Speedrun Leaderboards Discussion Topic (SRL)

2013-08-15 08:37:24 am

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

i was under impression this lb banned turbo but I guess it doesn't? may as well tag em but not keep em in same group as non turbo ones (nico community is bad with this)

kirkq

2013-08-15 08:37:30 am

Die Hard 2013.

Quote from Lenophis:

Quote:

If the first post in these SDA forum game threads is about someone who doesn't want their run up, do you want us to not link to it?
If the tenth post in these SDA forum game threads is about someone who doesn't want their run up, do you want us to not link to it?

If you guys give a damn at all about respecting the wishes of others, you can bet the answer will be yes, that is, not to link.

Whose permission do I need for this? Does one person saying I can't link to it mean I can't in good conscience link to it?

Solairflaire

Edit history:

Solairflaire: 2013-08-15 08:43:13 am

Solairflaire: 2013-08-15 08:40:40 am

2013-08-15 08:38:48 am

Quote from kirkq:

Questions

Personally, I'd answer yes to all but possibly the moderation ones. I'd answer no to those if the person agreed to have their times on the LB initially. Unless you meant remove the post they made, which I would be against.

It's the fact that one person can submit another persons time on their "behalf" that is causing all these problems and fuss. If there was some way for a person to say "I don't want that run put on the LB" after a 3rd party submits the time, there wouldn't be all these issues. It really is the policy that all runs go up regardless of the runners wishes that is the central issue here. It really is bullying tactics.

I'm of the opinion that the LB should only ever remove a run if it's cheated. The run has already been confirmed legit and cheat free. Why remove the time because the video disappeared? As I've stated several times, the problem is forcing runs onto the leaderboard. I have nothing against keeping them there.

Here's a legit question. Have any of the people working on this done any research on what would happen if a 3rd party submits a time, that time gets on the leaderboard, and then the runner asks you to remove the run? Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service? What could they do? Have it removed? Sue for damages for perceived or actual harm (this could be psychological harm, not just physical mind you)? Remember, the runner never agreed to the Terms of Service. This could cause rather costly legal battles if they can sue. Just because something is legal doesn't mean people can't sue you for doing it.

I'd also like to state that I have nothing against SRL. There are plenty of people I hang out with that are primarily or wholly SRL. I just don't participate in the activities SRL has because I don't like live racing.

[quote="kirkq"]Questions[/quote]

Personally, I'd answer yes to all but possibly the moderation ones. I'd answer no to those if the person agreed to have their times on the LB [b][i]initially[/i][/b]. Unless you meant remove the post they made, which I would be against.

It's the fact that one person can submit another persons time on their "behalf" that is causing all these problems and fuss. If there was some way for a person to say "I don't want that run put on the LB" after a 3rd party submits the time, there wouldn't be all these issues. It really is the policy that all runs go up regardless of the runners wishes that is the central issue here. It really is bullying tactics.

I'm of the opinion that the LB should only ever remove a run if it's cheated. The run has already been confirmed legit and cheat free. Why remove the time because the video disappeared? As I've stated several times, the problem is forcing runs onto the leaderboard. I have nothing against keeping them there.

Here's a legit question. Have any of the people working on this done any research on what would happen if a 3rd party submits a time, that time gets on the leaderboard, and then the runner asks you to remove the run? Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service? What could they do? Have it removed? Sue for damages for perceived or actual harm (this could be psychological harm, not just physical mind you)? Remember, the runner never agreed to the Terms of Service. This could cause rather costly legal battles if they can sue. Just because something is legal doesn't mean people can't sue you for doing it.

I'd also like to state that I have nothing against SRL. There are plenty of people I hang out with that are primarily or wholly SRL. I just don't participate in the activities SRL has because I don't like live racing.

Freezard

2013-08-15 08:39:40 am

Quote from Solairflaire:

I do have one question. Why would times be removed from the leaderboard when there is no video anymore if it's already been cleared of cheating?

Yeah that doesn't make much sense does it. When a record is registered and whitelisted, why would it be removed if the video was removed? The actual registration of the record is the evidence, what happens with the video afterwards is not important to the leaderboard.

And yeah like S said, we're using our nicknames to separate us from the real world, it's optional to use your real name on SDA submissions for example. I think the objections to being on the leaderboard is more about SDA/SRL suddenly dropping the news here and saying "hey, we're going to force all of the SDA users to be on the SRL leaderboards without informing you about it". Unlike Wikipedia, SRL is not a neutral site only consisting of facts, SDA and SRL are at its core maybe working for the same thing, but they are providing different things and their communities are very different as well. Indirectly, for a lot of people they are also rivals since they are leading speedrunning into different directions. I think that's what it boils down to for Lenophis and the other people who do not want to be on the leaderboard.

[quote="Solairflaire"]I do have one question. Why would times be removed from the leaderboard when there is no video anymore if it's already been cleared of cheating?[/quote]
Yeah that doesn't make much sense does it. When a record is registered and whitelisted, why would it be removed if the video was removed? The actual registration of the record is the evidence, what happens with the video afterwards is not important to the leaderboard.

And yeah like S said, we're using our nicknames to separate us from the real world, it's optional to use your real name on SDA submissions for example. I think the objections to being on the leaderboard is more about SDA/SRL suddenly dropping the news here and saying "hey, we're going to force all of the SDA users to be on the SRL leaderboards without informing you about it". Unlike Wikipedia, SRL is not a neutral site only consisting of facts, SDA and SRL are at its core maybe working for the same thing, but they are providing different things and their communities are very different as well. Indirectly, for a lot of people they are also rivals since they are leading speedrunning into different directions. I think that's what it boils down to for Lenophis and the other people who do not want to be on the leaderboard.

ING-X

2013-08-15 08:43:38 am

umad

I think that this whole "opt-out" thing rests on a huge category mistake based on semantic confusions. What's screwing people up here is the fact that the word "leaderboard" is being used: when people think of leaderboards, they usually think of something like Cyberscore: a ranking table where people who are part of the community submit their scores/times voluntarily. By calling the so-called "SRL Leaderboards" "leaderboards", we're making it seem like people are literally being FORCED to "participate" and "submit" their times to a leaderboard. This perception is reinforced by the fact that the original document says "no opting out": the implication is that you're participating in this whether you like it or not, and can't opt out of it. The result of all this is that people are, at least on a subconscious level, looking at this the way they would look at Cyberscore suddenly making a policy where anyone who had a video of a score on the internet would have a Cyberscore account made for them automatically and have their score automatically submitted to the Cyberscore leaderboards without their consent. Regardless of whether the person in question would have wanted to submit to Cyberscore anyway, just the fact that this would be done automatically without their consent would make them feel like they were being "controlled" or "stolen from": something that is normally done under the control and consent of the user is now being done automatically, and it makes people feel like they're being controlled and forced to do something against their will.

I think what needs to be made clear is that the SRL "leaderboards" are not "leaderboards" in the traditional sense that Cyberscore is a leaderboard. The SRL "leaderboards" are more like a database or a wiki: a useful reference tool for people to see the fastest times known to the community in one place. Having your name and video on the database does not imply affiliation with the community: it implies only that the community is aware of your run's existence and is documenting it so that people within the community can easily access it if they want to see it. There is no relevant difference between having your run linked to on the SRL "leaderboards" and having it linked to on Wikipedia. They are both reference tools to make information conveniently available in one place. There should be no illusion of "forced participation" here: to even talk of "opting out" is to make a deep conceptual mistake about what is going on.

Hopefully that helps.

I think that this whole "opt-out" thing rests on a huge category mistake based on semantic confusions. What's screwing people up here is the fact that the word "leaderboard" is being used: when people think of leaderboards, they usually think of something like Cyberscore: a ranking table where people who are part of the community submit their scores/times voluntarily. By calling the so-called "SRL Leaderboards" "leaderboards", we're making it seem like people are literally being FORCED to "participate" and "submit" their times to a leaderboard. This perception is reinforced by the fact that the original document says "no opting out": the implication is that you're participating in this whether you like it or not, and can't opt out of it. The result of all this is that people are, at least on a subconscious level, looking at this the way they would look at Cyberscore suddenly making a policy where anyone who had a video of a score on the internet would have a Cyberscore account made for them automatically and have their score automatically submitted to the Cyberscore leaderboards without their consent. [b]Regardless of whether the person in question would have wanted to submit to Cyberscore anyway[/b], just the fact that this would be done automatically without their consent would make them feel like they were being "controlled" or "stolen from": [b]something that is normally done under the control and consent of the user is now being done automatically, and it makes people feel like they're being controlled and forced to do something against their will.[/b]

I think what needs to be made clear is that the SRL "leaderboards" [b]are not "leaderboards" in the traditional sense that Cyberscore is a leaderboard[/b]. The SRL "leaderboards" are more like a [b][i]database[/i][/b] or a [b][i]wiki[/i][/b]: a useful [b]reference tool[/b] for people to see the fastest times known to the community in one place. Having your name and video on the database [b]does not imply affiliation with the community[/b]: it implies only that [b]the community is aware of your run's existence and is documenting it so that people within the community can easily access it if they want to see it[/b]. There is no relevant difference between having your run linked to on the SRL "leaderboards" and having it linked to on Wikipedia. They are both reference tools to make information conveniently available in one place. There should be no illusion of "forced participation" here: to even talk of "opting out" is to make a deep conceptual mistake about what is going on.

Hopefully that helps.

kirkq

Edit history:

kirkq: 2013-08-15 08:48:20 am

kirkq: 2013-08-15 08:46:53 am

2013-08-15 08:46:18 am

Die Hard 2013.

Quote from Solairflaire:

Have any of the people working on this done any research on what would happen if a 3rd party submits a time, that time gets on the leaderboard, and then the runner asks you to remove the run? Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service?

I read stuff like this often. Have you done any research to support your side of the argument?

Quote from Solairflaire:

Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service?

This is practically the equivalent of saying SDA could get sued for having a link to a video posted in the forum that someone didn't want there and SDA not electing to take it down. Imagine if PSY said no one could link to his youtube video of Gangnam Style, but he was going to keep it on youtube. It makes no sense and is not legally enforceable.

Quote from Solairflaire:

This could cause rather costly legal battles if they can sue. Just because something is legal doesn't mean people can't sue you for doing it.

Now you're saying I shouldn't do legal things because someone could possibly get mad and sue. I can't even get out of bed tomorrow, much less make a website. Am I going to get sued for psychological damages because someone disagrees with me on a forum?

[quote="Solairflaire"]Have any of the people working on this done any research on what would happen if a 3rd party submits a time, that time gets on the leaderboard, and then the runner asks you to remove the run? Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service?[/quote]

I read stuff like this often.  Have you done any research to support your side of the argument?

[quote="Solairflaire"]Does the runner have the right to sue the site because they didn't agree to the Terms of Service?[/quote]

This is practically the equivalent of saying SDA could get sued for having a link to a video posted in the forum that someone didn't want there and SDA not electing to take it down.  Imagine if PSY said no one could link to his youtube video of Gangnam Style, but he was going to keep it on youtube.  It makes no sense and is not legally enforceable.

[quote="Solairflaire"]This could cause rather costly legal battles if they can sue. Just because something is legal doesn't mean people can't sue you for doing it.[/quote]

Now you're saying I shouldn't do legal things because someone could possibly get mad and sue.  I can't even get out of bed tomorrow, much less make a website.  Am I going to get sued for psychological damages because someone disagrees with me on a forum?

Solairflaire

Edit history:

Solairflaire: 2013-08-15 08:51:56 am

Solairflaire: 2013-08-15 08:51:04 am

Solairflaire: 2013-08-15 08:49:25 am

2013-08-15 08:48:47 am

Quote from kirkq:

I read stuff like this often. Have you done any research to support your side of the argument?

I wasn't making an argument at that juncture. I was asking a question and wondering if you had an answer. Have you actually done research on that topic to make sure nothing can be legally done?

And SDA has terms and conditions for posting stuff on their forums that gives them the right to keep that information. You actually give up a bunch of rights by posting info on the forums, that's true of most forums and other websites where the user posts information.

Samura1man

Edit history:

Samura1man: 2013-08-15 08:49:03 am

2013-08-15 08:48:51 am

speedgaming is serious business, welcome to community, if you are not part of community then your place is in another castle. =)

zewing

2013-08-15 08:51:03 am

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

The only issue I have is people submitting to LB and not highlighting run and it gets deleted. Yeah it's still proven but there goes all video proof of that run. You gonna make sure people read something that reminds them to have a highlight or local recording of their run and keep it saved?

StingerPA

2013-08-15 08:53:37 am

I just wanted to say that these leaderboards are a fantastic idea, and will be the one of the best things to happen to the community in a while. A resource like the leaderboards will make it infinitely easier to access new games and videos that you'd have a hard time finding otherwise. I think this will help out the smaller games even more than the big-name games like SM64 or OoT because of that very fact. It's easy to find a good run of SM64 on youtube, but try finding a quality run of Secret of Mana. There's one good youtube vid, and it's fairly out of date. The SDA run is even more out of date (which is actually an issue for many games). Now some random person who wants to look up a speedrun can stumble upon the leaderboards and have access to as many speedruns as they could imagine. There's nothing about the end result here that could be bad.

ArtificeX

2013-08-15 08:59:14 am

So, I'm not saying I would ever do these things (I wouldn't, because I'm not an asshole, and I honestly don't even feel that strongly about this), but I've been around the internets a few times. Just to play devil's advocate here, this is what I think will probably happen if there is an opt-out feature:

First lets say hypothetically RunnerA gets a Zelda II WR (that game seems to be a hot topic for this issue), and opts out of it being displayed on the leaderboard. Whats probably going to happen is,
A) Someone will link the opted-out run in the youtube comments of the 'fake' WR (#1 on leaderboards) run
B) The youtube comments of the opted-out run will be full of trolls
C) There will be a reddit thread linking to the run full of people talking shit about the runner
D) There will be a post on /srg/ followed by a pile of idiots making fun of the runner
E) People will go to the runner's twitch channel and troll them
F) Someone will make a joke website called real-leaderboard.net or something insulting like autismrunslive.com (or worse), where they mirror that game's leaderboard, with the opted-out run included

I don't think this is really a stretch of the imagination, to be honest, people are assholes. Opting out is going to attract more negative attention from anonymous trolls than having your run on a leaderboard ever would (You can already see evidence of this merely from references to this thread on other sites).

Also, the result of having your run up is probably something along these lines:
A) The leaderboard is more accurate
B) People picking up the game can learn from your run and appreciate your talent
C) Vague bad things that no one has elaborated on

Basically my point is, you can (maybe) control what appears on the leaderboard, but you can't control how everyone on the internet acts or how they link to your content, because as much as the people running the leaderboards might care about making the community happy, there's an equal or greater number of people who couldn't care less.

So, I'm not saying I would ever do these things (I wouldn't, because I'm not an asshole, and I honestly don't even feel that strongly about this), but I've been around the internets a few times. Just to play devil's advocate here, this is what I think will probably happen if there is an opt-out feature:

First lets say hypothetically RunnerA gets a Zelda II WR (that game seems to be a hot topic for this issue), and opts out of it being displayed on the leaderboard. Whats probably going to happen is,
A) Someone will link the opted-out run in the youtube comments of the 'fake' WR (#1 on leaderboards) run
B) The youtube comments of the opted-out run will be full of trolls
C) There will be a reddit thread linking to the run full of people talking shit about the runner
D) There will be a post on /srg/ followed by a pile of idiots making fun of the runner
E) People will go to the runner's twitch channel and troll them
F) Someone will make a joke website called real-leaderboard.net or something insulting like autismrunslive.com (or worse), where they mirror that game's leaderboard, with the opted-out run included

I don't think this is really a stretch of the imagination, to be honest, people are assholes. Opting out is going to attract more negative attention from anonymous trolls than having your run on a leaderboard ever would (You can already see evidence of this merely from references to this thread on other sites).

Also, the result of having your run up is probably something along these lines:
A) The leaderboard is more accurate
B) People picking up the game can learn from your run and appreciate your talent
C) Vague bad things that no one has elaborated on

Basically my point is, you can (maybe) control what appears on the leaderboard, but you can't control how everyone on the internet acts or how they link to your content, because as much as the people running the leaderboards might care about making the community happy, there's an equal or greater number of people who couldn't care less.

Maxx

2013-08-15 09:04:30 am

Quote from Fred:

Basically there's all these different version parameters, like platform, region and software revision that occur on most games, but there's a lot of illegal combinations, right? So why allow to represent them at all?

It might make more sense to have a separate "version" table, which is indexed by game ID and stores all the legit combinations of parameters for every given game, coupled with a unique "version ID", which is referenced in the "times" table as an enum. When you try to add a run with a certain set of parameters, it queries the version table for a matching entry and returns the respective version ID if valid, otherwise spits out an error.

this is a pretty reasonable approach, but the actual schema of a whitelist table like this isn't set exactly for every game. making the columns id, game id, revision, platform, and region would work for some number of games, but not all of them. what about games with only one revision? null the revision field? what about the wind waker with its tingle tuner? are we gonna have a tingle tuner column that's null for every row in the table except the tww rows? and when a new game comes out with another option or peripheral, are we gonna add another new (nullable) column to the table? the biggest problem is the varying "tags" that will be available for each game. it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a column for what starter pokemon you used for every game, and i don't like the idea of altering the table's schema for new releases or newly supported games and/or tags.

Quote from Alko:

I believe this should be easy to handle. Since these kinds of options (and these options' combinations) are different for every game, they will have to be entered manually. When entering an option, always point out which choices are illegal together with that option. (language=German makes system=NTSC, version=1.0 and version=1.1 illegal choices. system=NTSC makes language=German and language=French illegal choices). My gut feeling tells me, this shouldn't be hard to implement.

a blacklist would also work but it has all the same strengths and weaknesses as a whitelist, some of which i addressed above. i understand that specific information has to be entered for each game. the hard part is coming up with a flexible and robust way to store that data. (another slightly hard part is coming up with a sensible UI to enter this stuff, but i think the database work is harder.)

i'm not saying this is impossible to implement, and i'm sure i could cook up some hacky garbage that mostly works with every game. i'm just saying that in my opinion, based on time spent building speedrun leaderboards with similar functionality, doing this the right way is not trivial. it can (and will) be done, but we should really think pretty hard about exactly how the tagging data and information regarding legal/illegal combinations of tags will be stored. that's all i'm saying.

[quote="Fred"]Basically there's all these different version parameters, like platform, region and software revision that occur on most games, but there's a lot of illegal combinations, right? So why allow to represent them at all?

It might make more sense to have a separate "version" table, which is indexed by game ID and stores all the legit combinations of parameters for every given game, coupled with a unique "version ID", which is referenced in the "times" table as an enum. When you try to add a run with a certain set of parameters, it queries the version table for a matching entry and returns the respective version ID if valid, otherwise spits out an error.[/quote]

this is a pretty reasonable approach, but the actual schema of a whitelist table like this isn't set exactly for every game. making the columns id, game id, revision, platform, and region would work for some number of games, but not all of them. what about games with only one revision? null the revision field? what about the wind waker with its tingle tuner? are we gonna have a tingle tuner column that's null for every row in the table except the tww rows? and when a new game comes out with another option or peripheral, are we gonna add another new (nullable) column to the table? the biggest problem is the varying "tags" that will be available for each game. it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a column for what starter pokemon you used for every game, and i don't like the idea of altering the table's schema for new releases or newly supported games and/or tags.

[quote="Alko"]I believe this [i]should[/i] be easy to handle. Since these kinds of options (and these options' combinations) are different for every game, they will have to be entered manually. When entering an option, always point out which choices are illegal together with that option. (language=German makes system=NTSC, version=1.0 and version=1.1 illegal choices. system=NTSC makes language=German and language=French illegal choices). My gut feeling tells me, this shouldn't be hard to implement.[/quote]

a blacklist would also work but it has all the same strengths and weaknesses as a whitelist, some of which i addressed above. i understand that specific information has to be entered for each game. the hard part is coming up with a flexible and robust way to store that data. (another slightly hard part is coming up with a sensible UI to enter this stuff, but i think the database work is harder.)

i'm not saying this is impossible to implement, and i'm sure i could cook up some hacky garbage that mostly works with every game. i'm just saying that in my opinion, based on time spent building speedrun leaderboards with similar functionality, doing this the [b]right way[/b] is not trivial. it can (and will) be done, but we should really think pretty hard about [i]exactly[/i] how the tagging data and information regarding legal/illegal combinations of tags will be stored. that's all i'm saying.

Da Dood

2013-08-15 09:05:09 am

Dood Trigger™

The opt out seems more about people not wanting to be associated with the SRL community than about ownership. The difference between having your stuff on Wikipedia and SRL is that there is no social interaction on Wikipedia. If SRL is associated with people they might have a beef with, or an idea they don't agree with, I can see them not wanting their name there.

My point is: this is a colossal amount of work, YOUR work, so do your best to protect it. If the leaderboards are being created by SRL and hosted by SRL, people will view them as an SRL thing. For good reasons or not, they may have a problem with that, and that could create even more problems for you. It's only fair to be respectful of their wishes regarding their content.

That said, I am 100% in favor of the leaderboards being as detailed and exact as possible. I trust you guys to do a serious job building it.

kirkq

Edit history:

kirkq: 2013-08-15 09:09:08 am

2013-08-15 09:06:59 am

Die Hard 2013.

Two relevant cases regarding rights with linking to images. Videos are slightly different, but images are still intellectual property.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_v._Arriba_Soft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com,_Inc.

Look, I found a zelda 2 time! Should we sue google for aggregating this data?

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=zelda+2+world+record&oq=zelda+2+world+record&gs_l=firefox-hp.3..0j0i22i30.2047.7196.0.7885.23.20.1.1.1.0.207.1693.15j4j1.20.0....0...1ac.1.24.firefox-hp..3.20.1406.Be--USVmZpg

luigimeister

2013-08-15 09:07:29 am

Likes SoM far too much

Quote:

sorry I missed this. But the thing is. The video game company has the rights to the game stuff/etc. But the performance of the WR in question is my performance. If i soo choose to not allow people to link to it, or etc. That is my deal. That "run" is my content. I have no right against anyone else's run to say what to do with it. I have no rights to all runs of game XXXX. But if that run is mine. Where-in I performed those actions, it is my own performance. This is even the case for people doing cover songs. They can be sued /etc for singing a song, but that performance was theirs and is usually the basis in which they make money (which often causes the case).

But either way, our runs are moving into entertainment. People watch them and gain an entertainment value out of it. Thus my content is the run, the game maker's content is the game. But I have added significant value to that content and made it "towards more of my own." Thus the run (and only that run) applys to be my own content.... Gray issue. Problems.

Here's how I see it.
Full play-through of a game = original music video from artist
Speed-run = Chopped up bits of music video from said artist
Cover = Amateur's original rendition of the song and their own lyrics, doesn't involve original music video at all. (which posting music videos gets you in copyright trouble unless its 10 seconds or less). It's really not the same as using exact video-game footage. In fact it's really hard to make any sort of analogy to speedruns, and maybe this thread should really stop trying Tongue

(I'm sorry if my analogy is terrible in advance :P)

[quote] sorry I missed this. But the thing is. The video game company has the rights to the game stuff/etc. But the performance of the WR in question is my performance. If i soo choose to not allow people to link to it, or etc. That is my deal. That "run" is my content. I have no right against anyone else's run to say what to do with it. I have no rights to all runs of game XXXX. But if that run is mine. Where-in I performed those actions, it is my own performance. This is even the case for people doing cover songs. They can be sued /etc for singing a song, but that performance was theirs and is usually the basis in which they make money (which often causes the case).

But either way, our runs are moving into entertainment. People watch them and gain an entertainment value out of it. Thus my content is the run, the game maker's content is the game. But I have added significant value to that content and made it "towards more of my own." Thus the run (and only that run) applys to be my own content.... Gray issue. Problems.[/quote]

Here's how I see it. 
Full play-through of a game = original music video from artist
Speed-run = Chopped up bits of music video from said artist
Cover = Amateur's original rendition of the song and their own lyrics, doesn't involve original music video at all. (which posting music videos gets you in copyright trouble unless its 10 seconds or less). It's really not the same as using exact video-game footage. In fact it's really hard to make any sort of analogy to speedruns, and maybe this thread should really stop trying :P

(I'm sorry if my analogy is terrible in advance :P)

Samura1man

Edit history:

Samura1man: 2013-08-15 09:12:29 am

Samura1man: 2013-08-15 09:11:06 am

Samura1man: 2013-08-15 09:10:07 am

2013-08-15 09:08:06 am

Quote from ArtificeX:

First lets say hypothetically RunnerA gets a Zelda II WR (that game seems to be a hot topic for this issue), and opts out of it being displayed on the leaderboard. Whats probably going to happen is,
A) Someone will link the opted-out run in the youtube comments of the 'fake' WR (#1 on leaderboards) run
B) The youtube comments of the opted-out run will be full of trolls
C) There will be a reddit thread linking to the run full of people talking shit about the runner
D) There will be a post on /srg/ followed by a pile of idiots making fun of the runner
E) People will go to the runner's twitch channel and troll them
F) Someone will make a joke website called real-leaderboard.net or something insulting like autismrunslive.com (or worse), where they mirror that game's leaderboard, with the opted-out run included

I don't think this is really a stretch of the imagination, to be honest, people are assholes. Opting out is going to attract more negative attention from anonymous trolls than having your run on a leaderboard ever would (You can already see evidence of this merely from references to this thread on other sites).

Also, the result of having your run up is probably something along these lines:
A) The leaderboard is more accurate
B) People picking up the game can learn from your run and appreciate your talent
C) Vague bad things that no one has elaborated on

This means people should stream their runs live, it's enough to proof that run is legit, if not then it's been found by watching other speedrunners run from same game or checking if there is some splicing.
Using mic, controllercam and maybe even facecam gives more proof of the run and the runner himself/herself being legit.

Stealing other peoples runs has happened before and they have been got caught too, are you scared still? You shouldn't honestly, if you are legit and you have showed it already then people will believe you.

Also about this discussion about SRL leaderboards: Idea is honestly fantastic to make leaderboards for all games in one place, it's hard work to go out and look for the best times for specific games, for me I take care of Super Mario Sunshine leaderboards with other people named nkiller, hiddenpower13 etc.

Having leaderboards for popular games in one site is good thing because you will find them, if you want to find leaderboards for SM64 or SMS or something else then you have to find person who runs the game and knows about leaderboards.

I am still open for discussing about leaderboards since I am interested to have this. =)

<3

[quote="ArtificeX"]
First lets say hypothetically RunnerA gets a Zelda II WR (that game seems to be a hot topic for this issue), and opts out of it being displayed on the leaderboard. Whats probably going to happen is,
A) Someone will link the opted-out run in the youtube comments of the 'fake' WR (#1 on leaderboards) run
B) The youtube comments of the opted-out run will be full of trolls
C) There will be a reddit thread linking to the run full of people talking shit about the runner
D) There will be a post on /srg/ followed by a pile of idiots making fun of the runner
E) People will go to the runner's twitch channel and troll them
F) Someone will make a joke website called real-leaderboard.net or something insulting like autismrunslive.com (or worse), where they mirror that game's leaderboard, with the opted-out run included

I don't think this is really a stretch of the imagination, to be honest, people are assholes. Opting out is going to attract more negative attention from anonymous trolls than having your run on a leaderboard ever would (You can already see evidence of this merely from references to this thread on other sites).

Also, the result of having your run up is probably something along these lines:
A) The leaderboard is more accurate
B) People picking up the game can learn from your run and appreciate your talent
C) Vague bad things that no one has elaborated on[/quote]

This means people should stream their runs live, it's enough to proof that run is legit, if not then it's been found by watching other speedrunners run from same game or checking if there is some splicing.
Using mic, controllercam and maybe even facecam gives more proof of the run and the runner himself/herself being legit.

Stealing other peoples runs has happened before and they have been got caught too, are you scared still? You shouldn't honestly, if you are legit and you have showed it already then people will believe you.

Also about this discussion about SRL leaderboards: Idea is honestly fantastic to make leaderboards for all games in one place, it's hard work to go out and look for the best times for specific games, for me I take care of Super Mario Sunshine leaderboards with other people named nkiller, hiddenpower13 etc.

Having leaderboards for popular games in one site is good thing because you will find them, if you want to find leaderboards for SM64 or SMS or something else then you have to find person who runs the game and knows about leaderboards.

I am still open for discussing about leaderboards since I am interested to have this. =)

<3

RaneofSOTN

2013-08-15 09:09:23 am

I want off the ride....

Quote from kirkq:

Two relevant cases regarding rights with linking to images. Videos are slightly different, but images are still intellectual property.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_v._Arriba_Soft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com,_Inc.

I know these were sources, and the issues are around "deep linking". Akin to linking directly to some page on a user's website. Or getting some data and displaying it elsewhere.

I know I did more digging, I also know that since this leaderboard is not designed to be US only... I was looking into more areas laws, and I am led to believe that more European countires have stricter laws regarding this.

Paradox Karl

Edit history:

Paradox Karl: 2013-08-15 09:18:43 am

2013-08-15 09:12:15 am

Just from skimming through the pages it seems like there are only 2 individuals who don't want their runs on the leaderboards, one who has their own leaderboards (seems pretty obvious that they are just trying to protect their website) and the other who has fallen out with a few of the people who run SRL currently (even though it seems like SRL leaderboards are being developed an organised by different people than the IRC moderators??). Whatever you do people are going to complain about something, but seeing as the whole point of the leaderboards is to have a full and exact list of records and times I don't see why opt out should be a thing.

On the other hand, I don't know a whole lot about the legal side of things but this is something that I came across recently which is somewhat similar: http://pokerfuse.com/news/media-and-software/888-forces-removal-of-all-data-from-sharkscope/

Samura1man

Edit history:

Samura1man: 2013-08-15 09:14:02 am

2013-08-15 09:13:46 am

If you opt out with your runs then why are you here in internet with your speedruns?

theunoriginalname

2013-08-15 09:17:38 am

If you have a public video that has a time on it (barring the reason that you think the run isn't good enough to be on a leaderboard) then you have no reason to dispute it being on the leaderboards. If the reason is "I don't like SRL" then that's pretty stupid too, because it doesn't mean your run suddenly "becomes SRL affiliated", it's only on SRL because the conception of the leaderboards is there because it's a convenient thing to have. It doesn't mean you suddenly belong to SRL.

Omnigamer

Edit history:

Omnigamer: 2013-08-15 09:23:35 am

Omnigamer: 2013-08-15 09:22:38 am

Omnigamer: 2013-08-15 09:22:10 am

2013-08-15 09:21:51 am

All the things

Consider other modern implementations of leaderboards. For XBLA or PSN leaderboards, many never give an option to opt-in and I have never seen one that allows opting-out. If you clear some portion of the game, on to the leaderboards you go. If you don't want your username and score/time/replay on the LB, your only option is to play offline or not at all. This may be covered under the ToS since you're using their network and so on, but it's a current example with a userbase orders of magnitudes larger than that of what these LBs will serve.

I'm not trying to say that this is correct, but it can be regarded as a LB experiment that has already passed (or failed, depending on your perspective) many of the initial hurdles that are being discussed here. No lawsuits have developed and I have never heard of anyone being upset because their score was aggregated with the masses. You could argue that this is an issue simply because the speedrunning community is smaller and will create more tension since players are all likely to "know" each other, but that is something created by those players and separate from the scope of the site. As several people have mentioned, this is an archive of references, not a host. You can't ask Google not to index your SDA profile and runs.

Consider other modern implementations of leaderboards. For XBLA or PSN leaderboards, many never give an option to opt-in and I have never seen one that allows opting-out. If you clear some portion of the game, on to the leaderboards you go. If you don't want your username and score/time/replay on the LB, your only option is to play offline or not at all. This may be covered under the ToS since you're using their network and so on, but it's a current example with a userbase orders of magnitudes larger than that of what these LBs will serve.

I'm not trying to say that this is correct, but it can be regarded as a LB experiment that has already passed (or failed, depending on your perspective) many of the initial hurdles that are being discussed here. No lawsuits have developed and I have never heard of anyone being upset because their score was aggregated with the masses. You could argue that this is an issue simply because the speedrunning community is smaller and will create more tension since players are all likely to "know" each other, but that is something created by those players and separate from the scope of the site. As several people have mentioned, this is an archive of references, not a host. You can't ask Google not to index your SDA profile and runs.

kirkq

Edit history:

kirkq: 2013-08-15 09:25:32 am

kirkq: 2013-08-15 09:22:54 am

2013-08-15 09:22:25 am

Die Hard 2013.

Quote from Paradox Karl:

On the other hand, I don't know a whole lot about the legal side of things but this is something that I came across recently which is somewhat similar: http://pokerfuse.com/news/media-and-software/888-forces-removal-of-all-data-from-sharkscope/

Violation of a EULA Agreement or Terms of Service is not legally binding in most cases. Further readings suggest they also sent cease and desist letters, but it never made it to court.

exe

Edit history:

exe: 2013-08-15 09:27:25 am

exe: 2013-08-15 09:25:02 am

exe: 2013-08-15 09:23:52 am

exe: 2013-08-15 09:23:19 am

2013-08-15 09:22:28 am

from PAListan

I have a question about this: "The Game Community decided about the rules of the Game (Version Difference, Region Difference, etc.) and so about the listing in the Leaderboard too"
My question is: Who decided which players are the Community of a Game? Especially from Games which only have 2-3 Runners.

I make an example with OoT any% in the past, but this example wasn't very accurate, because i see that a whole part of the Community see the Wii VC as an official version and not as an Emulator.
And some people like Cosmo tested the ique, which is an offical thing and faster than every (allowed to use) Emulator and the OoT community is very big and exists/make rules since many years, so i try to choose an another example:

You know that many Games from the PS1/N64 era are emulated very badly. There are Games where the difference is by over 5 Minutes or near the 10 Minutes on a 1 Hour Run (Slowdowns, Lags). I know CV64 is one off this Games, which is only released on Original N64 and PC-Emulator of course.
You said that if the emulation is not 100% accurate, then the list will drop this from default view. Yes thats fine and i like the idea! Because It will be very uncool, if there is a Run marked as the "WR" (the run with the best time on the compared leaderboard) but that run is bad as hell and have 8 Minutes of Mistakes, but it's only faster (from the near perfect console run) because of slowdowns in the orig version. You have a good answer for this problem: The community of the Game can decided which Version should shown by default and other things. You also said, that there can be a little text which explain the difference.

Now i'll go back to the beginning: Who decided which players are the Community? If there are only 2 Players? I think that concerns a lot of games which aren't as popular as OoT or SM64.
Maybe the new LB-Forum is a good way to communicate this.

This is my only question for now.
Keep on this work. I like the idea of a LB and it's good that you let the community work on this, too

I have a question about this: "The [b]Game[/b] Community decided about the rules of the Game (Version Difference, Region Difference, etc.) and so about the listing in the Leaderboard too"
My question is: Who decided which players are the Community of a Game? Especially from Games which only have 2-3 Runners.

I make an example with OoT any% in the past, but this example wasn't very accurate, because i see that a whole part of the Community see the Wii VC as an official version and not as an Emulator. 
And some people like Cosmo tested the ique, which is an offical thing and faster than every (allowed to use) Emulator and the OoT community is very big and exists/make rules since many years, so i try to choose an another example:

You know that many Games from the PS1/N64 era are emulated very badly. There are Games where the difference is by over 5 Minutes or near the 10 Minutes on a 1 Hour Run (Slowdowns, Lags). I know CV64 is one off this Games, which is only released on Original N64 and PC-Emulator of course. 
You said that if the emulation is not 100% accurate, then the list will drop this from default view. Yes thats fine and i like the idea! Because It will be very uncool, if there is a Run marked as the "WR" (the run with the best time on the compared leaderboard) but that run is bad as hell and have 8 Minutes of Mistakes, but it's only faster (from the near perfect console run) because of slowdowns in the orig version. You have a good answer for this problem: The community of the Game can decided which Version should shown by default and other things. You also said, that there can be a little text which explain the difference.

Now i'll go back to the beginning: Who decided which players are the Community? If there are only 2 Players? I think that concerns a lot of games which aren't as popular as OoT or SM64. 
Maybe the new LB-Forum is a good way to communicate this.

This is my only question for now.
Keep on this work. I like the idea of a LB and it's good that you let the community work on this, too

theunoriginalname

2013-08-15 09:25:04 am

Yeah, the SRL verification is another story altogether because you're dealing with a potentially large amount of categories - one for this emulator, one for that emulator and not everything is going to be recognized as coming down to the skill of the player (or the luck of the RNG as the case may be)

theunoriginalname

2013-08-15 09:26:08 am

But then again this has already been considered and I don't know too much about that - I'm not trying to start a new discussion altogether