I have been pretty dissappointed by TG's censorship of this and many other topics over the years. Funspot killed their forums completely over the mc/roy issues(mainly). I don't see why they can't just let everyone have their say, instead of ignoring the problems that fester into something much worse...distrust of TG.
Censorship is always tricky, as it can cause forum readers to resent the web site that they joined up to utilize. Of course, the opposite can happen, as far as posts that are 'over the line' ticking off a forum's readers (or customers of a business) too. Gary Vincent stated that the reason that the Funspot forums were pulled was because of business customers complaining, tho it was all handled poorly near the end, and some people suspect that the 'data crash' around that time (which was one of the explanations for reluctance to keep things going) was... well, made up. Hey, I'm not saying it was, I'm just passing along a theory, and, it does sound rather plausible to me. Gary and company were also quick to hop on me when I went to lots of work to try to revive Funspot posts from Google's cache, and I've taken what I had recovered down for the time being (see
this page). The reluctance of Funspot to allow even an 'edited' version to go back up (which I suggested) is yet another reason I have 'issues' with them... To allow such valuable information to be lost is... well, it's not caring about the hobby of gaming.
OK, on to TG. They've taken the stance of having (for lack of a better description) 'family-oriented' content on the forums. I don't disrespect that. But, I have noticed some bias (well, OK, I guess everyone is a little biased, at times) and removal of things that weren't really
that over-the-top. The thing that was perhaps more bothersome is (as Weehawk noted on their forums at one point) the censoring of certain links. Well, it was basically ones that led to my web site, and Paul Dean's. Of course, I don't like this, but, I haven't complained much, as my stats tracking showed that I 'only' got a few dozen hits from the TG links, versus a few hundred from Google in the same time period. And, event tho TG members are very desirable visitors, as they're my target audience, random surfers are nice to have, too ! In any case, I'd like to see more consistent policy-making from TG, and also policy (i.e., forum rules, and for that matter, general gaming rules, like on marathons) that's put up in one consistent place, that's easy to find.
As Mark alludes, any censorship can cause a distrust of an entity. That's why there's essentially none here, other than (of course) what's banned in the member agreement. Now, don't think that that means I encourage overt negativity (and, especially repetitive type of negativity), even about those persons / entities that may (on occasion) 'deserve' it. More on the subject of 'flaming' appears later on in this post...
We should probably start a new DK thread here to avoid the censorship. It is clear that factions within TG are acting childish in thinking that only 'Billy' can possibly be the best on the games he plays. Do I think he's a good player, yes. Do I think he's the only one who can be #1 on everything he plays, hell no.
Such a thread would be welcome, if it's being stifled elsewhere. I think that 'censoring' is what brought about a lot of the posts in this thread, actually ! And, I appreciate everyone maintaining a pretty reasonable discussion throughout the length of this thread.
As I said above, Mark, there is bias at TG, and Billy seems to be somewhat of a beneficiary on occasion (while others that appear in this thread seem to not get as fair of a shake, or 'benefit of the doubt', if there are any doubts). Now, I'll clearly state that I
do not think that anyone at TG (including Billy) is benefiting from the standpoint of a score or performance that wasn't legit - I think all TG parties are fair as far as judging his
performances. But, when it comes to certain decisions on certain gamers, bias is pretty apparent.
I like Dwayne, but he seems convinced that both Steve and Roy are cheats. I'll admit to not having all of the details, but from what I have read, I believe both scores, even if Roy is 'anti-social'.
I haven't seen all the details on the Dwayne commentary either. Some gamers are dead against Roy, and one can't overly blame them, based on his behavior - it's been totally unacceptable / over-the-top on a number of occasions. But, even tho it is very tempting to let a gamer's behavior influence your view on their gaming, it's not fair to do so. I've never forgotten something that my principal (I was a teacher back in the 80's) said to the staff before the year began - he reminded us that we cannot let conduct affect academic grades. That's what the conduct grade is for ! Believe me, it wasn't easy for me to hand out (academic) A's to absolute jerkwads, who acted up and were disrespectful in class. But, I did, and that mandate is one that should be applied to any gamer - judge their gaming on their game skills only. Of course, anyone who chooses to dislike or ignore them is welcome to - that's certainly any person's right, and I 'support' that right as well.
I'll take Walter's word that Roy got the score he claims; Walter isn't an idiot, so any score he approved/witnessed back in the day is fact, till proven otherwise.
The inconsistency with Roy having Walter's support (read the TG world record book), and now it being different is... well, inconsistent at best. Things like this do not reflect well on TG, and, like the censorship issue, can easily lead to distrust. Believe me, I know new information can come to light, and other unusual circumstances can come up that were unknown before. But, the 'score verified / accepted' / 'score pulled' flip-flop is rather confusing, and I think the lack of information on the TG site (the last time that I checked) doesn't help things !
The contest/last game issue Roy has with Dwayne is borderline, but does seem to make sense to me, that any game not completed by the stated end of the contest would be invalid for contest consideration(still good if a WR). I still fail to see why anyone needed to make personal attacks, but it was entertaining...flame away
I'm unaware of the exact issue you allude to, but assume it's about the situation at the 2002 Funspot event. Believe me, I was peeved at this annoying TG 'ball in play' rule at
my first contest - the
1985 North American Video Game Challenge. The results there were delayed at least an hour because some gamers were still playing
Cheyenne when the contest deadline time was reached. Now, fast forward two decades - apparently, at Funspot Dwayne started a late game of
Donkey Kong Junior (a two-player game to boot, I have heard) just a bit before the end of the contest. And, finishing it took things until quite a bit after the contest 'finish' time. But, 'playing on' was a TG precedent, so it wasn't intrinsically Dwayne's 'fault'. Still, this a bad rule, since it's pissed off multitudes of players over the years. And, that's why I nuked the whole stupid idea for my
CAGDC tourney, and said that any game in progress is subject to have its score taken at, or near, the contest close time - it's too simple of a solution, and it makes players manage their time, as they should.
I agree with you Mark - personal attacks are to be refrained from, and in spite of the entertainment value (I know you love these wars, Mark, as do others), I don't want that kind of mess getting out of hand here. I mean, I do like to think of my site (and forums) as kind of like the Fox network - a little edgy, and pretty open-minded, but I don't want things
too over-the-top, or (certainly) in violation of the members agreement. After all, comments and opinions are one thing, but libel is a bad idea ! So, instead of encouraging 'flaming', lets just say that I'm OK with a few sparks, but let's all try to leave it at that !
Yeah, I stopped posting there about a year ago because of the over-moderation.
I definitely understand your position, John, and also appreciate your feeling free to voice your opinion (as in your correct thot that TG had implemented a 'links rule' a while back specifically because of my web site links). I also respect your way of dealing with things - you didn't really rant or complain, so much, but you made it clear that things were not to your liking by not posting. Sometimes silence can speak volumes...
