Request for Transparency

[MessengerOfDreams]

Also, if we're gonna talk about transparency, BY, it's very clear that these posts you have consistently made here and in the QM incident, have been aimed at one person consistently, and I personally don't care for it.

[nin10mode]

As someone largely disconnected from LDing at the moment, I don't really see a problem testing new methods.

If you don't mind longer judging periods (and I mean much longer unless we set up chats and schedule times to make sure everyone's on the same page because lord knows simply PMing each other gets messy), having a communicating judging panel is certainly feasible.

Or we could try making anonymous entry a standard if you don't mind quiet LDCs.

We could even give Shroom's system a go, though it doesn't seem to help him in this particular case.

Heck, we could try having just the host judge, because having a host entrant has always kinda bothered me.



...all that said, it's easy to pick up on imaginary things if you're actively looking for them.

[Supershroom]

I don't see why the host shouldn't be allowed to enter. If this was stated, it would strongly restrict the circle of potential hosts.

Generally I feel like it's not the problem of the system but the problem of the people being involved into it, but exactly this is where BY's idea can help a lot. The judges shouldn't tell the exact scores, but they should tell their main concerns and reasons for deducts and their general assessments and some stats of their tables such as highest score, number of 16's / 15's and such, so they can clarify each other if a part of a level is really frustrating or not, or if there's one more trick than they believe, and if they're indeed too strict or not. I 100%ly agree on this, it's totally worth the extra waiting time.

Also every judge should make a post in the Judging Style topic. Even if the same things are repeated again and again, it helps a lot to those who wonder how to get higher scores from specific judges.

[Harmless]

Also every judge should make a post in the Judging Style topic. Even if the same things are repeated again and again, it helps a lot to those who wonder how to get higher scores from specific judges.

Even though it's in the judges's best interest to judge objectively, okay.

The best thing to do to obtain higher scores is to listen to the things that went wrong in your level, really. And, of course, keep what happens right. If anything that's what we've been doing for 29 LDC's. In fact, I don't really remember any major incidents where the judgings have been called into question. And of course I would be lying here. But let's not talk about that, okay? Point is, it's been working well, and isn't broke. Don't fix what isn't broke.

[-BY]

The best thing to do to obtain higher scores is to listen to the things that went wrong in your level, really. And, of course, keep what happens right. If anything that's what we've been doing for 29 LDC. In fact, I don't really remember any major incidents where the judgings have been called into question.

Problem isn't the problem that you disliked specific things, but rather if it's questionable how many points one reducts for these. And that's where talking to other judges comes in handy. Especially for people who seem to get frustrated easily and feel like turning down an entire level, often way beyond objectivity.

[Harmless]

I would reduce tons of points for an untested, very unforgiving wing-cap speedrunning segment. Let's not forget the forced damage from badly positioned rotating platforms, a cheap bottomless pit that gave me a headache, background-tiles merging with the front-tiles and/or the background causing confusion in the level, and some red block challenges I could care less about because they're so ♥♥♥♥ glitchy.

I think you underestimate the amount of bugs and unenjoyable aspects in Shroom's level.

[-BY]

I would reduce tons of points for an untested, very unforgiving wing-cap speedrunning segment. Let's not forget the forced damage from badly positioned rotating platforms, a cheap bottomless pit that gave me a headache, background-tiles merging with the front-tiles and/or the background causing confusion in the level, and some red block challenges I could care less about because they're so ♥♥♥♥ glitchy.

I think you underestimate the amount of bugs and unenjoyable aspects in Shroom's level.

Thing is. I'm not dismissing the good things either. And as long as the good aspects overweight the bad ones, it's more than questionable if a level should lose that much points. Not trying to turn down mega's level now. But it did in fact only better, because it simply did nothing outstanding good, nor doing too much things bad. The judgings in the most recent LDC's kind of tell the level designer, to avoid going out of the box and keep going for the same uniform methods. It's both motivation and inspiration killing to see that happen on this scale. Also not sure why people keep thinking that I'm directing this only to you, Harmless.

Also, if we're gonna talk about transparency, BY, it's very clear that these posts you have consistently made here and in the QM incident, have been aimed at one person consistently, and I personally don't care for it.

The QM accident was caused by one person. So why should I direct it to multiple people? I'm generally having multiple people and LDC's in mind, when adressing my issues. My main intention of this topic is to, guess what, make a positive change to the current system. I am and was not the only one, feeling that things are off with the judging system on this site. And the purpose of this topic is to solely offer a possible solution for it. In the end it's up to you guys, if you want to go for it or not. But at least, I'm actually trying to do something for it, instead of clinging to the past solely, while letting my ignorance blinding me.

You wouldn't ever hear a word about me, regarding these things, if I wouldn't actually care. I don't know what you think about me. But it's by now certainly a wrong picture. (This is also adressed to the LDC posts you directed towards me, trying to predict reactions and whatnot.)

[Harmless]

Thing is. I'm not dismissing the good things either. And as long as the good aspects overweight the bad ones, it's more than questionable if a level should lose that much points. Not trying to turn down mega's level now. But it did in fact only better, because it simply did nothing outstanding good, nor doing too much things bad. The judgings in the most recent LDC's kind of tell the level designer, to avoid going out of the box and keep going for the same uniform methods. It's both motivation and inspiration killing to see that happen on this scale. Also not sure why people keep thinking that I'm directing this only to you, Harmless.

Oh, whoops. Sorry, I wasn't under the impression that you hated my guts or anything, I was just feeling a little annoyed and rattled from the incident over the 29th LDC topic. I don't think this has anything to do with the quote museum, as this sort of topic has been in debate regarding the judging panel and system.

I would disagree that the recent judgings promoted uncreative levels - In fact, there were plenty of point reduction for being too basic with platforming, for having uncreative level design (singerboy41's level for example, though that might be too obvious), etc. Personally I felt ChaosYoshi hit it out of the park execution and conceptually wise, and a few other judges agreed conceptually wise, but apparently none of them agreed execution wise.

Which makes me feel like if we discussed CY's level and asked eachother 'is this part really forced damage/an execution error?', then maybe we could've done judgings better. But hey, live and learn I guess. As stated earlier, I do like your suggestion of having the judging the panel stay in contact with eachother.

My main intention of this topic is to, guess what, make a positive change to the current system. I am and was not the only one, feeling that things are off with the judging system on this site. And the purpose of this topic is to solely offer a possible solution for it. In the end it's up to you guys, if you want to go for it or not. But at least, I'm actually trying to do something for it, instead of clinging to the past solely, while letting my ignorance blinding me.

You wouldn't ever hear a word about me, regarding these things, if I wouldn't actually care. I don't know what you think about me. But it's by now certainly a wrong picture. (This is also adressed to the LDC posts you directed towards me, trying to predict reactions and whatnot.)

Well it wasn't bad. If it's been going on for solid years without much complaints (until now), then I feel like it's not really something that broken as we make it out to be. I'm by no doubt saying that you shouldn't care and not suggest positive changes, but we gotta make sure what you're saying makes sense, and notice if there even is a real issue in the system.

Because there's been constant complaints ever since the 27th LDC regarding the judging panel, maybe there is a small issue (albeit most of the complaining came from one Supershroom). I have noticed that judgings tend to get quite varied here and there - one level might have a 17.5 as well as a 9.25. So while I don't feel like we should take out the genuine opinions of the judges and how each individually feels about each level, there should be more communication between them so they can have a better grasp of the level. This can help them fix anything they've missed.

tl;dr I like your suggestion regarding communication between the judges, but as for the overall system I think it's still okay.

[-BY]

Poll is added. If people can agree on this I'd kind of like this to take effect in the next LDC already. After all there are no major changes to be made.

[MessengerOfDreams]

This post by MessengerOfDreams was thumbed up by:

Oranjui (May 25th, 2015, 9:48 am)