zero attempt to play the game fast (I personally don't agree with rejecting runs for that reason, though it's understandable), but looking at your run that logic doesn't seem to apply, it's not even the longest run on that leaderboard (and it's significantly shorter than the last place time).

Anyway, it looks like the moderators reconsidered and approved the run, so I guess this is resolved.

 
  SioNSioN

im kinda confused now
did you submit a run that was rejected for "being slow" or did you just randomly think of this?

but yeah the run doesnt have to be fast to be a speedrun

 
  emeraldalyemeraldaly

It should be obvious when someone is at least trying to go fast. If they're not, yeah nuke it, but if they're even trying, it should be accepted (provided it follows all leaderboard rules).

 
  emeraldalyemeraldaly

Like, I'd have a hard time accepting this run if I were a mod - https:/​/​www.​speedrun.​com/​smb1/​run/​yo4d6n1m

And it's not just because it's 6 hours long. Just watch the first two minutes. The player enters the underground coin area and then spends two minutes trying to achieve a wall jump. Once he succeeds, he exits and immediately runs into the first Goomba he sees. Now it's possible the latter was an honest gameplay miscue, but the former rules out the possibility of the video showing a sincere effort to complete the game as fast as possible.

(futhermore, the runner is clearly capable of a generally competent run - https:/​/​www.​speedrun.​com/​smb1/​run/​y67o5jpm )

MooreaMoorea and xenkaroshixenkaroshi like this. 
  SpikestuffSpikestuff

And instead of trying to actually contact the moderator in question, or moderators for a "what's up?" you created this instead and to top it off you took to twitter you never contacted the moderators first. Your outburst isn't justified.

Always see if you can contact the moderators and see what's up first before you make an outburst.
Because they work together to actually prevent this from happening when another moderator spots it.

And who knows, one of the moderators could've been having a bad day with nothing but having to reject a lot of runs, and they hit yours saw where your timer stops, saw the gameplay and got annoyed at it.

PASRCPASRC likes this. 
  ShikenNuggetsShikenNuggets

Originally posted by Spikestuffone of the moderators could've been having a bad day

Yeah, no, this does not justify anything. I still expect moderators to be professional and not reject runs unfairly even if they're "having a bad day" or whatever. I don't know a single self-respecting moderator who would reject a run literally just because they're not in a good mood.

TheGreatToddmanTheGreatToddman, ImaproshamanImaproshaman and 5 others like this. 
  SpikestuffSpikestuff

What so you don't expect people to be human and make mistakes sometimes, even if they've been moderating a series pre-srcom?

Also what about all my other comments I made? That was literally my last bit.

Originally posted by ShikenNuggetsI don't know a single self-respecting moderator who would reject a run literally just because they're not in a good mood.

I mean there's moderators on the boards that will outright lock the threads for no justifiable reason when a topic is going on questioning how the moderators are handling the game. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

-----

Originally posted by LonneYou could also just not verify runs if "you are having a bad day"

And you could also just contact the moderator that rejected their runs instead of creating an outburst first.

 
  ShikenNuggetsShikenNuggets

Originally posted by SpikestuffWhat so you don't expect people to be human and make mistakes sometimes

Of course people make mistakes. But I'm still gonna call them out on it instead of going "oh it's okay cuz maybe they were having a bad day".

Originally posted by SpikestuffAlso what about all my other comments I made? That was literally my last bit

What about them? I only responded to the part I took issue with.

Originally posted by Spikestuffthere's moderators on the boards that will outright lock the threads for no justifiable reason

Yeah, and that's also something bad that good moderators generally don't do. Not sure what point you're trying to make here.

 
  SpikestuffSpikestuff

Originally posted by ShikenNuggetsWhat about it? I only responded to the part I took issue with.

Just to note this one. Talked to ShikenNuggets in private and asked about it I didn't know their method of not mentioning something is what they agree with.

Originally posted by ShikenNuggetsOf course people make mistakes. But I'm still gonna call them out on it instead of going "oh it's okay cuz maybe they were having a bad day".

And that's justifiable. However, there always the other side to what's happening and the full picture.
Not contacting in the first place is the crux to this.

Originally posted by ShikenNuggetsNot sure what point you're trying to make here.

Just saying that there's literally worse moderators who actually don't care about their speedgame, you can ignore the point if you want.

-----

Thanks for actually reading to the other side, even if it's also bad. I just didn't like that there was no clear air here.