And I basically agree, but additionally to that think that if you weigh all the evidence, then you come to the conclusion that decriminalizing marijuana is a net good. It's not some miracle flawless perfect substance, no. But more importantly, it's not the devil.
However, a few parts rub me the wrong way, because they feel like an attack on any reader who doesn't agree. Specifically, the paragraph about "refusal to speak is implicit support of the status quo" and the final "Silence is Violence". I think the statement would be perfectly fine if those were removed. A possible site rule could be: submission texts may contain any extraneous/personal information or opinions, as long as they don't make anyone feel unwelcome.
I'm not an expert in this field, but I know that Marijuana is objectively less dangerous to use than cigarettes and alcohol; the main reason why it's illegal is historical reasons, not due to evidence based reasoning (look up the War on Drugs).
It should be categorized as abuse of the submission mechanism.
If the music loops, and the picture does not change, find the frame when the first full loop ends
If the credits play regardless of place, 1st place could be considered a full completion
If anyone wants to give a try at improving goro and suceeds, i don't mind sharing authorship at all. In fact, I encourage the attempt.
1) What qualifies as significantly different game-play?
2) Is this even definable in a way that would cover the majority of situations?
3) Are we more concerned about the appearance of different game-play or are we more concerned about actually different game-play from a mechanics perspective? (or some other differentiation).
4) If this a problem where we can't establish a more clearly defined/worded rule that would cover most situations, should we require a multiple judge consensus on whether a particular situation is applicable to the rule? (This may already be a common practice, at least as it seems to have been demonstrated with the 1-On-1 situation.)
After a lot more discussion, private and public, it looks like my take on how similar these two games are wasn't shared by other judges, nor have my arguments convinced them. It was important in this case, because these games look at the very least borderline similar to me, so I needed more educated opinions. The main argument is that the rules of the games are rather different. Not as different as "one has fighting and it's heavily used, while the other one doesn't"; mostly in how they tweak the basketball rules. Since the sports are played by different rules, and in-game controls are also different, they are most logically not the same game. Which means both this game and 1 on 1 can be published in Vault separately.
