I’m opting to post my opinions on the “5 top times requiring a video” here on the forums because I think things can be easily lost in a Discord room.
What the discussion entails:
It’s been brought up recently that HaloRuns could soon be moving to a format that would require all 5 of the top times in any particular category to have video evidence of that particular time’s run. It is already the policy that every World Record run must have video evidence of said run within 36 hours of posting the WR time.
Arguments For adopting the policy:
1F. It reduces spam from fake accounts and fake runners just trying to gain points on the HaloRuns leaderboards.
2F. It rewards legitimate runners with slower times with videos that may get bumped up in points if fake/video-less runs are removed.
3F. Every single run is different and you might be able to get an edge by watching the top five times with videos because each runner does slightly different things. And by combining two or more strats/movements/concepts from different runners, you could end up finding something brand new (and faster).
4F. Metaphor time: Imagine you’re competitive runner in the 100m dash. You know that in practice you can run 100m in 10s. However, when it comes time for the track meet, you can’t make it because you have to drive your sister to ballet practice. So you show up at the track meet after the 100m dash has been run and ask to put your time of 10s on the leaderboard. Of course they wouldn’t let you do that if you didn’t compete in the track meet, regardless of what place you’d get with that time. If you don’t show up, your final time in the race does not go on the leaderboard. AKA If you don’t submit a video, your time doesn’t go on the leaderboard.
Arguments Against adopting the policy:
1A. While grinding certain levels, it is common to constantly reset or not finish a level if you know it’s not going to be WR. Thus, you may get a 2nd place during the course of trying to get WR. But after the course of 4 to 6 hours of grinding, it can be tedious (and not worth it?) to go back through and try and find the 2nd place time in your Twitch VOD. Thus you submit the time without a video.
2A. There are many times on the leaderboards that are legitimate times that do not have videos. People have been using HaloRuns as a means to track their PBs. Does that mean that just because one of my PBs is top 5, it gets deleted because I didn’t submit a video back in 2015? Sounds a bit rough.
3A. All current times submitted to HaloRuns get assigned a point value, video or no video. Currently, that means that somebody who wants to just game the system has to submit all 2nd place times with no video. If the policy changes to top 5, then they just have to game the system at top 6. And if they game the system on being 6th place on every single run, then they’ll still probably have a higher point value on HaloRuns than somebody who legitimately runs one game. It’s pointless to require vids if we’re referencing the current point system without requiring vids for every single run no matter what. And even then, if vids were to be required for every run, who’s to say top 6 scammer guy wouldn’t post this link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ) as every video.
I would personally like to see the top 3 times on any particular category have a video. I’m not sure about requiring it though. If a time is posted (regardless of placing), maybe halve or quarter the point value given to that particular runner until they post a video. If you’re just keeping track of PBs, you don’t care about point value. If you do care about points, post a vid.
Edited by bkpaguy on August 24 2018 at 12:20 PM EST
Some HaloRuns points have Outliers, for example, On Halo: Reach Legendary and Easy for Winter Contingency, My 3rd place time on Easy has 35 points. On legendary 4th place time has 37 points. I really don't think the point system really matters here. What I think really matters to most people is the times that are submitted. I'm all for requiring top 3 times strongly preferring video proof, and for WR most definitely have proof, but stretching it to top 5, is kinda unnecessary and i really don't see a competitive reason to want to watch lower placed times if you have a much better time or WR. I can see the perspective turning from vice versa, having a low time to see how a better timed run is. From my perspective, I would assume everyone is an expert at their own game that they play, and know the ins and outs. but if something that is significantly different from a lesser point of view, Just conversate about it and show video about ideas and tricks. I don't think 4th or 5th place times would have better strats.
I think that it is very easy to adopt a policy without requiring it to be applied retroactively. If a run was submitted and allowed under the previous system then removing it is outrageous. However going forward a more formal system for when videos are required seems like a good system.
ParadoxxicModeratorAugust 24 2018 at 1:22 PM ESTPosts: 1574
I appreciate the discussion happening here. I agree with the viewpoint that retroactively applying new rules to old runs is unfair, especially in this sense. The real goal of this idea in my mind was to:
Prevent cheated or fake times from competing on the leaderboards
Bring proof standards for Haloruns into a more modern age, more reflective of the general speedrun standards for popular games.
In this regard, retroactively removing some top 5 runs doesn't actually accomplish the first goal and only serves to hurt runners for reasons they cannot control. I think I'm getting the sense that many people are all for improving the proof policy system, but not retroactively applying that proof policy to old runs.
I'll provide a bit of context as to how I started getting into the idea of requiring proof for top times. For a long while in Haloruns, there has been this feeling of "If its not WR it doesn't matter." While that works for a smaller community, I would argue that this mindset doesn't work as the games get more optimized and the community grows in size. More runners joining the ranks would want to test themselves against those runners that inspired them to start running in the first place, which in some cases may lead to more people caring about the legitimacy of not just WR times, but also times close to WR. I've had people outside of the community point out very good runs on the leaderboard without attached videos (tybinks96 2:21 Keyes easy, three way tie for 4th place) and they questioned why they were allowed to stand.
Other popular speedgames such as Portal, Goldeneye, TLoZ: A Link to The Past, and SM64 all have stricter proof policies than Haloruns currently does. Some of these, like Portal's Demo submission requirement, make verification very easy but lower the accessibility of the game to newer players. Goldeneye requires video proof for all runs worth more than 60 points, A link to the past requires video submissions and game audio for all runs in the top 20%, and SM64 requires video proof of the run regardless of what time you get. I think its only prudent that Haloruns keep with the times and raise our proof standards as well to align more with what is expected and respected in the general speedrun community.
The idea of using top 3 instead of top 5 is something that may work better. It would significantly reduce the number of encompassed runs that don't already have associated videos (compared to the number of encompassed runs using a "top 5" system), and the framework is already somewhat in place via the trophy system. My only qualm here is that for certain games like H2 are active enough that a "top 3" might not fully encompass the active section of the leaderboards, while inversely games like Reach and H4 suffer from a lack of active leaderboards in general, so a top three could work fine there.
How about we define it as top 5 for the main trilogy and top 3 for other games? I also think that it would be nice to have a 24 hour grace period (similar to the 36 hour grace for WRs that exists rn) just so someone can post their time as a marker and then get the video sorted once they're done streaming or whatever. After all, if it goes without a video then it was only affecting the leaderboard for a day, and if it's a random new runner then they won't have autoverification anyway and it will not show on the leaderboard.
Edited by bhayward2000 on August 24 2018 at 8:39 PM EST
It was a rough draft, it is not absolute. Necessary changes will happen since it got constructive feedback from the community. Things can change. Mods are not doing what they want. No times were deleted even when some said "These are the rules as of right now and will take into effect immediately.".
@WoLfy: The rule wasn't a rough draft, it was intended to be the official rule change. The rule was put in place effective immediately. The times weren't deleted yet because the rule gave 1-2 weeks, not because they weren't planning to enforce it. The reason the rule is now not set in stone is because of the pushback from the community, and as the rule has not been officially changed yet we need to continue talking about it.
@bhay: We already gave feedback. What more is there to talk about? Also, It will change eventually. I like how the "pushback" was atleast 3 people. It takes time to change, just be patient, and the Mods are still in discussion. Even if we were to go back to the old rules, I'm pretty sure the times would've been removed instead of leniency acted upon.
I made my thoughts and opinions known on the discord, but I thought to post here as well to prevent it from being swept away to the discord sea. So.
I think being grandfathered in feels like the best option so the people now, who didn't know then, since the rule didn't exist yet/was not being enforced, you had to still keep up the video for the time to stay don't feel shafted. So now moving forward, everyone now has to have a video to go with their times. I like this because if a runner enjoys to run one certain mission, he can look at the leaderboards and see 3-5 different runs to study. That's really cool and useful.
Personally I, and a sizable number of other people, don't have a problem with the new rule, its the fact that people won't be grandfathered in is where the point of contention lies. Doesn't seem fair for times to be removed when the rule wasn't being enforced and when most people didnt know the rule existed.
For full disclosure, I don't run or have a horse in this race, so I feel I have the ability to say objectively my feeling on the rules without the bias of thinking how I would be affected by it, and think of the community as a whole. I'm just trying to find ways to appease both the mods and th community, since there was a sizable pushback from multiple reputable runners on the discord.
There is a problem that I saw with the new rule that should definitely be addressed though. If we are to require videos on only the top three records but not all records, then this situation could happen.
What happened if they had video proof before, but the link becomes dead? Ok so very important logistics question/problem. Say people are not grandfathered in, or even say a person with a top time deletes his videos on YouTube, say on Sierra 117, there are 20 times, 3 top times, and the 3rd time does not have video proof, so it's removed. Now what video/record takes its place? The next "with video" time/record? So a time that was 4th before the removal, which didnt require a video, now requires one. So the next "with video" proof is #8. What do you do with records 4-7?
It's not unfeasible that the situation above could happen. We had reputable runners delete their videos before, like Cryphone, Dustin, and History, so if that situation happens again while the new rules are enacted, I dont see how you would fix it unless the rules required that all times submited have video-proof with it.
I and most others agree that the rule is a good rule, it's not being grandfathered in where the point of disagreement comes from.
@TheSuperWaffle: Your point about having times being removed retroactively is very interesting. I think that it might be a sensible rule to say that any proof requirement checks should be re-applied with any changes in the submission, including videos being taken down. As for whether this should apply to older runs, in the past the enforcement of that has been unclear, but if it is stated in the rules as such now there should be no such confusion. After all, the whole point of this discussion is to set in place some concrete rules that can be enforced evenly and fairly, and the process to do that is to properly inform everyone as to what standards they will be held to (this is my main argument against retroactive application of the new rule btw, the runners did not know those standards so holding them to those standards seems unfair).
As for what to do with the runs that move up into that 3rd place spot, personally I feel like those should not be removed for lack of video. The proof rules should apply only at the moment of submission (or at the moment of change of submission, such as video deletion), and if a run is accepted onto the boards then the time should be kept on the boards regardless of where that time is placed a year from now. The runner submits under the knowledge that a 4th place time does not require video, and so if they have a 4th place time they do not need to add said video. Of course the addition of a video should be encouraged, but these rules are just setting the absolute requirements and if we define a run submitted in 4th place as meeting those requirements, we should not overturn that due to another run being removed.
As you point out, if the 4th (now 3rd) place time was removed for lack of video, it could send a knock-on effect down the entire board, removing many times that did not seem to require proof at the time (and create a possible situation like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAdmSMWMFOk). The retroactive enforcement of the rules on runs that did not fall under the proof requirements is often going to cause a knock-on effect like this, as lower times are less likely to have videos, which is why in my opinion if a run is considered to have passed proof requirements it should stay in that state, no matter what else happens to the boards after that.
(Also I feel like I shouldn't have to explicitly state this, but clearly if a run is cheated then the run should be removed and the runner punished accordingly. Having met proof requirements is something you can do even with cheated runs, and I think everyone can agree that once the run is shown as cheated any prior approval of it can be overturned.)
ParadoxxicModeratorAugust 29 2018 at 7:01 PM ESTPosts: 15715
I am posting the announcement that was made in the discord here so that we make sure no one misses anything.
Thanks to community feedback and after deliberation between both admins and community members alike, we have decided that we need to reconsider our policy on removing previously submitted top times that do not have video proof during this time of proof policy change. HaloRuns was built by the community and development continues to be influenced by the needs and opinions of the community.
What this means:
Going forward, the new requirements of video proof for top three times and 80+ point times are still active and will still be applied to ALL new runs. As of now, runs that are currently on the website that do not meet this proof standard but fall into this category WILL be grandfathered in, until we can reach a consensus on the best course of action for treating these runs.
Currently all WR times on the site have working links. Discussion of how to deal with top times that lose video proof due to link-rot is ongoing. If you notice a WR without a working video link, please notify an admin so it can be dealt with accordingly. The rules regarding proof for WR times are still the same as before and can be referenced here: https://haloruns.com/forums?t=2
We still want to encourage you to keep providing your feedback and ideas as we try and adopt new policies for the website. We are continuing to have conversations about if and how we would like to make changes to these policies, and your voices help us.
Edited by Paradoxxic on August 29 2018 at 7:01 PM EST