runouw.com

Alright, fair enough amp. I was trying to be civil as possible with that last post though. It's pretty hard to let that kind of post slide especially when a lot of its content is directed at you.

However, keep in mind that it wasn't just 'i found this hard and frustrating and not suited to my tastes 0/10', I also had technical issues with his level, such as the usage of 'quicksand' and how cheap it was, plus the duration counts being really short on, well, everything, and etc. It wasn't just taste, it was also lack of execution that got him a low score from me.

Again, I don't hate you Supershroom. But sometimes reality is reality. If you blunder on an LDC entrant, you blunder on an LDC entrant. Might as well learn from it so you can do better next time instead of blaming the Judge.

Raz wrote:Harmless, I loved your post mainly because your avatar fit amazingly with it.

lel, gotta love dat phoenix wright

End of discussion, next time everything will be different. Before this topic gets locked, let's talk about the fantastic work of our medalists. They stand at the top deservedly.

Also MoD, honestly I didn't know that you also get a PM when a thumb up is removed.

Edit: Wait, before we really end the discussion, I'd like to make a suggestion that could be fair for all in the future: We have at least 5 judges
(optimally 6), and the highest and the lowest judgings of each level aren't included for the results, like it's done at ski jumping.

that idea could sound good but no, there are not enough people willing to judge

Plus it ♥♥♥♥ up a system used for 27 years to judge

In my own opinion, if we were to try an idea like that, we could try it for a mini-LDC just to test it out. Changing things to official LDCs tends not to work, hence the 26th LDC.

I feel like we have quite a bunch of people being ready to judge if we're lacking them. In the 2nd LLLDC only Oranj has applied for judge before the deadline and we've got the 2 missing judges afterwards. And if we shouldn't find 5 or 6 judges, we can still do it like we have done it all the time. But I truly feel this reform will bring much more fairness and work against bias. No matter how late a good reform comes, it's still much better than if it never comes. I agree with the idea to test it out in a mini-LDC.

I feel like its way unfair and brings forth more bias. If two levels have around the same middle scores but one gets a very high score from someone and one gets a very low score from someone, the one with a great impact gets punished and the one with a negative impact gets rewarded gets rewarded. It's also biased against judges who work in a way that does give lower or higher scores, punishing them by throwing away most of their judgings in exchange for giving designers who don't deserve to win because of their low score a feel good victory.

It's more of that feel good everyone gets a turn to win ♥♥♥♥ only now were directly punishing good designers for being good. Star Power indeed.

I'm gonna get flak over that forever, aren't I...

What flak?

Nah, it's barely even relevant to that topic, just a piece of snark to the new suggestion that I think enforces that viewpoint far more than that topic.

Punishing people for getting high scores isn't okay. Rewarding people for getting low scores isn't okay.