why was umihara kawase and fortified zone rejected there were no status comments next to those thanks
what's up with the lilo & stitch rejection tho
SDA Forum
Quote from Cool Matty:
Quote from AnonymousUser:
Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping. And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.
I've already gone over the rest of everything you posted, so I'll just re-establish that neither Sumi nor I are responsible for any submissions. Again, if the runners have issues with the Kirby submission, they are more than welcome to approach us. Let the runners speak for themselves.
How do you explain the tweets TonyOGbot posted? Sumichu is outright explaining why people's runs were rejected, obviously only someone on the selection committee would know this information. And again, the lack of transparency in regards to any of this is stunning.
And why should we only let the runners themselves have this discussion? It's blatantly obvious GDQs select games because of runner popularity and not runner skill. And I'm not even referring to the Kirby 64 situation, this has been going on for years. We should be having this discussion.
Also, you haven't addressed my points about the no-offensive language rule or the lack of transparency regarding who's even running AGDQ this year.
The Dork Knight himself.
I'll admit that I was VERY salty when all of my submissions got the axe, but after a week of really thinking about it (and tossing salt all over the house, that'll take a while to clean up), I realized one thing that many people are forgetting:
AGDQ is about more than just the runs on display.
Viewing things from a spectator, you could say the entire event is about the runs. Honestly though, that only covers about a quarter of the event. What the public sees from the outside is only a few guys sitting in some chairs talking about a game that someone else is playing. They get to see a show of skill, and, hopefully, get some enjoyment out of it. Everybody wants to be in that hot seat, playing the game, showing off their skill. But why focus just on that?
Behind the scenes you get to see the rest of what's going on.
On the tech side, we have people, usually scrambling around wildly with little to no sleep, making sure that all of the equipment works. They're the heart of the entire event, keeping that twitch feed pumping out for everyone to enjoy. No video signal? No audio? Somebody just had a heart attack trying to figure out if a wire came loose or if someone earlier messed up a connection. When the panic baskets start going through chat they have to figure out if the hotel's internet went down or if Twitch is having issues. Every technical issue that can go wrong, from a console not cooperating with a capture card to a microphone spazzing out right before a run, they have to deal with. All of them volunteer to do this, whether or not they're paid. Most burn out by the 3rd day of the event.
Then there's the practice areas. No matter who does it, they've got a tough job. The guys working this area make sure anyone coming in that needs to practice a run can get setup quickly. Need a TV, a console, or an outlet? These were the guys to go to. What if your game is on PC? These guys have to cover it too. It's not easy providing practice equipment and making sure everything works for every person who comes in wanting to get some practice in. Still, these guys do it with a smile and don't complain when someone comes in with a weird request.
The final aspect of the entire marathon is you, and you, and you, you, you, you, you, and of course you too. The social aspect of the event is the selling point for me personally. Being able to meet the runners you've only seen online, hang out with people you've never met before, and mingling with others who all share one common interest is something that no amount of on-stream time can replace. I've personally met people that amaze me with the amount of skill and dedication they put into their games, and I've met other people I wouldn't have had the chance to anywhere else.
My point is: if you keep focusing on whether or not your run got through, you're missing out on the main focus of this marathon. We're just a group of gamers all getting together to put on a good show for a good cause.
TL;DR
The salt is strong this year.
AGDQ is about more than just the runs on display.
Viewing things from a spectator, you could say the entire event is about the runs. Honestly though, that only covers about a quarter of the event. What the public sees from the outside is only a few guys sitting in some chairs talking about a game that someone else is playing. They get to see a show of skill, and, hopefully, get some enjoyment out of it. Everybody wants to be in that hot seat, playing the game, showing off their skill. But why focus just on that?
Behind the scenes you get to see the rest of what's going on.
On the tech side, we have people, usually scrambling around wildly with little to no sleep, making sure that all of the equipment works. They're the heart of the entire event, keeping that twitch feed pumping out for everyone to enjoy. No video signal? No audio? Somebody just had a heart attack trying to figure out if a wire came loose or if someone earlier messed up a connection. When the panic baskets start going through chat they have to figure out if the hotel's internet went down or if Twitch is having issues. Every technical issue that can go wrong, from a console not cooperating with a capture card to a microphone spazzing out right before a run, they have to deal with. All of them volunteer to do this, whether or not they're paid. Most burn out by the 3rd day of the event.
Then there's the practice areas. No matter who does it, they've got a tough job. The guys working this area make sure anyone coming in that needs to practice a run can get setup quickly. Need a TV, a console, or an outlet? These were the guys to go to. What if your game is on PC? These guys have to cover it too. It's not easy providing practice equipment and making sure everything works for every person who comes in wanting to get some practice in. Still, these guys do it with a smile and don't complain when someone comes in with a weird request.
The final aspect of the entire marathon is you, and you, and you, you, you, you, you, and of course you too. The social aspect of the event is the selling point for me personally. Being able to meet the runners you've only seen online, hang out with people you've never met before, and mingling with others who all share one common interest is something that no amount of on-stream time can replace. I've personally met people that amaze me with the amount of skill and dedication they put into their games, and I've met other people I wouldn't have had the chance to anywhere else.
My point is: if you keep focusing on whether or not your run got through, you're missing out on the main focus of this marathon. We're just a group of gamers all getting together to put on a good show for a good cause.
TL;DR
The salt is strong this year.
Dixie Kong Fan Club
Quote from AnonymousUser:
Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping. And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.
First, it's pretty disrespectful to talk about Kungfufruitcup like that. Just because her stream doesn't primarily focus on runs doesn't diminish the fact that she owns a top 5 time in that category.
Quote from Cool Matty:
I've already gone over the rest of everything you posted, so I'll just re-establish that neither Sumi nor I are responsible for any submissions. Again, if the runners have issues with the Kirby submission, they are more than welcome to approach us. Let the runners speak for themselves.
I would like to know who I can discuss this with. I don't have an issue, at least at the moment, but I found the reversal troubling myself. I'd like to talk with someone just to get an idea of why the reversal happened.
Quote from Supreme:
First, it's pretty disrespectful to talk about Kungfufruitcup like that. Just because her stream doesn't primarily focus on runs doesn't diminish the fact that she owns a top 5 time in that category.
My apologizes, didn't mean to be disrespectful. I still stand by the rest of my points, however.
Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.
Quote from AnonymousUser:
How do you explain the tweets TonyOGbot posted? Sumichu is outright explaining why people's runs were rejected, obviously only someone on the selection committee would know this information. And again, the lack of transparency in regards to any of this is stunning.
We explicitly explained this already, I won't go over it again. Sumi and I are acting as a medium between Mike + committee since Mike is not up to jumping into the fray right now, and the committee has never responded directly. If you don't like this arrangement, I'm sorry, but that's the best way to handle it.
Quote:
And why should we only let the runners themselves have this discussion? It's blatantly obvious GDQs select games because of runner popularity and not runner skill. And I'm not even referring to the Kirby 64 situation, this has been going on for years. We should be having this discussion.
Also, you haven't addressed my points about the no-offensive language rule or the lack of transparency regarding who's even running AGDQ this year.
Also, you haven't addressed my points about the no-offensive language rule or the lack of transparency regarding who's even running AGDQ this year.
Who's doing what:
I'm heading finance, contracts, hotel arrangements.
Sumi is handling social media, sponsorships, etc.
Mike's handling submissions, scheduling, and donation incentives. We're being a relay for any communcations.
Quote from Supreme:
I would like to know who I can discuss this with. I don't have an issue, at least at the moment, but I found the reversal troubling myself. I'd like to talk with someone just to get an idea of why the reversal happened.
You can either PM me or we can hand ya Mike's reply here in the morning. Up to you.
Snow Problem
Quote from honorableJay:
I'll admit that I was VERY salty when all of my submissions got the axe, but after a week of really thinking about it (and tossing salt all over the house, that'll take a while to clean up), I realized one thing that many people are forgetting:
AGDQ is about more than just the runs on display.
Viewing things from a spectator, you could say the entire event is about the runs. Honestly though, that only covers about a quarter of the event. What the public sees from the outside is only a few guys sitting in some chairs talking about a game that someone else is playing. They get to see a show of skill, and, hopefully, get some enjoyment out of it. Everybody wants to be in that hot seat, playing the game, showing off their skill. But why focus just on that?
Behind the scenes you get to see the rest of what's going on.
On the tech side, we have people, usually scrambling around wildly with little to no sleep, making sure that all of the equipment works. They're the heart of the entire event, keeping that twitch feed pumping out for everyone to enjoy. No video signal? No audio? Somebody just had a heart attack trying to figure out if a wire came loose or if someone earlier messed up a connection. When the panic baskets start going through chat they have to figure out if the hotel's internet went down or if Twitch is having issues. Every technical issue that can go wrong, from a console not cooperating with a capture card to a microphone spazzing out right before a run, they have to deal with. All of them volunteer to do this, whether or not they're paid. Most burn out by the 3rd day of the event.
Then there's the practice areas. No matter who does it, they've got a tough job. The guys working this area make sure anyone coming in that needs to practice a run can get setup quickly. Need a TV, a console, or an outlet? These were the guys to go to. What if your game is on PC? These guys have to cover it too. It's not easy providing practice equipment and making sure everything works for every person who comes in wanting to get some practice in. Still, these guys do it with a smile and don't complain when someone comes in with a weird request.
The final aspect of the entire marathon is you, and you, and you, you, you, you, you, and of course you too. The social aspect of the event is the selling point for me personally. Being able to meet the runners you've only seen online, hang out with people you've never met before, and mingling with others who all share one common interest is something that no amount of on-stream time can replace. I've personally met people that amaze me with the amount of skill and dedication they put into their games, and I've met other people I wouldn't have had the chance to anywhere else.
My point is: if you keep focusing on whether or not your run got through, you're missing out on the main focus of this marathon. We're just a group of gamers all getting together to put on a good show for a good cause.
TL;DR
The salt is strong this year.
AGDQ is about more than just the runs on display.
Viewing things from a spectator, you could say the entire event is about the runs. Honestly though, that only covers about a quarter of the event. What the public sees from the outside is only a few guys sitting in some chairs talking about a game that someone else is playing. They get to see a show of skill, and, hopefully, get some enjoyment out of it. Everybody wants to be in that hot seat, playing the game, showing off their skill. But why focus just on that?
Behind the scenes you get to see the rest of what's going on.
On the tech side, we have people, usually scrambling around wildly with little to no sleep, making sure that all of the equipment works. They're the heart of the entire event, keeping that twitch feed pumping out for everyone to enjoy. No video signal? No audio? Somebody just had a heart attack trying to figure out if a wire came loose or if someone earlier messed up a connection. When the panic baskets start going through chat they have to figure out if the hotel's internet went down or if Twitch is having issues. Every technical issue that can go wrong, from a console not cooperating with a capture card to a microphone spazzing out right before a run, they have to deal with. All of them volunteer to do this, whether or not they're paid. Most burn out by the 3rd day of the event.
Then there's the practice areas. No matter who does it, they've got a tough job. The guys working this area make sure anyone coming in that needs to practice a run can get setup quickly. Need a TV, a console, or an outlet? These were the guys to go to. What if your game is on PC? These guys have to cover it too. It's not easy providing practice equipment and making sure everything works for every person who comes in wanting to get some practice in. Still, these guys do it with a smile and don't complain when someone comes in with a weird request.
The final aspect of the entire marathon is you, and you, and you, you, you, you, you, and of course you too. The social aspect of the event is the selling point for me personally. Being able to meet the runners you've only seen online, hang out with people you've never met before, and mingling with others who all share one common interest is something that no amount of on-stream time can replace. I've personally met people that amaze me with the amount of skill and dedication they put into their games, and I've met other people I wouldn't have had the chance to anywhere else.
My point is: if you keep focusing on whether or not your run got through, you're missing out on the main focus of this marathon. We're just a group of gamers all getting together to put on a good show for a good cause.
TL;DR
The salt is strong this year.
That's not what this is about. AGDQ is a fine event. It's fun to be at and it's great. But this conversation is one that needs to happen.
Also the problem with encouraging the runners to come forward themselves and ask why they got denied is a little rude in my opinion. Like, they put the work in. At the very least, something public about why they didn't get in would be good. A few sentences. Specific inquiries should be on elaborations in my opinion, not on the nature of review itself.
The submission committee remains candid. (why not just have them have pseudonyms? Like a pen name? Compromise is cool) That
s not preferable in my opinion, but fine. The runners have been rejected and most of them probably understand on some level why they were excluded. But to say, "you could always have asked! Just ask us privately." is a little non-transparent, you have to admit.
Quote from Cool Matty:
Who's doing what:
I'm heading finance, contracts, hotel arrangements.
Sumi is handling social media, sponsorships, etc.
Mike's handling submissions, scheduling, and donation incentives. We're being a relay for any communcations.
I'm heading finance, contracts, hotel arrangements.
Sumi is handling social media, sponsorships, etc.
Mike's handling submissions, scheduling, and donation incentives. We're being a relay for any communcations.
Thank you. No idea why this wasn't stated from the original announcement, but at least we know now.
No pain, no gain
I think they're fair enough points, AnonymousUser, but this is an incredibly busy time with submissions. I think everyone's getting a little flustered on each side, and hopefully we can have people address issues in the future. At this point, I think it's fine to keep things the way it is this time; if people joined the committee under the belief that it would be confidential, I wouldn't want that changed.
I mean, things perhaps should change in the future, but for now they're doing their best. I've had most (or all) of my runs rejected, and that's fine; I know there are reasons, and I trust them to make those decisions.
I mean, things perhaps should change in the future, but for now they're doing their best. I've had most (or all) of my runs rejected, and that's fine; I know there are reasons, and I trust them to make those decisions.
Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.
Quote from moofinmoofin:
Also the problem with encouraging the runners to come forward themselves and ask why they got denied is a little rude in my opinion. Like, they put the work in. At the very least, something public about why they didn't get in would be good. A few sentences. Specific inquiries should be on elaborations in my opinion, not on the nature of review itself.
Personally, I wonder how much runners would actually be okay with this. Mike's already explained to me that often, there's just not a lot of reasons. It's just because one game will fit better than another. If anything, I suppose I could talk Mike into making sure to respond if the submission itself was at fault, but typically it's just game/category/time issues. That's not going to make people feel any better, you know?
Quote from Brossentia:
At this point, I think it's fine to keep things the way it is this time; if people joined the committee under the belief that it would be confidential, I wouldn't want that changed.
Despite frustrations this is causing, if the committee members volunteered or were chosen under some level of assumed confidentiality (why that would be, I can't possibly imagine), then they deserve to not have that contract broken. However, when this is all brought back up during feedback after the marathon, I think people are going to expect an answer on how it will be better next time, right then.
Quote from Brossentia:
I think they're fair enough points, AnonymousUser, but this is an incredibly busy time with submissions. I think everyone's getting a little flustered on each side, and hopefully we can have people address issues in the future. At this point, I think it's fine to keep things the way it is this time; if people joined the committee under the belief that it would be confidential, I wouldn't want that changed.
I mean, things perhaps should change in the future, but for now they're doing their best. I've had most (or all) of my runs rejected, and that's fine; I know there are reasons, and I trust them to make those decisions.
I mean, things perhaps should change in the future, but for now they're doing their best. I've had most (or all) of my runs rejected, and that's fine; I know there are reasons, and I trust them to make those decisions.
I understand that there's a bit of frustration on both sides, I get that. My main issue is the lack of any and all transparency from GDQ. We're only just learning who's in charge of running the marathon this year, that's basic knowledge that should have been stated from the start. Same applies to the selection committee. I agree with what moofinmoofin said, the reasons for rejections should be public information, even it it is just a small blurb. I had to tweet to Sumi just to know why my games got rejected. I shouldn't have to do that, should just be on the site itself.
And I don't have faith in the selection committee when I know runs are selected based on runner popularity, and how much money they'll bring in instead of runs being selected based on if they're cool speedruns or not. It's why marathons like the European Speedster Assembly are more popular with runners, they actually focus on showcasing the speedruns instead of just being about the charity.
Also, what happened to switching up the charities every AGDQ? I wasn't around when GDQs did different charities other than MSF and PCF so I'm not sure how you guys decided on what charity to raise money for. But many people think PCF isn't that good of a charity and would prefer AGDQ raise money for different causes instead of simply awareness.
Menu Faster!
I don't understand why everyone even bothers asking why their runs were rejected and then complaining no reason was given to them.
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
And why would people want to be known for being a member on the GDQ game committee when all they're going to experience from it is harassment wherever they go.
Also why do you care if someone on the committee isn't a "speedrunner" you play a video game in one sitting with a timer going congratulations.
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
And why would people want to be known for being a member on the GDQ game committee when all they're going to experience from it is harassment wherever they go.
Also why do you care if someone on the committee isn't a "speedrunner" you play a video game in one sitting with a timer going congratulations.
I think people should look at GDQ submissions like submitting a job résumé. Regarding both the content of the submission and their expectations of getting accepted or rejected. Employers aren't going to give a reason to every person they reject, and neither should the GDQ staff.
Also, GDQ is primarily about raising money for the charity, whether you like it or not. If you want to organize a marathon to showcase speedruns, no one is stopping you.
Also, GDQ is primarily about raising money for the charity, whether you like it or not. If you want to organize a marathon to showcase speedruns, no one is stopping you.
Snow Problem
Quote from Cool Matty:
Personally, I wonder how much runners would actually be okay with this. Mike's already explained to me that often, there's just not a lot of reasons. It's just because one game will fit better than another. If anything, I suppose I could talk Mike into making sure to respond if the submission itself was at fault, but typically it's just game/category/time issues. That's not going to make people feel any better, you know?
I think it would be a good start. Saying the game is too long or short is already super nice. Saying the category wasn't what you're looking for works nicely too, given that it tells a community that their game is still valued and can work in the marathon, but just not in that specific context. But at the end of the day, beyond all the caveats, universally, any more information is appreciated. Greatly.
Given the candid nature of the committee, anything more you can say publicly needs to be said.
It's not a thing where it's like, "What good would it do?" but it's a disservice not to in my opinion.
No pain, no gain
Quote from Caerulius:
Despite frustrations this is causing, if the committee members volunteered or were chosen under some level of assumed confidentiality (why that would be, I can't possibly imagine), then they deserve to not have that contract broken. However, when this is all brought back up during feedback after the marathon, I think people are going to expect an answer on how it will be better next time, right then.
And I think discussing that is reasonable. However, I think we also need to realize that people have had some extreme harassment for being involved in these events; I know there have been death threats just for game selection. It's good to bring up, but sometimes people get a little too dedicated to a run they want in the marathon.
Quote from AnonymousUser:
And I don't have faith in the selection committee when I know runs are selected based on runner popularity, and how much money they'll bring in instead of runs being selected based on if they're cool speedruns or not. It's why marathons like the European Speedster Assembly are more popular with runners, they actually focus on showcasing the speedruns instead of just being about the charity.
Yeah, that's a bit of a sticky point. I think the purpose of GDQ events has evolved; it started as a speedrunning event that involved charity, but it's become much more centered around raising money. I don't think that's necessarily bad; the event does some amazing fundraising for charity. The problem comes with wanting to focus on both speedrunning and charity--when one takes priority, the other is disappointed. I think there's still plenty of give and take, but it's difficult to strike a balance. How many unknown runners can you have while hoping people will keep watching? How many popular runners can you have before you disappoint every other runner? Frankly, I have no clue.
Quote:
Also, what happened to switching up the charities every AGDQ? I wasn't around when GDQs did different charities other than MSF and PCF so I'm not sure how you guys decided on what charity to raise money for. But many people think PCF isn't that good of a charity and would prefer AGDQ raise money for different causes instead of simply awareness.
Basically, PCF has helped GDQ grow much faster than it ever could have. MSF did the same with SGDQ. They switched charities many times because, well, the charities showed little to no support back. It's hard to go back to a time when the charity ignores the event.
Quote from Rosael:
I don't understand why everyone even bothers asking why their runs were rejected and then complaining no reason was given to them.
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
And why would people want to be known for being a member on the GDQ game committee when all they're going to experience from it is harassment wherever they go.
Also why do you care if someone on the committee isn't a "speedrunner" you play a video game in one sitting with a timer going congratulations.
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
And why would people want to be known for being a member on the GDQ game committee when all they're going to experience from it is harassment wherever they go.
Also why do you care if someone on the committee isn't a "speedrunner" you play a video game in one sitting with a timer going congratulations.
In some cases it's because their time wasn't in a good enough spot for them to accept, but they don't know that until they ask. I'd want to know so that I can push my game further to get it into the next event.
I really don't think this mysterious "shadow committee" is nearly as insidious as people are implying.
Mike has always had last call on what games get in, but consulted some people on different games for counsel. He has avoided naming who he counsels because ultimately, he has last call on what gets in, and acts as the figure to which all criticism can be channeled.
I guess the marathon being more competitive and Mike being less visible this year has led to this committee suddenly becoming more of a target. I suppose discussion can be held as to whether or not this committee should be public knowledge moving forward, but personally, I don't really care who they are and don't feel the need to trouble each and every person who may or may not have had a hand in a decision.
Mike has always had last call on what games get in, but consulted some people on different games for counsel. He has avoided naming who he counsels because ultimately, he has last call on what gets in, and acts as the figure to which all criticism can be channeled.
I guess the marathon being more competitive and Mike being less visible this year has led to this committee suddenly becoming more of a target. I suppose discussion can be held as to whether or not this committee should be public knowledge moving forward, but personally, I don't really care who they are and don't feel the need to trouble each and every person who may or may not have had a hand in a decision.
Quote from AnonymousUser:
We're only just learning who's in charge of running the marathon this year, that's basic knowledge that should have been stated from the start.
Just wanted to throw this link out there, has a bit of information pertaining to that: https://forum.speeddemosarchive.com/post/agdq_2016_informationdirectory_thread.html.
Quote from AnonymousUser:
And I don't have faith in the selection committee when I know runs are selected based on runner popularity, and how much money they'll bring in instead of runs being selected based on if they're cool speedruns or not.
Yeah, it's difficult, but it's not impossible. I had under 500 followers and got into this past SGDQ with an extremely obscure 1999 FPS game called The Wheel of Time. It took a lot of work to get in - a year of running the game, performing it in ten online marathons, etc. Difficult, yeah, but it has definitely happened for quite a few people.
Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.
Quote from AnonymousUser:
And I don't have faith in the selection committee when I know runs are selected based on runner popularity, and how much money they'll bring in instead of runs being selected based on if they're cool speedruns or not. It's why marathons like the European Speedster Assembly are more popular with runners, they actually focus on showcasing the speedruns instead of just being about the charity.
This IS a charity event. ESA and GDQ are not equivalent events. This event was started for the purpose of speedrunners raising money for a good cause. ESA is more of just a hang-out with runners. There's nothing wrong with that, but that's the point. We expressly chose to support charities, that's our cause. If you want a speedrunner get-together, go start one! They're happening all the time, and I've personally assisted with advice and suggestions on how.
Everyone loved the appearance of TASBlock, yet much of that was as far from speedrunning as you can get. Tetris was also a fantastic hit, two events in a row. We'll always have a speedrunner focus, and that's why 98% of our schedule is speedruns.
Quote:
Also, what happened to switching up the charities every AGDQ? I wasn't around when GDQs did different charities other than MSF and PCF so I'm not sure how you guys decided on what charity to raise money for. But many people think PCF isn't that good of a charity and would prefer AGDQ raise money for different causes instead of simply awareness.
I don't know where you got the idea AGDQ was switching every event. GDQ switches charities when there's a reason to. Originally, it was because the charities we picked offered no support. We're aware of the PCF criticism, but they were chosen for this year a long, long time ago. They've been fantastic to this community, helping it grow when no other charity would. We'll have a discussion about future charities after AGDQ. We were not prepared to have such a discussion until Mike was back in full capacity, and he should be okay to do so after AGDQ.
Quote from Rosael:
I don't understand why everyone even bothers asking why their runs were rejected and then complaining no reason was given to them.
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
Its such a waste of time to type out a reason as to why each and every run got rejected, and if they did give you a reason are you going to really be happy with it?
In my case I'd like to know so I can adjust my submissions next time. I'm sure there are multiple other reasons for other people too. Regardless, if typing a couple sentences is such a chore, I don't know why they'd even be on selection committee in the first place.