Language…
16 users online: Cardioid, ElysRedField, FPI, Ginnb0b, gui, K3anuGamer, Koszmxr, LadiesMan217, Moronsky, MoxieCat, Nitrogen, SkyeLondon18, The_Uber_Camper, TriStain, Tutubi, Zute - Guests: 110 - Bots: 295
Users: 65,938 (2,185 active)
Latest user: Bobra

Formalizing "Contest Bans"

Over the course of the past few contests, many of us have realized that certain users consistently submit "troll"* entries to the site's level design contests. This includes things low-effort joke entries (blatant edits), entries that deliberately bend the defined rules (using ACE in a contest like VLDC), or any other kind of entry that intentionally seeks to be disqualified (for example, submitting a Kaizo: Hard/Pit level to a non-kaizo contest.)

While an occasional joke entry may be funny, we've come to realize that submitting nothing but joke entries can be disrespectful to contest judges when frequent; judges have to play through the level and then discuss whether it should be disqualified, which is a waste of time, especially when there dozens of other legitimate entries to play through.

Therefore, the PR team has reached consensus that if we notice somebody repeatedly submitting bad faith entries seeking to get disqualified from every contest, we reserve the right to bar their participation from future contests. In practical terms, it doesn't really make a difference if a user is seeking to get disqualified each and every time-- we're just cutting the middleman.

Rest assured that this policy does not even remotely apply to any form of accidental disqualification (for example, submitting an .ips, submitting a broken patch, using ExGFX in a VLDC level because a user doesn't know better, etc.) This policy only seeks to curb repeated, intentionally rule-breaking submissions. If you're going into a contest without intent to stir up trouble or bend the rules, you'll be fine, so don't worry!


tl;dr Repeatedly submitting levels to contests with the express intention of getting disqualified may result in a "ban" from entering future contests so that the judges' time isn't wasted each time.

good approach and sorry that contest judges had to waste time on such entries in the past;
all the best.
This should've been common sense. Seeing some deliberately rule-breaking contest entries, everyone could've made one and call it a day. This rule amendment is something we needed and all, but...

Can any banned user appeal if they changed their mindset and have a sufficient proof of it so as they can participate in contests again? That'd be another affirmative action like restoring otherwise punished users to the site under certain conditions.
I have a Discord server as well! (by joining, you agree to the rules)
-----
Basically, I believe in peace and bashing two bricks together.

Originally posted by 7 up
Can any banned user appeal if they changed their mindset and have a sufficient proof of it? That'd be another affirmative action like restoring otherwise punished users to the site under certain conditions.

Yes, just like other site punishments, appeals would be possible.

While I 100% support this and think this is a much needed new rule, I'm slightly concerned by your wording here (using the example of submitting a kaizo level to a non-kaizo contest as grounds for being banned from future contests). For a while now, this has been a very grey area. We've seen numerous kaizo or slightly kaizo levels submitted in the past that have not been dq'd. In fact, they sometimes place quite well (for example, rainbow trout in cldc 2018, a bunch of kaizo-esque levels in bldc that scored decently well, a few levels this past cldc too). Not to mention something like mountan castle, which scored poorly for being kaizo, but still wasn't dq'd. Is this rule stating that the judges will now dq kaizo and kaizo-esque levels no matter what? If so, I think there should be more discussion around this because it's a very different manner than dq'ing levels for breaking the rules, being outright jokes, bending the rules (as in using ACE), etc.
Originally posted by GbreezeSunset
While I 100% support this and think this is a much needed new rule, I'm slightly concerned by your wording here (using the example of submitting a kaizo level to a non-kaizo contest as grounds for being banned from future contests). For a while now, this has been a very grey area. We've seen numerous kaizo or slightly kaizo levels submitted in the past that have not been dq'd. In fact, they sometimes place quite well (for example, rainbow trout in cldc 2018, a bunch of kaizo-esque levels in bldc that scored decently well, a few levels this past cldc too). Not to mention something like mountan castle, which scored poorly for being kaizo, but still wasn't dq'd. Is this rule stating that the judges will now dq kaizo and kaizo-esque levels no matter what? If so, I think there should be more discussion around this because it's a very different manner than dq'ing levels for breaking the rules, being outright jokes, bending the rules (as in using ACE), etc.

I believe this refers to submitting a Kaizo level to a contest that explicitly bars Kaizo levels (ie, the current 24hosmw), in which case the level would just be DQ'd anyways.
Originally posted by Gbreezesunset
For a while now, this has been a very grey area. We've seen numerous kaizo or slightly kaizo levels submitted in the past that have not been dq'd. In fact, they sometimes place quite well (for example, rainbow trout in cldc 2018, a bunch of kaizo-esque levels in bldc that scored decently well, a few levels this past cldc too). Not to mention something like mountan castle, which scored poorly for being kaizo, but still wasn't dq'd. Is this rule stating that the judges will now dq kaizo and kaizo-esque levels no matter what?


Oh yeah, I think it's just a wording/clarity issue (probably a by-product of writing this at 1 in the morning lol). What we meant is somebody submitting, say a Kaizo: Hard, Pit, or just overly-precise and difficult Kaizo: Light level to a contest like VLDC. Of course, it would be discussed between judges, and it would have to be a recurring, intentional thing for the person to get contest banned. Otherwise, a level being "kaizo-inspired" in its design (as opposed to say, a "traditional" level), would not be an issue at all. The key point here is that something needs to be submitted in bad faith to fall under this policy.

I'll tweak the initial post with the points you've brought up, thank you.

In regards to kaizo, here's my take.

If it needs to involve TAS, excessive use of emulator tools (save states, slowdown, frame advance, etc), and otherwise literally frame perfect maneuvers, or multiple/all of the above, it should be disqualified.

Most of the kaizo levels that were previously accepted mostly do not fall under this category last I checked.

-----------

STELLA!
Originally posted by Arash
In regards to kaizo, here's my take.

If it needs to involve TAS, excessive use of emulator tools (save states, slowdown, frame advance, etc), and otherwise literally frame perfect maneuvers, or multiple/all of the above, it should be disqualified.

Most of the kaizo levels that were previously accepted mostly do not fall under this category last I checked.

Barring kaizo levels outside of kaizo contests is not and was never restricted to tricks like these.
Originally posted by Arash
In regards to kaizo, here's my take.

If it needs to involve TAS, excessive use of emulator tools (save states, slowdown, frame advance, etc), and otherwise literally frame perfect maneuvers, or multiple/all of the above, it should be disqualified.

Most of the kaizo levels that were previously accepted mostly do not fall under this category last I checked.

So basically if the judge sucks, it's too hard and the person who submitted gets banned?
Nice.
Super Mario Pants World
Luigi's Lost Levels
New Super Mario Pants World
Luigi's Lost Levels 2 - Back With A Revenge
Luigi's Lost Levels 3 - Electrik Boogaloo
VLDC12 - 72HoKaizo#1
Originally posted by Romano338
Originally posted by Arash
In regards to kaizo, here's my take.

If it needs to involve TAS, excessive use of emulator tools (save states, slowdown, frame advance, etc), and otherwise literally frame perfect maneuvers, or multiple/all of the above, it should be disqualified.

Most of the kaizo levels that were previously accepted mostly do not fall under this category last I checked.

So basically if the judge sucks, it's too hard and the person who submitted gets banned?
Nice.

Nothing like that was ever implied in this thread!

First of all: Don't look at the end of a discussion chain to jump to a conclusion! The most important post is still the OP, not one by some random dude.
Second: It's about repeated offenders of intentional rule breaking which is more than just difficulty (Epic Nothing from... VLDC7/8/9, it's one of those three, requires no effort to beat the level but it's still a joke level). One who doesn't realise they broke a rule is fine and one who has submitted only one joke level is fine too. And what if one submits a difficult level? Well…
… all judges are (or at least should be) experienced players, a newbie player is never to be expected among the judges. If a level gets disqualified for difficulty, it's because it's either a tool-assisted Kaizo or Pit level in general as well as a real-time Kaizo level (if not too easy) outside of a Kaizo contest or just painfully obnoxious. This contrasts with well-intended too difficult levels where the creator doesn't realise their level is too difficult and receive a low score from the judges instead of a disqualification.
Originally posted by Romano338
Originally posted by Arash
In regards to kaizo, here's my take.

If it needs to involve TAS, excessive use of emulator tools (save states, slowdown, frame advance, etc), and otherwise literally frame perfect maneuvers, or multiple/all of the above, it should be disqualified.

Most of the kaizo levels that were previously accepted mostly do not fall under this category last I checked.

So basically if the judge sucks, it's too hard and the person who submitted gets banned?
Nice.

Where did you get that absurd notion from?
Man, talking about putting words in my mouth.

No, I obviously do not imply that judges have to suck, and players have to dumb down their levels. I'm just saying we aren't supposed to be robots in order to complete a level.

There have been levels that skirt on the Kaizo:Light category before, and I'm not one to shy away from a challenge, but if you're asking me to complete tasks that require TAS, I'd disqualify the level, no matter how intentional or unintentional it is.

-----------

STELLA!