Ol'Bud Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 If so, How come we privately discuss some long standing results on this board that are apparently fabricated and not Genuine? And the consensus is that they are so old that no one would take the time to moderate them and remove them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 The rules have developed alot over the past couple of years, pre-2008 scores (or so) with alot of missing info were valid at the time of posting, and it would be wrong to moderate because of that reason - unless it's a bugged run or something not related to the screenshot itself (cheats have always been cheats for example). Lots of forum links are dead too, but that's not the fault of whoever posted it. Personally, I hope people don't use forums and other non-HWBot related services to host pics anymore, because they're 100% safe here. What scores are you thinking of, btw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share Posted December 5, 2009 We have a Team Captain that is going to get around to listing the ones and why we feel there is something wrong with the results. We have agreed to let Mr.Scott do the part that only the team captain should do. Thank You for getting to this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 if the score's really old, we will not block because of a lack of validation. However, cheated or bugged runs will be removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komadyret Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 And I'm sure there are plenty, as interested parties start to scrutinize them. Big thanks to CP for taking time to do this a bit more systematic than the normal hit 'n miss checking of results close to the ones each member actually submit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share Posted December 5, 2009 just as long as you realize that blocking "for blocking" sake is not HWB motto Don't get defensive ,Sir, It would be real good for the site to do some Policing to make sure all parties get a fair shot at points and not just the ones who have learned how to be kinky. It wasn't that long ago that we all read the news here about a member getting a lifetime ban from the activities here. That was a prime example of the site,HWBOT.org, doing a great job of Policing the members posting of results so that there was acknowledgment of the REAL Accomplishments done by Tried and True methods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 I don't really see the issue here... blocking just for blocking hasn't really been the idea - ever. However, scores that look suspicious and don't have validation will be removed. There's no need to block a score that's not very efficient for the clocks, just because the memory tab is missing, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share Posted December 5, 2009 That's not the motivation here; And I just reported a couple of entries with no supporting evidence. I'm not benching the particular CPU, I got a link to the item and took a look at it and now I have kicked the ball downfield to you, You can pick it up and run with it or just let it run out of bounds; We'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 2 old scores checked, screenshot links broken and nothing weird about the time vs clocks, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share Posted December 5, 2009 (edited) That's not the motivation here;And I just reported a couple of entries with no supporting evidence. I'm not benching the particular CPU' date=' I got a link to the item and took a look at it and now I have kicked the ball downfield to you, You can pick it up and run with it or just let it run out of bounds; We'll see.[/quote'] This quoted from upthread is my statement of fact, I did not make an accusatory statement. you can lock my thread, Thank you. Edited December 5, 2009 by Ol'Bud edit for the sake of editing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 :woot: jmke, You missed the point completely. There are more than two posts reported for insufficient documentation. So,your WOOT"" is a bit immature, Don't you think ? And the taking of an adversarial" position with your fellow members at HWBOT is noted. But, you didn't have to do that; Your choice, not mine. I was hoping for a more analytical stance from you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 If the score was valid at the time of submission, then we can't block it now. If you report a similar score from 2009 it will probably be blocked, but there's no need to moderate stuff when there is no reason to think there were cheats involved, or the score was misplaced - or something like that. Feel free to continue to report scores, if we agree we will block, if not just check them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 Roger that,Bruce. Not watching this thread any longer. Good Night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Bud Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 still an immature response to members post. I'll try to ignore you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.