Vaz - dsaber -32040

Discussion of playback questions / problems. Any recording where people have playback problems should appear here.

Moderator: Chad

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Wed Apr 05, 2017 8:20 pm

BeeJay wrote:....This sort of common courtesy may also motivate people to be more interested in looking into games that have playback issues. Certainly its more likely to come across in a positive manner than putting in a snarky comment about how long that score took to DQ.


What is common to you, is not necessarily common to me. I've received many snarky comments during my precence here, but I never heard you to support me.


Phil Lamat wrote:certainly none of the "P" is for politeness


I' m always polite with polite people.


BeeJay wrote:so I'm not sure where the 4 other people you quoted comes from in this thread,


The four people are pp, giro-X, vaz, tar.
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:19 am

PP. wrote:
BeeJay wrote:....This sort of common courtesy may also motivate people to be more interested in looking into games that have playback issues. Certainly its more likely to come across in a positive manner than putting in a snarky comment about how long that score took to DQ.


What is common to you, is not necessarily common to me.

I was not referring to me. I was referring to common courtesy as a general statement of how you should deal with others if you want respect back again.

PP. wrote:I've received many snarky comments during my precence here, but I never heard you to support me.

The suggestion to use common courtesy was an attempt to support you in becoming a more contributing and potentially valued member of this site and these forums. Disagreeing with you, or trying to politely point out where I think you've made a mistake, or an error in judgement, doesn't mean I won't support you in future if/when you have a valid argument that I agree with or if I find someone unreasonably having a problem or issue with you.

PP. wrote:The four people are pp, giro-X, vaz, tar.

Only yourself and Giro-X mention that it plays back to 5900. Tar couldn't get it to play back at all, and Vaz only said he doesn't know why it doesn't play back properly but didn't say whether he actually tried replaying it or what score it reached. In other words, neither of them mention the 5900 score. Therefore Phil was the 3rd person who indicated that it plays back to only 5900 and the score was then adjusted to that amount.

But again, the important point is that the score was finally adjusted and all I was trying to politely suggest was that a simple "Thanks for fixing." or something along those lines to show some appreciation would be a better approach to consider taking in future.

Cheers,
BeeJay.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:41 pm

BeeJay wrote:I was not referring to me. I was referring to common courtesy as a general statement of how you should deal with others if you want respect back again.


Apparently your own opinion refers to you only.I think you have a wrong idea about "common courtesy". Do you use to respect people who don't respect you?

BeeJay wrote:The suggestion to use common courtesy was an attempt to support you in becoming a more contributing and potentially valued member of this site and these forums.


Well, are you sure that people like giro-X, kale, novice can recognize and appreciate a contributing valued member?


BeeJay wrote:Only yourself and Giro-X mention that it plays back to 5900. Tar couldn't get it to play back at all, and Vaz only said he doesn't know why it doesn't play back properly but didn't say whether he actually tried replaying it or what score it reached. In other words, neither of them mention the 5900 score. Therefore Phil was the 3rd person who indicated that it plays back to only 5900 and the score was then adjusted to that amount.

But again, the important point is that the score was finally adjusted and all I was trying to politely suggest was that a simple "Thanks for fixing." or something along those lines to show some appreciation would be a better approach to consider taking in future.



"Tar couldn't get it to play back at all" means to you that Tar can playback normally the inp to the claimed score?

Fixing something after 9 months and after I asked it several times is bad moderation. But ok if you insist, I thank the mod...
Will mod now fix the other issues I have reported as well?
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Sun Apr 09, 2017 5:59 pm

Sigh. I give up. You clearly don't want anyone to think you're anything other than a contrary moaning complainer and therefore deserve whatever comes your way.

But that doesn't mean I won't continue to pull up you, or anyone else for that matter, who puts out comments that are clearly designed to be antagonising and/or blatantly ignoring what is obvious to others or when people have gone out of there way to try to politely show you where your are wrong. A perfect example of being antagonising is asking someone if they're sure the manual scan they went out of their way to find for you is for an arcade version of the game when that said manual scan has comments about coins, cabinet style, etc and is therefore blatantly obvious that it is for the arcade version of said game.

Cheers,
BeeJay.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Sun Apr 09, 2017 6:03 pm

PP. wrote:"Tar couldn't get it to play back at all" means to you that Tar can playback normally the inp to the claimed score?

No, it means he couldn't even get game to start the playback and therefore couldn't confirm that it will "reliably" play back to only 5,900 points. If nobody can get it to playback at all, then it can considered to be zeroed, but once some people can get it to playback, albeit to a significantly reduced score, we can't reduce it to that score until three people confirm that it plays back to only that reduced score.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:11 am

BeeJay wrote:Sigh. I give up. You clearly don't want anyone to think you're anything other than a contrary moaning complainer and therefore deserve whatever comes your way.


You give up what, it is not a fight match, it's a discussion.
Am I complainer for what?
Don't worry about whatever comes in my way, you better take care for your way.
You sound like you're some teacher who tries teach a kid...

BeeJay wrote:But that doesn't mean I won't continue to pull up you, or anyone else for that matter, who puts out comments that are clearly designed to be antagonising and/or blatantly ignoring what is obvious to others or when people have gone out of there way to try to politely show you where your are wrong.


I'm always ready to hear where I'm wrong, and I use to tell to othes where they're wrong too.

BeeJay wrote:A perfect example of being antagonising is asking someone if they're sure the manual scan they went out of their way to find for you is for an arcade version of the game when that said manual scan has comments about coins, cabinet style, etc and is therefore blatantly obvious that it is for the arcade version of said game.


This does not make much sense. Which game? What is the point of this sentence? What is antagonising?
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:17 am

BeeJay wrote:
PP. wrote:"Tar couldn't get it to play back at all" means to you that Tar can playback normally the inp to the claimed score?

No, it means he couldn't even get game to start the playback and therefore couldn't confirm that it will "reliably" play back to only 5,900 points. If nobody can get it to playback at all, then it can considered to be zeroed, but once some people can get it to playback, albeit to a significantly reduced score, we can't reduce it to that score until three people confirm that it plays back to only that reduced score.


He can't play the claimed score, period.
32040 was the claimed score, not 5900.
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby Novice » Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:12 am

PP. wrote:Well, are you sure that people like giro-X, kale, novice can recognize and appreciate a contributing valued member?



DEFCON=7
I do not know I am valued or not. many people does not think so.
but some wise marpers enjoy mine. (they says)
so I did not stop upload.

in the other hand, I think you are "completely worthless. "
just my opinion. PERIOD.
DEFence CONdition
WAR 1<< >>7 PEACE
Novice
The greatest info supplyer
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:28 am
Location: earth

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:16 am

PP. wrote:He can't play the claimed score, period.
32040 was the claimed score, not 5900.

Correct, he can't play the game back at all but two others could play it back to 5900. That doesn't mean we can reduce it to 5900 at that point as we only have 2 x people that confirmed a 5900 playback and 1 x people that can't play it back at all. If all three were unable to play it back, then we could have zeroed the score.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:25 am

PP. wrote:
BeeJay wrote:A perfect example of being antagonising is asking someone if they're sure the manual scan they went out of their way to find for you is for an arcade version of the game when that said manual scan has comments about coins, cabinet style, etc and is therefore blatantly obvious that it is for the arcade version of said game.


This does not make much sense. Which game? What is the point of this sentence?

It's your comment, surely you can remember making it in another thread?!? Specifically it was the Pacmania thread. I was just quoting it here as another example of you making antagonising comments or, perhaps more accurately, comments that can easily be taken as antagonising whether or not you intended for them to be antagonising.

PP. wrote:What is antagonising?

Here's the definition from the online dictionary at dictionary.com:

Antagonising
verb (used with object), antagonized, antagonizing.

1. to make hostile or unfriendly; make an enemy or antagonist of: His speech antagonized many voters.

2. to act in opposition to; oppose.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:29 am

PP. wrote:You give up what, it is not a fight match, it's a discussion.

I give up on trying to help you realise how your comments come across.

PP. wrote:Am I complainer for what?

Continually asking why scores haven't been zeroed yet, etc, etc.

PP. wrote:Don't worry about whatever comes in my way, you better take care for your way.

What, I'd better take care when I'm honestly trying to give some feedback on improving your social skills. Sure, I'll take care to continue trying to help those who want to listen and/or improve their social skills.

PP. wrote:You sound like you're some teacher who tries teach a kid...

If the coat fits...

PP. wrote:I'm always ready to hear where I'm wrong

It would seem not, based on your responses to my attempts at some constructive feedback.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:23 am

BeeJay wrote:Correct, he can't play the game back at all but two others could play it back to 5900. That doesn't mean we can reduce it to 5900 at that point as we only have 2 x people that confirmed a 5900 playback and 1 x people that can't play it back at all.


We can't reduce it to 5900 ok, so we 'll let it to 32040?... Is this your logic?



Novice wrote:I do not know I am valued or not. many people does not think so.
but some wise marpers enjoy mine. (they says)
so I did not stop upload.


I was not talking for your uploads.

Where are you from?
Last edited by PP. on Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:48 am

BeeJay wrote:It's your comment, surely you can remember making it in another thread?!? Specifically it was the Pacmania thread. I was just quoting it here as another example of you making antagonising comments or, perhaps more accurately, comments that can easily be taken as antagonising whether or not you intended for them to be antagonising.


I've made threads for many games, I couldn't know for which one you were talking about.
As I said many times, I make comments to help the community and the fair competition.

BeeJay wrote:Here's the definition from the online dictionary at dictionary.com:

Antagonising
verb (used with object), antagonized, antagonizing.


I didn't ask for the dictionary definition, I asked you what is antagonizing in my posts.


BeeJay wrote:1.I give up on trying to help you realise how your comments come across.
2.Continually asking why scores haven't been zeroed yet, etc, etc.
3.What, I'd better take care when I'm honestly trying to give some feedback on improving your social skills. Sure, I'll take care to continue trying to help those who want to listen and/or improve their social skills.
4.If the coat fits...
5.It would seem not, based on your responses to my attempts at some constructive feedback.


1.But I know how they come across.
2.Many gamers do the same, but I don't hear you blame them too.
3.It's better to avoid give such feedback when they don't ask it.
4.:D sense of humor. I'm probably much older and more experienced than you.
5.I said I'll hear, not I'll accept. I'll accept only useful and right things.
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:14 pm

PP. wrote:We can't reduce it to 5900 ok, so we 'll let it to 32040?... Is this your logic?

Until such time as we have three people that confirm it only plays back to that score, yes. The reason for this is because, historically, there have been games where some people can play back to the advertised score, some can play back to the 'same' lesser score, and some people can never play it back. That's the whole reason why we wait until there are 3 people in the same category before adjusting the score for a game, either to zero or to a reduced score to which 3 or more people can reliably replay that inp.

PP. wrote:I didn't ask for the dictionary definition, I asked you what is antagonizing in my posts.

No, you simply asked "What is antagonising?" and I answered that question. If you'd said "What is antagonising in my posts?" then that would have been a different question altogether, and somewhat superfluous given that I had already given you an example of said antoganising wording.

PP. wrote:I've made threads for many games, I couldn't know for which one you were talking about.

There's only 1 thread where you asked if the manual scan was for the arcade version of the game. It's not that hard to remember the game for which you asked that very specific question... surely?!?

PP. wrote:2.Many gamers do the same, but I don't hear you blame them too.

I've not seen many recently going on and on about the games on which they have reported playback issues. Yes, many people report problems with playbacks, and that is fine. What is not fine is repeatedly asking why nothing has been done yet, given that this site is run by volunteers who have non-gaming related activities taking up their precious time. Especially as we've already told you that it's not necessarily being ignored but more likely that people have other more important real life activities demanding their time. However, the more you repeatedly ask, the more the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome will kick in and the more I, and probably others, will start ignoring those type of posts from you.

PP. wrote:4.:D sense of humor.

Yes, I have a sense of humour. I never said that I didn't.

PP. wrote:I'm probably much older and more experienced than you.

Interesting assumption to make. I don't assume who's older or more experienced as I have no idea of your age or the amount of life and/or gaming experience you have.

PP. wrote:5.I said I'll hear, not I'll accept. I'll accept only useful and right things.

So why are you so unwilling to accept the evidence presented to you that Pacmania difficulty C is in fact harder than difficulty B. That is both 'useful' and 'right' information?
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby Kale » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:18 pm

Novice wrote:DEFCON=7
I do not know I am valued or not. many people does not think so.
but some wise marpers enjoy mine. (they says)
so I did not stop upload.



I totally enjoy an inp made professionally and on a legit game.
i.e. I've watched your Tatsujin inp a few months ago, cool stuff. 8)
User avatar
Kale
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2002 5:53 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Playbackability

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron