Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Warp wrote:
Flygon wrote:
They're monetary donations. The point of donations is that you're throwing money at a cause to keep it running. Donating money to something means that you're giving up the money 100% unconditionally; you're not buying shares at the share market.
That's quite a harsh attitude.
I didn't mean to imply that people who donate co-own the server. However, I think that the community deserves more than a one-man dictatorship because they donate and contribute. In technical and legal terms he may own the server (well, he doesn't really own it because it's a rented server, but he is the person directly responsible for its rental), but he doesn't own the community. The community consists of all people who participate and contribute.
I didn't say I liked the reality of the situation.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Personman wrote:
...
This would make it clear to everyone what sort of behavior is not tolerated, and would make it clear to the bannee exactly what they did wrong. It would also make the admins somewhat publicly accountable for their actions; while I do mostly trust you guys, the occasional unsigned edit or inexplicable disappearance of a post do bother me a little bit.
I'm in full agreement with basically the entirety of this paragraph.
Warp wrote:
Noob Irdoh wrote:
Technically, no, because the site owner (e.g. adelikat), as the word implies, literally owns the website. We are being nothing more than guests on HIS server, and we have no given right to be here if he doesn't want to.
If you own a website by paying for a server you have the right to turn it into a pure dictatorship if you want to (it's your complete right to ban everyone but you)
How about the people who contribute with monetary donations?
They're monetary donations. The point of donations is that you're throwing money at a cause to keep it running. Donating money to something means that you're giving up the money 100% unconditionally; you're not buying shares at the share market.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
moozooh wrote:
To be honest, I'm seeing something inherently wrong in one party joking about itself being good taste while another party joking about it bad, no matter the content. :D
Move to Australia. We think everyone is an idiot. Especially America, and New Zealand, and South America, and Europe, and Asia, and Australia, and New Zealand, and America. I think you'll like it here.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
mmbossman wrote:
Warp wrote:
About perma-banning users: If someone is such a dick as to get himself banned, but years later grows up a bit and becomes a much more civil and reasonable person (yes, that can really happen), isn't there any way that he can have his ban reversed? Or is it a life sentence?
Quick question: Have you ever known of this to happen on the internet?
I got myself permabanned from Sonic Retro once. I was kind of an idiot.
A few years later, badabing, badaboom, I post there regularly.
I'm a full believer of limiting permanent ban sentences to around 3-5 years, tops. By the time it ends, chances are, the person will either not care enough to come back, will have smartened up. Admittedly, people will abuse second chances sometimes, but I think that most people won't really be stalking the day until they're unbanned just to exact revenge for no particular reason.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Brandon wrote:
Warp wrote:
Brandon wrote:
How many Jew jokes am I allowed to make in the publication text?
Let's maintain good taste.
It's good taste; I'm Jewish. I'm not allowed to practice my self-deprecating humor? I'm offended. <_<
Well, considering all the groin smashing screenshots we've had, I'm pretty sure Jewish related humour would be alright, given the source.
Random optimized screenshot usable for publication.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
DarkKobold wrote:
Flygon wrote:
DarkKobold wrote:
Personman wrote:
We don't accept encodes, movies, posts, etc, from banned users. If you are perma-banned from the site, you are banned from participation in the forums, IRC, and any other activity. Any person that has become sufficiently disruptive to be banned in this fashion should not be encouraged to participate in the site, in any way shape or form.
Fair enough. I assume the site would have no problem with a banned author handing a WIP (or completed run) to a non-banned member and having them finish it up and submit it as their own?
As the 'banned' author couldn't be included on the movie, and therefore denied credit, I'd consider that pretty crappy on the part of the submitter.
Well then, what else is the submitter suppose to do if the unperson contributed a fair amount to a pretty good TAS? Say Russia did it?
#1: Not submit it.
or
#2: Try improve the work that the banned author did.
The point is is that the TAS is improved or completed. If the unperson made 75% of a final result because his work is just that damn good, it's kind of difficult to fault him for, I dunno, making a TAS that's really difficult to improve.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
DarkKobold wrote:
Personman wrote:
We don't accept encodes, movies, posts, etc, from banned users. If you are perma-banned from the site, you are banned from participation in the forums, IRC, and any other activity. Any person that has become sufficiently disruptive to be banned in this fashion should not be encouraged to participate in the site, in any way shape or form.
Fair enough. I assume the site would have no problem with a banned author handing a WIP (or completed run) to a non-banned member and having them finish it up and submit it as their own?
As the 'banned' author couldn't be included on the movie, and therefore denied credit, I'd consider that pretty crappy on the part of the submitter.
Well then, what else is the submitter suppose to do if the unperson contributed a fair amount to a pretty good TAS? Say Russia did it?
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Noob Irdoh wrote:
This is a low quality unofficial encode (without subtitles) made for people so they can start watching the new movie until a better encode is prepared by someone else: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17315175/BabyMoses.mkv
Of course I confirm my yes vote.
And with that, I decide to get off my ass and make an official encode.
Edit:
DownloadYouTube HD
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Standard encode can be found here and a special scaled encode can be found here.
I'm interested in seeing audience reactions to the encodes... but I know you are all just going to watch it on YouTube. Feel free to embed when it uploads. I gotta sleep.
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
The credits gave me a good laugh. Yes vote! The TAS was also good enough.
I'll encode this bugger.
Also, my avatar somehow becomes ironic.
One important question though: This game has a Sega CD version, why wasn't that TASed instead?
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Dada wrote:
Flygon wrote:
And whoever wrote the PSXjin AVI dumper... will want to realize that their .WAV dumping support is a bit broken. I'll have to consult .kkapture for that one.
I have not yet checked the audio, but what exactly did you find wrong with it?
It stopped dumping 3 and a half hours in because it hit the 2 gigabyte mark.
Windows made me epic fail. The fact that it dumped 500 AVI files and sorted by name sorta hid the WAV files from me finding them. *urg*
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
Okay, after somehow dumping all the AVI files required (and will be begging for help in sorting the mess out to something... usable). I believe I can say Yes to this absolute behemoth.
And whoever wrote the PSXjin AVI dumper... will want to realize that their .WAV dumping support is a bit broken. I'll have to consult .kkapture for that one.
