We're going to be issuing bans for users who submit fake runs to "test" moderators. I see this behavior as a detriment to the quality of the site's leaderboards and to the people moderating the site. Letting a few people get by doing it would just encourage more people to engage in this behavior. If people do it on an alt account and we find out about it, we're going to issue a ban on the main account.

I don't wholly disagree with sentiments of encouraging people to be more thorough with moderating, but I find "testing moderators" to be a highly detrimental way to go about it.

I'm aware a rules page would help clarify the expectations. I also think that the lack of a formal rules page doesn't mean people can go around engaging in detrimental behavior.

I fully agree and want to add the following: Instead of "testing" moderators with cheated submissions, you can always go the more social way of making a forum post and point out things to look out for in submissions or share your findings in potentially suspicious runs on the board. Game moderators are only human and make mistakes. This whole site can only function because so many volunteers come together and try to make it work - so instead of working against this concept, better consider contributing in a positive way!

Agreed.

ty

Would it be feasible to insert a new section into a game's sidebar that allows this sort of thing? It could be like training to moderators and if anything it'd reinforce verification, to both on site moderators and off site "volunteers."

There used to be a youtuber that did this with Jak and Daxter games I believe, would open up more positive content creators in the community.

Absolutely agreed Kirkq. There are many ways to encourage moderators to verify runs better. Fake runs are not the way to go about it.

For the record, I at least consider a "fake run" to be ANYTHING that fits the following criteria:

• A run the user knows with absolute certainty is illegitimate per the ruleset being submitted to and is submitted regardless.
• A run done using cheats or hacks unless said cheats or hacks are explicitly allowed.
• A run that is spliced (via video editing) or segmented, unless explicitly described as such and submitted to a segmented leaderboard. Note that this does not include a run split into multiple videos, as that may be necessary for various reasons, though such runs should ultimately fall under more stringent scrutiny as a result of the video split(s).
• Any run that abuses emulator functions, including slowdown, savestates, and TAS input panels. Runs done on emulator should be identified as such when a community accepts runs on emulator.
• A run performed by someone other than the submitter whose name the run would appear under; i.e. submitting a run by someone else as your own. This does NOT include a moderator submitting a run for someone else when that someone else made the run. This DOES include a user making a second account and submitting a run (that is theirs) under their secondary account rather than their main account. In the case of a run done by multiple people (e.g. co-op or multiplayer runs) when allowed, all runners should be accredited with the run, though names can be in any order.

Absolute genius!

I agree its kinda silly tbh, I feel its better just to point out things you find a problem to the mods like this is wrong or this doesn't add up. People make mistakes and yeah some times you ask them and everything is fine with the run but no one should get mad at you for asking or pointing things out. :) just submitting fake runs is bad do we even know if it was a illegitimate run or just a test they could be lying to save there own skin. my thoughts :)

Undermining the integrity of a board is an affront to the site and its purpose as a whole.

Hear hear!

What purpose do people have "testing" moderators anyway? Is it something they do just because the Mods disagree with what they say?

@Lucky_Game_Player I think the idea is usually "let's see if this fake run would get verified, I'm curious how good the moderators are at spotting splices".

I kind of understand the idea behind this sort of thing, but yeah, it's an annoying waste of time and, regardless of your intentions, you're still claiming a fake run is a real run, so I'm glad it's been officially stated that this won't be tolerated.

@lucky_game_player

person a submits a fake/cheated run person b verifies it person a raises hell about how terrible person b is.

So since this is all coming up right now, I'd like to bring up a few points that many seem to just gloss over. One of these is the whole "tell the mods about the problem and they'll fix it" approach. I've found that this doesn't work, whether approaching mods about the way runs are verified, or asking for further clarification on rules. The thing about this is, some mods are willing to listen and change things for the good of the community, but some mods think that they know best because they're mods.

Even bringing up a "Rules" page brought up this issue. I don't mean to hate on kirkq or anything, this is purely intended to be respectful and constructive: Exactly the same thing is happening here. You even stated that creating a "Rules" page would possibly help "clarify the expectations" but yet you still don't/haven't. I don't know if it's because you don't have time/effort right now, or whether it's because you think you shouldn't have to (in which case, again, mods know better because they're mods). I'm going to assume it's the former, since I myself am a mod and I know how time-consuming and frustrating these things can be, but hopefully you understand the point I'm trying to make here.

Another thing to mention is this: Why are we banning these people? If it's because of their "fake runs" then the rules and expectations don't line up. Plenty of runners who submit fake runs hoping to actually achieve a higher place don't get banned, but instead get warnings or just get off scot-free. So unless we're punishing them for trying to make a point to the moderators (which is ridiculous) I think there needs to be a discussion about cheating in general. Why don't we, for example, leave the consequences up to the moderators of the specific games, the way we do with any other spliced/cheated runs? Testing mods is something I would consider much less "detrimental" than actually submitting a fake run with the intent of holding a time.

And that's another thing: You officially put the rule into effect after a certain individual had already taken back their actions, but yet you still decided to ban them for... what? If they'd already proven the point without breaking any of the rules of that time and have taken back their actions, what is the ban for? Even in most sports and other competitive activities, doing something questionable that doesn't quite break the rules doesn't get you any sort of repercussion. Sure, the rule-makers will probably add the rule in afterward, but that doesn't mean the individuals should be punished for breaking rules that didn't exist at the time (even if it was common sense. Maybe just a warning would suffice?)

Let me finish off by saying, I'm not necessarily in support of what any individuals have done. I think it's a pretty stupid idea to go about submitting fake runs with the intent of "testing the moderators". But, considering the conditions, I think this particular individual should be given a second chance, especially if other runners who have actually cheated are allowed to "run free".

"You even stated that creating a "Rules" page would possibly help "clarify the expectations" but yet you still don't/haven't" It's worth noting that this thread was made like 4 days ago. It's not like there's been tons of time to set up something like that.

"Plenty of runners who submit fake runs hoping to actually achieve a higher place don't get banned" I'm under the impression that anyone who submits a fake run is supposed to be banned, at least on paper. Whether or not that actually happens is another matter though.

"You officially put the rule into effect after a certain individual had already taken back their actions, but yet you still decided to ban them for... what?" To stop actual cheaters from just saying "I was just testing the mods", to stop people from doing it in the first place, etc... Also it's a bit misleading to say that anyone who does this "has taken back their actions". Just because their intentions were good doesn't mean that they're regretful of their actions (and even if they are, they still broke the rules).

I also agree with the sentiment that cheaters should be banned from the site when they are caught cheating. It feels weird to have a set in place rule about banning people that test moderators with fake/cheat runs despite that regular cheaters (generally) get their runs denied. It would be nice to see a standard put in place for what kind of rule breaking deserves a ban. I think in everyone's eye cheating has always been the biggest rule of speedrunning, you don't try to pass off illegitimate runs as legitimate ones, period.

While I agree with many sentiments here, I would like to express that simply having a global rules page removes a sense of autonomy and independence these leaderboards were initially presented to me. Usually, it should go with "common sense" that being a prat by playing pranks on a moderator or splicing your runs to cheat a time is obviously something you do not do. However, I find that referring to a register of "cheaters" or a set of global laws is not exactly healthy and I lose the "country" feeling of the leaderboard as I am hindered by a complex bureaucratic system above me. This type of thing would be useful in a "perfect world," but even moderators make mistakes.

To reflect, I had a discussion with a runner that is more accepting of splicing and how they have seen that it is "OK" on certain scenarios. My response was simple: "While it may be fine elsewhere, it is unacceptable on these leaderboards." With this information out there, I did not decide to stain their name or reputation simply because of how I disagreed with their sentiment. Instead, they are now aware of the "laws of the land" when it comes to submitting for a run in this "country." Any misconduct on these leaderboards only results in punishments for these leaderboards. Nowhere else.

I also understand that there are "black sheep." The worse of the worst, the stain on the sheets, et al. Repeated offenses from multiple sources is obviously grounds for permanent ejection from the website, but some times, it is just a form of bad habit or worse, bad explanation. Theoretical scenario that probably never happens: I splice my runs for a game I moderate to showcase "best case scenario." Somebody else follows suit and I approve it. This how business is conducted normally here. Now the somebody else goes to a different leaderboard and conducts the same form of splicing. They are deemed a cheater and permanently banned from the website.

Permanently banning a person from the website for a form of misconduct seems extreme. But it should be based on malicious intent and severity rather than "Did he cheat? Yes? Ban. No? No ban." It seems so very black and white in a perfect world where everyone is taught the same way to be a speedrunner, but that's not exactly a reality.

At this point, I feel as if I am redundant, and barring my now destroyed reputation, I would like to suggest that instead of banning from the website, why not allow moderators to ban individuals from their respective leaderboard? Yes, there will be the "black sheep" moderators that will abuse this power and there will be an ensued drama over this whole scenario, but that sort of little independence makes each leaderboard a little bit more special.

Biases: Since I find it very important to understand where my full standpoint is, I list my biases at the end of most discussions.

• My speedgame has yet to have a cheater or a completely malicious individual identified. Questionable runs that overly abuse a scenario or test the extent of the rules? Yes. Spliced runs or remarks that offends others? No. Some people have tried impersonating as other players, but it was more of a poor attempt rather than something that warrants elevated action. We had a scenario where a runner was making passive aggressive remarks on our Discord, but that was handled there, not here, and his permanent ban there does not apply here.
• I am fairly new to the speedrun scene as of early 2017, so I do not have experience of "back then."
• I find that a leaderboard gains legitimacy individually, not collectively. My leaderboard is probably more/less legitimate than another leaderboard, but it should be my responsibility to strive for perfection. I will never allow my leaderboard to be deemed as the front face of the overall website, but neither will I allow it to be the negative face of it either.
• I have yet to fully commit to interacting with other speedgames and their communities, but this is mostly due to lack of time. I use this forum more, since I find it similar to a real forum, where people congregate from other places to discuss business (good or bad).
• I have stated about this new global policy to my community, but it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth and I find that my community is not responding to it well. It is as if I am ready to turn them in for committing something against me.
• The only reason why I would want to ban somebody from my leaderboard is if the intentions are completely malicious and meant to disrupt the day-to-day business that has been conducted. While I am open to feedback for change, simply trying to "bend the rules" without a discussion is not the way to go. You only get off scot-free for so long before you've highlighted yourself as a potential threat to the community. Even then, I inquire with an advisor and two other moderators for a second opinion.
• I make mistakes. Plenty of times.

"Usually, it should go with "common sense" that being a prat by playing pranks on a moderator or splicing your runs to cheat a time is obviously something you do not do" You would think so, but it still happens so apparently it isn't common sense, so it might be worth having these things written down somewhere official. I don't think that would cause any individuality or autonomy issues as long as the rules are for the site itself or make sense universally (which, say, splicing a run in a non-segmented category is universally considered cheating, so that would fit).

"Theoretical scenario that probably never happens: I splice my runs for a game I moderate to showcase "best case scenario." Somebody else follows suit and I approve it." I'm not really sure I understand this scenario. Is the moderator's spliced run listed on the leaderboard (if so, that's a huge problem)? Is the other person's spliced run being added to the leaderboard (another huge problem)? No matter why it's done, a spliced run doesn't belong on a single segment RTA leaderboard.

This scenario actually supports the case for a global rules page. If it's officially stated on a rules page that splicing is not allowed globally, then everyone is on the same page that splicing isn't allowed, and then you shouldn't ever see scenarios like this. Not knowing what's allowed wouldn't be valid anymore. If you don't know the rules and you break them, then it's your own fault for not reading the rules page.

Lmao at that scenario. If you’re a moderator and you splice your own runs and then you approve someone else’s spliced run then you should probably not be a moderator at all.

In that scenario, the user who splices should be banned and you should never allowed to be a moderator again on any game for your incompetence. Or if you posted your own spliced runs, you should be banned too. I’m seriously not understanding that scenario, it has to be a joke.

I can’t believe that there are people who think splicing isn’t a bannable offense. Splicing requires complete malicious intent because it takes time to do and you know the whole time what you’re doing is wrong. There is no sliding scale here - you either knowingly and willingly cheat or you don’t. Passing a spliced run off as an RTA isn’t a mistake, it’s a choice made. If you make that choice, suffer the consequences and take your ban.

As for the global rules thing, I don’t have much comment on that other than the site has been wary of things like that in the past because they want the communities to be in control over their own rules for as much as possible. Not saying some things can’t be site wise rules (like banning those who cheat), but something like that would require thought.

Also, I think this thread deviated a bit from the original point of banning those users who splice to test moderators, not those who splice in general (although both are bannable in my opinion and that of others).

It'd be sad if SRC were gentler than TG on cheating.

If you submit a cheated run, you should be banned, no matter what excuse you give.

This is absolutely the right policy. There's absolutely no reason to believe a post hoc claim that it was just a prank, bro.

@Timmiluvs As you stated above: "I think this thread deviated a bit from the original point of banning those users who splice to test moderators, not those who splice in general". I brought this up initially because I thought it was important to bring up. If we leave the repercussions of actually cheating up to the individual communities, why aren't we doing the same with "testing mods", which is something arguably less malicious? Why do those with arguably better intentions get banned from the site, but those with actual malicious intentions are handled according to the specific community?

Splicing and cheating in general are definitely bannable offenses, but my stance is this: Regardless of whether it's still wrong, doing something with the intent of "testing" or "helping" is LESS malicious than doing it simply to gain a better time. So why, then, is a more malicious action being treated with less severe repercussions (leaving the punishment up to the individual community, rather than banning them from the website entirely)?

I'm sorry if I come across as passive-aggressive. I'm trying to explain my perspective on this without sounding like I'm targeting anyone. I just think that an arguably stronger offense should be given an equal or arguably stronger repercussion, which doesn't seem to be the case currently.