Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Post content relevant to Guild Wars 1. This includes, but is not limited to: screenshots, guides, tutorials, questions & answers, etc.

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Flo » Fri May 19, 2017 2:39 am

@haskhasin
For example like this?
[1.3] Should everything that is possible in the game itself be allowed by default (without the use of tools)? (Yes/No)
NOTE: "Yes" is obvious, "No" means it would have to be allowed before beeing eligible for use.
[1.4] Should everything that is possible in the game itself be allowed to be automated by tools? (Yes/No)
NOTE: "Yes" means that everything that can be done in the game by itself is eligible for use. This includes movement macros (because you can move by yourself), targetting (because you can target by yourself) rupting (because you cant rupt by yourself) and also every other action that is possible at all. "No" means you think a case by case view as starting from 2.1.1 is more suitable.

^Pretty shitty wording, but this is essentially what it gets too. I didnt edit it into the first post yet because I feel like this is even worse than the current draft. If you ve a better wording / structure, go ahead.

There are a few problems with that. Things are possible ingame but we didnt allow them in the past. Coindrop is a good example. Also you can target minipets in doa outpost - does this mean you re allowed to target minipets everywhere, even with a tool? That would be absurd. Also things like rupting 1/4 second spells with ymlad (there was a discussion some months ago)... it is theoretically possible to pull that of, which doesnt meen you re allowed to use a tool for it. More recent, connecting late to an area. Yeah, you can not load a certain amount of packets and have your game load slow, but its inconsistent and not feasible.

Practice: Yes, I thought the same. We should probably create a new account (and name him like "PMyourvotehere" so every mod has access to it), collect the votes and put them into a google sheet without the names beeing visible to the public.
Flo
Moderator
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:23 pm
In-game name (GW1): Hi Im Flo
Guild: Golt
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby haskhasin » Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm

ugh no that's not what I meant. I'll reply later.

anyway that's exactly what google forms would do for us, so i'd rather let it. I tested it quickly and seem to be working well, I'll pm you the link.
haskhasin
Moderator
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 6:03 pm

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Misty » Sat May 20, 2017 4:19 am

Flo wrote:[2.1.17] Should a 3rd party tool be allowed that allows you to force slow loads and therefore connect to the game really late?
[2.1.18] Should a monitor for bonds be allowed?

Apparently these are not yes/no questions? =P The bonds monitor question should be split into two: Should it be allowed at all? If it is allowed, what about clicking to cast and dismiss bonds?

Flo wrote:3.1 Category: Amount of videos required

This is dependent on the categories. For example, I believe pure requires a video from everyone, standard requires a video showing every split, and TAS requires just one video from someone who loaded at the start (if you load so slowly that someone has already gone out of range, your video is not valid). The current wording seems to assume that the video requirements should be the same for all categories.

Flo wrote:[1.1] Do you agree with the way this vote is held and therefore with its results? (Yes/No)
NOTE: If more than 50% vote "No", we as moderators would probably have to determine the rules ourselves.

Did I miss something, or is all of that yet to be decided? You just put that question in as a placeholder... right?
Flo wrote:Sadly, Misty is right.
Misty
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:19 am
In-game name (GW1): ____ of the Misty
In-game name (GW2): Misty Y%@£|*!#a
Guild: Based God Stole My Zwag [FBGM]
Server: Dragonbrand
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Flo » Sat May 20, 2017 5:54 am

@Misty
Yes, you re right about them beeing yes/no questions and I also see no harm in splitting the bond question and also you re right about the videos dependent on the category, I ll edit all of those later.

1.1 is a subsequent legitimisation if you want. Since we have never held a vote before regarding which system of a vote should be chosen, this questions is basicly to reassure we re all on the same page. I feel like I wasnt quite able to express what I meant (my english is decent but not perfect for this more complex matter), but you probably still understand what I am saying.

EDIT 21:23: done
EDIT 2 00:05: done
Flo
Moderator
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:23 pm
In-game name (GW1): Hi Im Flo
Guild: Golt
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Misty » Sat May 20, 2017 4:51 pm

still don't like the videos section... just have people answer the question for each category individually. They can give the same answer 3 times if they want.
Flo wrote:Sadly, Misty is right.
Misty
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:19 am
In-game name (GW1): ____ of the Misty
In-game name (GW2): Misty Y%@£|*!#a
Guild: Based God Stole My Zwag [FBGM]
Server: Dragonbrand
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Unreal » Sat May 20, 2017 7:06 pm

Here are my thoughts on this:

1. Rules and categories should be consistent across elite areas/dungeons/missions/vanquishes - it doesn't make much sense to have separate requirements for each, unless there is something inherent in one that is unavailable in others (e.g. existence of an in-game timer for certain missions).

2. Voting for videos should be done before voting for hotkeys/macros/minimap/etc. since they are related - it's impossible to prove whether someone used hotkeys/macros/minimap/etc. if they don't upload a video. Otherwise, you end in scenarios like this: viewtopic.php?f=32&t=2045, where accusations get thrown without any evidence. If people think that videos shouldn't be required for everyone, then hotkeys/macros/minimap/etc. should be allowed by default.

3. Everyone should be allowed to vote if they consider themselves part of the gwscr community. Excluding people based on achievements/intelligence/dislike only serves to alienate people who could potentially contribute to the community in the future.

4. All votes should have the same weight because of (3) and because lolexperimentaldesigningw.
Unreal
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:05 pm
In-game name (GW1): Unreal Lemma
Guild: FBGM
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Flo » Sun May 21, 2017 3:07 am

1. Yeah, thats how the draft is set up right now. The only difference between elite area and the other stuff comes from the testing period of pure and tas. This will be resolved with the vote.
2. I agree with the first part (that the video stuff might be better before the other things) but absolutely not with the second. Thats just your opinion and you re free to vote for whatever you like, but thats not necessarily how others feel. Also, reasonable doubt.
3. This will just result in manipulation. Having "at least 3 months and at least 5 posts in the last 2 years" as a requirement will pretty much exclude nobody while cutting down on manipulation a lot. I am not saying these should definitely be the thresholds, but we need some (either those are others).
4. Yes, everything else would be too much trouble to set up.

(5.) Regarding that old-current-meta-record thread you made: I see absolutely no problem with emplementing that, but one would have to go through every single old record, figure out in which meta they belong, list them and make absolutely no mistake in the process since noone is going to double-check. If you wanna go for that, why not - I am not going to and considering there are still some dungeon/mission records unapproved from two months ago, you shouldnt have your hopes too high that another mod is going to assist you with that.

Will wait for different opinions or people to agree regarding the ordering of videos before the category stuff.
Flo
Moderator
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:23 pm
In-game name (GW1): Hi Im Flo
Guild: Golt
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Flo » Sun May 21, 2017 3:14 am

Also, I added

[2.6] Should we tolerate little deviations from the new ruleset for old records in regard to 3rd party tools when those werent forbidden (for example distance trackers, minimap, bond monitor)? (Yes/No)
[3.4] Should we tolerate little deviations from the new ruleset for old records in regard to videos? (Yes/No)

to the first post.
Flo
Moderator
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:23 pm
In-game name (GW1): Hi Im Flo
Guild: Golt
Game focus (mode): PvE

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Nika » Sun May 21, 2017 5:51 am

What do u mean by old records?
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Nika
Moderator
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:07 am
In-game name (GW1): Nika Iz Back
In-game name (GW2): Nika Iz Back
Guild: [SenT]
Server: uh idk
Game focus (mode): Speedclear

Re: Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

Postby Flo » Sun May 21, 2017 7:43 am

Well, any record done before the vote.

For toolbox minimap that would be these records (2nd post, viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2004), but it could be applied for any minor deviations that wont be allowed after the vote (for example hotkeys, autopcons, distance trackers... whatever the results might be).

For example, lets say distance trackers or toolbox minimap get forbidden because a majority votes for that. Than we would either have to sort all records that did this in tas (if tas exists after the vote) or remove them completely (if tas doesnt exist after the vote). If people agree to tolerate little deviations, we dont have to do everything from scatch. Also, punishing people for things that werent illegal at that time is pretty questionable.
This also applies to records which dont have (enough) videos by the new ruleset. Either those get removed completely or we agree that its fine because at the time the record was done it was acceptable.
Flo
Moderator
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:23 pm
In-game name (GW1): Hi Im Flo
Guild: Golt
Game focus (mode): PvE

PreviousNext

Return to Guild Wars

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ima Go Farm Now and 3 guests