I've started running "The Seven Deadly Sins: Knights of Britannia" and I noticed that first places video doesn't exist. It looks like it was linked from twitch but never saved as a highlight.

Is this a common occurrence?

No it's not common but it does happen. Runners are generally responsible for their run videos being accessible on an indeterminate basis, and moderators should try to make sure the run is not an expiring vod. Things slip through, people delete their old videos, mods allow runs without checking for expiry, etc, this is all stuff that comes with a site such as this that simply links to other video hosting sites.

It would be nice if src could automatically check whether a submitted run's video is set to expire after 14 days. I believe that's been suggested before, and recently.

I recommend contacting the game mod and/or top runner to see what they plan to do about the WR not having any video evidence linked, because that's a big problem for competition. (There are potentially a few different options for them.)

Personally, while it is unfortunate there is no video evidence now (to study and for posterity), if someone did verify a video back when the record was gained I don't think they should be removing the entry from the leaderboard. Although it is a shame it wasn't picked up on as the wording of the entry made it quite clear it was a full stream they were uploading and not a highlight.

At least the run was this year though, so in an ideal world the runner could just beat their time again.

I think as long as the run was verified, it doesn't matter if it has a video or not. I have seen so many cases of great runs having their videos lost for one reason or another, that I know have happened ('cause I watched them myself).

If we were to remove runs with no existing proof, the Mario Kart leaderboards would have to be nearly wiped. When runs are a decade old it's only a matter of time until the video is lost.

This doesn't apply to most speedgames, since their communities are very new, but you need to think about the future. In 10 years from now we're going to have loads of classic speedruns where no video exists anymore.

For 12 years this run had no real proof besides accounts from others that claimed it happened. For 12 years this WR had 0 proof. Yet it still happened, as can be seen by this video I recorded after finding the ghost downloaded on a Wii of a guy I met online.

Obviously cheaters will always exist, but they honestly are not as common as most people think, and if the run already got verified with a video before I see no reason why it should be distrusted unless the player has a history of cheating or removing his videos frequently for no reason.

However, this is all a hobby run by volunteers.

Yes, do I wish verification was more thorough across the board? Absolutely. But nobody is getting paid because of the leaderboards (except in the abstract of clout = more fans), these aren't life or death situations. The communities are free to challenge any WR but the fact that this one got verified 6 weeks ago and never got challenged during that time, I think it's safe to assume it was correct at time of posting and hopefully it isn't optomised and someone with a saved video can beat it.

What about anonymous runs? I can think of at least 3 times when world record holders deleted their account/videos, and according to site rules, these can stay up on the leaderboard under the name "Anonymous".

In my opinion, no video runs should be allowed to stay up as long as they aren't suspicious, and the video is deleted after verification. However, deleting a video immediately after you get a top time is cause for suspicion, so if something like that happened, I would be in favor of removing that run.

@Merl_ it depends. In Minecraft Bedrock we have one of those (https://www.speedrun.com/mcbe/run/yj12xxdy), but the video still exists unlisted on my YT account.

I currently add ingame end dates to all runs in https://www.speedrun.com/hoi4 as variable (which is the timing method for Ingame Date). And especially in older runs which werent that good there are some missing videos. Community decision currently is to let them there. Runs which are in the top (and arent beaten by the same person) would be removed though. People especially other runners dont like it when they cant see how a world record was done, even if the record wasnt optimised.

The above point is important for me at least. One of the great benefits of having video footage is that it makes leaderboards a great learning tool for every skill level. Each run doubles as a tutorial for how to achieve that time. This isn't only relevant for the most optimised of WRs.

Maybe mods should ask for proof calls, or challengers could contest a video-less run to prompt a proof call in the case of a video disappearing from its host site?

That brings in a problem tho: if that runner has left the hobby, or has passed away; is their run invalid even though it was legitimately verified just because they're no longer around/alive to put forward re-re-verified proof? I dont like the thought of that to be honest. I think a lot of these players want their times recorded for posterity and don't want to constantly have to reverify already verified runs while worrying the minute they kick the bucket their run will be invalidated.

[quote=Brakshow]Maybe mods should ask for proof calls, or challengers could contest a video-less run to prompt a proof call in the case of a video disappearing from its host site?

That brings in a problem tho: if that runner has left the hobby, or has passed away; is their run invalid even though it was legitimately verified just because they're no longer around/alive to put forward re-re-verified proof? I dont like the thought of that to be honest. I think a lot of these players want their times recorded for posterity and don't want to constantly have to reverify already verified runs while worrying the minute they kick the bucket their run will be invalidated.[/quote]

@Brakshow Once a run has been verified and has been around for a long period of time (we're talking years here, usually leading to most if not all of the community to have had time to watch and validate the run for themselves), I think it's fair to say that the burden of proof would lie on the challenger rather than on the original runner, so it shouldn't really be an issue.

I mean, if a person wants to contest that a 10+ year old run is fake, they better back up their claim with solid evidence. I'm not saying that old runs can't possibly be fake even after all that time, but such an accusation shouldn't be something you just throw around without some deep consideration first either.