Step 3: Who gets to vote + DRAFT

[Misty]

Why is it possible to tick multiple options for how many videos should be required? All of them are mutually exclusive, surely?

I'm getting pretty triggered by all the typos xD if I list them all, will you fix them please? <3

[Misty]

"Should only things that are specifically allowed be allowed? NOTE: "Yes" means that things have to be allowed before they are eligible to be used in a record. "No" means that everything should be allowed that isnt forbidden."

I think that no matter what the result of this is, it will be too easy to misinterpret. We will need clearer definitions on what is being allowed or forbidden, and such definitions are mentioned nowhere.

[Flo]

@Misty
Well, lets assume for one second there are 4 options, A, B, C and D which all get voted equally on (25% each). Now, the A people all like B as their second best option, the C people all like D as their second best option, the B people would split up to A (1/2 of them) and D (1/2 of them) and the D people would split up into A (2/3 of them) and C (1/3 of them).
If you can pick only 1 option, the results after the first vote will be 25% / 25 % / 25% / 25%, which isnt satisfying and nothing really has a majority.
If you can pick more than one option, the results will look something like 25%+12,5%+16,7% / 25%+25% / 25%+8,3 / 25%+25%+12,5% (54,2% / 50% / 33,3% / 62,5%). This ensures that we wont need a second round of voting to get approval rates of >50% for one of the options (a 2nd round of voting would have a much worse voter turnout, so we want to avoid that).

In a different section, we could also split it in 3 different questions like Should Pure exist? Should Standard exist? and just go for a forced yes/no. Probably thats better in those cases. Probably thats also better for some of the other questions where you can currently pick more than one option. I ll look into that and make some changes for clearer results.

If you list the typos (+grammar, punctuation, whatever comes to mind) I ll ofc correct them <3.

And yeah, for the last part, its not really precise yet. Maybe you can help out with said definitions.

EDIT 30.05.2017 11:37: Changes have been made, you might want to check this out again. Changed the structure of some aspects and added questions about aggro trackers and dialogs.

[Misty]

Right, so what you want is an Alternative Vote system... but that's not what's there. I might want to vote for D>C>B>A but at the moment there's no way to express that preference. Also, some of the questions are heavily interdependent, but are still asked completely separately. For example, I believe that PURE and TAS should exist, but STANDARD should not. However, if TAS isn't going to be a thing, I'd want to vote yes on STANDARD. Imagine if almost everyone wanted just one category, but they were evenly split between the 3 of them: 33% for PURE, 33% for STANDARD, 33% for TAS. Each category would get 66% "No" votes, so what, you'd have no categories at all? xD This clearly doesn't make sense. If we had AV, my vote would look like this: PURE and TAS > STANDARD and PURE > STANDARD and TAS > all 3 > TAS only > STANDARD only > PURE only. Is there any reasonable way to put the questions so that I can vote for that?

"Allow Texmod/UMod in STANDARD records?"
I don't have a problem with how this question is phrased, but I think there should be small print (on most of the questions) specifying something like "the modification of any textures". If you make rules that use different wording to the survey, then people will justifiably complain, and if you use even slightly ambiguous wording, some idiot will probably copy the source code of texmod, release his own version and claim he's not breaking the rules. this applies to basically all the questions - just put the small print somewhere easily visible.

Another question that I don't think has been covered yet: auto res scrolls and mobstoppers. Some people might consider those the same as auto pcons, but I'm sure that's not true for everyone.

What's up with some of the questions being required and others not? There doesn't seem to be any particular reason for that.

Regarding the "little deviations" for old records... have we had any discussion on how lenient we should be?

Now for the boring list of corrections AKA Flo's Keyboard Doesn't Have An Apostrophe:
• All instances of "GWSCR" should be capitalized; also "UW", "DoA", "Shadow of Haste", "Recall".
• "the basic population determined by the above mentionend rules" *mentioned
• "everything should be allowed that isnt forbidden" *isn't
• "PURE" meaning no external tools at all.
"STANDARD" is the historical ruleset, some tools are allowed while others arent.
"TAS" means tool-assisted, with anything allowed.
I don't know if these definitions are confirmed - I've heard some debate about timers being permitted in PURE, and videos in various categories not showing the mouse. Regardless, this should say "means" rather than "meaning", and "aren't" with an apostrophe.
• "(i.e. uw teleport, fighting snakes in doa)" e.g., not i.e. =P
• "targetting" *targeting
• "Allow forced slowloads to connect to the game really late" *slow loads (2 words)
• "area you can and cant walk" *can't
• "Allow minimap feature 5" Most of the other "Minimap"s have a capital M; this should be consistent.
• "when those werent forbidden" *weren't
• "every option you re fine with" *you're

[Flo]

Yo Misty, wanna be German? You can grammar-flame people all day and everybody will think its just natural :P .

To your points: Yes, thats within the realm of possiblity. Really unlikely though. The logical solution for that case (in which every category gets <50%) would be to have no categories at all and everything competes on one, unregulated level. But again, thats most likely not going to happen.
Sadly I fear there is no way to make order of preference work.

For the next part, you re right, those questions shouldnt be about a single tool in particular but instead about the function itself. I ll rephrase that stuff and put examples behind. In this case "Should the modification of any textures be allowed in STANDARD records (e.g. Texmod/UMod)?"

There are really few required questions, I believe its 8 in total. The first 3 are pretty obvious because we cant count the vote without the information about IGN, gwscr account and guild. Number 4 and 5 are also pretty important because we need the legitimasation. The other 3 questions that are required have a "I dont care"-option. I put that in because those question are not really on the same "level" as the other questions in their respective category (they re somewhat... different, I lack the word) so its just that people dont accidentally skip them.

I dont think we should limit ourselves too much about tolerating deviations. I dont remember any record really that uses stuff on such a big scale that we couldnt accept it. All those minimap records would be fine, maybe a few with some other stuff... again, I dont think aynthing was that drastic so we ld have to intervene.

I ll make the changes later and correct the mistakes you listed :) .

EDIT 30.05.2017 20:29: Added auto-scrolls and auto-mobstoppers. Changed the wording in the standard rules section to be more general and not focused on a single tool. Fixed most (hopefully all) spelling and grammar mistakes.

[Sakura]

Why is there a vote for Texmod when it is actually tolerated by anet?

[Misty]

Sadly I fear there is no way to make order of preference work.

Then it makes no sense to allow multiple answers for those questions. However, you could use the linear scale option and just tell people to put 1 for the option they like best..?

I dont think we should limit ourselves too much about tolerating deviations. I dont remember any record really that uses stuff on such a big scale that we couldnt accept it.

Well, that depends on the results of the vote... in any case, I was mostly talking about the video requirements. Most of the very old records don't have videos, but I think there's no real doubt that they were legitimate.

Why is there a vote for Texmod when it is actually tolerated by anet?

Realistically we don't expect anyone to vote against that, but the option has to be there because we're voting on EVERYTHING.

[Flo]

@Misty

Well it ensures we get a big majority on some moderate option pretty much everyone will be able to agree on. Beeing able to only vote for one option would artificially stenghten extremist opinions (none/all videos required) since the moderate opinions would be split up between the other three categories. You could solve this by saying "type in a number between 0 and 10, 0 is no videos required at all, 10 is video required by every party member" and then take the average. But that will also leave room for interpretation. Or by having only one moderate option in between to even the field. Every single way to set this up has some upside and some downside. I ve been really willing to change stuff people dont like, but I think you re a little oversensitive here.

Yeah, all those old records gotta be fine. Ofc they have no video, but 3rd party tools also only really surged in the last 2 years... lets be tolerant.

@Sakura

That what Misty said. I am x->100% certain texmod will be allowed.
Also, we dont make our rules about what anet tolerates but what we think is eligible.

[Misty]

I meant that each option could have a linear scale like this:

Rate each option according to how much you like it, with 5 being best and 1 being worst:
NO VIDEOS REQUIRED
1 -------------- 5
ONE VIDEO REQUIRED
1 -------------- 5
ONE VIDEO FOR EACH SPLIT
1 -------------- 5
HALF THE PARTY
1 -------------- 5
EVERYONE IN THE PARTY
1 -------------- 5

Then you can either do an instant run-off or just add up the scores.

[Flo]

@Misty

To give some perspective, some people failed to put in the link to their gwscr profile.

Why do you want to make this so unnecessarily complicated? Yeah, you could have people vote that way and make 1 out of every 2 votes invalid because people didnt read the caption or the notes above and fail. And even if you were to claim its "better" or "more representative" that way, thats just subjective and someone could make the same argument for any other setup (for some examples, see two posts above).

So at least this way its simple, understandable for everyone and we ll have clear results. More than one could say about the approach you just described.