bounty: fix the god damn rule pages!

[knopflerbruce]

I'll bump this. Any particular things you guys have in mind - high priority stuff? AFAIK we updated a few things not so long ago.

[I.M.O.G.]

Looks like all the rules pages are broken at the moment.

 

But... 3DM11 has no rules. That could use some improvement.

 

The rules could be linked from the submit pages, at the top. Currently there is a "more info" link on the submit page, but it just lands on the benchmark ranking page, and the rules would probably be a more relevant landing page for more info.

 

The rest of the stuff that needs addressed and clarified is stuff that ensures the rules are enforceable in a consistent fashion - some things do have to be addressed on a case by case basis, but many things can be handled more consistently if there are rules that are written down to reference. I think Massman addressed some of that in the link in his last post, however that hasn't been published with the rest of the rules, and there is no main rules page.

 

Basically, the biggest problem with the rules is that there are a lot of rules and clarification stated in the forums that are not stated anywhere else, and the rules don't reflect that. That is really what needs fixed.

 

An example of a recent problem that happened as a result of bad rules? John Lam. Submitting screenshots virtually identical to other people's submissions, but it took forever to actually address that problem (high exposure, pro league, WR scores). In comparison, Dejo and Dejo's Daughter were shut down very quickly, because the screenshots looked too similar (low exposure, enthusiast/OC league, no top scores). The rules should be written in a way so that they are enforceable in a consistent fashion. They shouldn't be unwritten in a way so they can be unenforced in whichever way suits the enforcers at the time. Both these example situations are just a couple examples, there are many similar examples, and all of them cause frustration/dissatisfaction... At the root of these problems is lack of clarity in the rules, and it looks a lot like unfairness/favoritism when unwritten rules are selectively enforced. I don't believe the enforces mean to be unfair - but if the rules aren't written, it just isn't possible to be consistent, even with the best intentions.

Edited November 16, 2012 by I.M.O.G.

[Mr.Scott]

^^^Exactly correct. Good Post.

[I.M.O.G.]

I forgot about this one. The rules might also mention something about how potentially invalid scores are addressed retroactively. Recently PCM05 was cleaned up after getting a bit out of hand, once it was realized by staff that some tweaked scores were actually violating existing rules. So retroactively, offending submissions were blocked.

 

Then similarly there was also the CPUz issue, where it was realized 1.60 and 1.61.x were badly bugged... Submissions were inconsistently cleaned up.

 

1. Multiple memory records were blocked from the ranking without any voting.

(because their trust level is =0 due to highly bugged cpuz)

 

2. The CPU frequency records were left to stand. Valid.canardpc.com has already removed invalid CPU frequency submissions from their records page, and the hwbot members vote supports investigating and blocking invalid scores... But nothing has been done for 3 months on hwbot about the scores in question: http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=54369

 

Maybe if the rules covered how these situations are handled, these types of situations could be addressed consistently.

[Massman]

Fyi, I've moved the updated rules to the public pages.

 

1) pretty much all benchmark rules should be up-to-date: http://hwbot.org/benchmarks

2) the general rules should also be up-to-dat, but some segments need more updating: http://www.taiwannights.com/images/uploads/photos/800-456--254-5734d.jpg

 

To do:

 

1) add the missing rules pages (would've done it today, but couldn't access the database to look up application id's)

2) improve clarity of the general rules with tabbed page -> coding for that will be scheduled for the HWBOT Rev5 release

3) backend for judiciary system -> rev5

[chispy]

Fyi, I've moved the updated rules to the public pages.

 

1) pretty much all benchmark rules should be up-to-date: http://hwbot.org/benchmarks

2) the general rules should also be up-to-dat, but some segments need more updating: http://www.taiwannights.com/images/uploads/photos/800-456--254-5734d.jpg

 

To do:

 

1) add the missing rules pages (would've done it today, but couldn't access the database to look up application id's)

2) improve clarity of the general rules with tabbed page -> coding for that will be scheduled for the HWBOT Rev5 release

3) backend for judiciary system -> rev5

 

Thank you for the update Pieter !