Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

dew

Members
  • Content count

    6464
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dew

  • Rank
    superfiend

Recent Profile Visitors

4917 profile views
  1. Fox News, Breitbart and many other dishonest media of the far right were specifically founded with the mission to bend and weave the narrative instead of simply reporting and analyzing it, because then your homeboys often look bad when they're caught doing wrong things. Roger Ailes was proud of this, so it ain't no secret knowledge. It's hilarious to see secret consumers of this drivel bend over backwards to paint everything else with the same brush. "Both sides are baaaahd" -Tucker lovers.
  2. dew

    Doomworld is full of old cranky curmudgeons.

    Oh no, don't listen to this man. I tried it once and now we're stuck with zero press!
  3. dew

    Doomworld is full of old cranky curmudgeons.

    How To Unmask Yourself In 14 Words
  4. ZeroMaster is 🐐 Chewy is ⛵
  5. dew

    Bizarre Multiplayer Stories

    Let the foaming process begin.
  6. dew

    Scythe X demos (complevel 2)

    Haha, good find. I even questioned if the crusher hallway can be considered pacifist in my ancient tablefiller.
  7. I said this in discord and I'll repeat here: the "legacy" label was an attempt to accomodate the hardcore playerbase that doesn't want to compromise on the all-telefrag rule. It should not be the sticking point in the wider debate over the new ruleset and the part about labeling is just a suggestion seeking further debate, I would certainly move it outside the rules/bullet points if I knew people would attack it so strongly. In fact, I wouldn't really care if the labeling was flipped and all-telefrag/crusher runs get labeled as "new rules" or "with telefrags" or what-have-you. That is more of a question for the archive administrators and what they deem more workable. As for why I have "tossed aside" the objections, I simply don't think this can be done piecemeal. We cannot reform crusher use and defer telefrags till 2030. We clean it up this time or we lose momentum and future generations point at this thread as empirical evidence change is not possible. With that in mind, I simply don't see how we can remove "intent" out of the equation while keeping the rules internally consistent. The advantage of my proposition is that as a whole, the rules are a slightly more lenient superset of the old rules, and therefore they allow extra runs and don't prohibit any legacy runs. This is far less intrusive than e.g. banning telefrags and having to filter out existing pacifist runs into uv-speed/other throughout the archive. However feel free to continue the debate. I like the idea of a "corporate" poll that allows soft positions, but don't expect a classic yes/no thread poll - voting on the entire ruleset gives no space for nuance and voting on every bullet point separately misses the central issue: the reform should strive to be consistent between all issues. Furthermore, I should mention that it's been brought up with me that the simpler the rules are, the higher there's a chance "pacifist" could get supported by ports as a feature that automatically tracks your compliance. The less exceptions the engine needs to track for damage given by player, the easier such an implementation gets, and measuring "intention" kills it on the spot, heh.
  8. If you cheat and get caught in multiplayer, you're going to get banned and any possible path to redemption will be long and arduous, because many will never forgive you. And you cannot really argue for more lenience, your cheating is destroying not just the competition, but the community as well, because the competition is the community. As for cheating in speedrunning, the stakes are lower, but the trust issue is similar. Some people may never trust you again and if you're still allowed to send demos to the archive, they'll be inspected with increased scrutiny. However the speedrun community is quite forgiving when the cheater comes forward and identifies demos that have been cheated. Getting caught a second time definitely gets you ostracized, because it kind of tells you think the community is a bunch of idiots for you to toy with. However what happens a lot is that the person simply storms out of the community on their own, whether they admit fault or not. The former is usually out of shame, the latter flowers into spectacular drama bombs and memorable copypasta. I mean, from the top of my head I recall just two banned speedrun cheaters... Hock for repeat use of automated sr50 and that guy who started blanking his post after getting called out, which equals to forum vandalism and thus ban. Those cases are 10 years apart, heh. Player M is neither of these categories, there's a lot more baggage tied to their multiple doomworld bans.
  9. dew

    I appreciate you all

    Is this the Isis OnlyFans and CoViD VR simulation appreciation thread? Finally!
  10. Oh my god, I haven't noticed your post before, but your input is delightful. A sprinkle of OG intents is very appreciated. Anyway, I've intentionally let the debate run its course without pushing my own narrative too hard, but now it's died down and it's time to make a call. It seems like there cannot be a clear consensus that would make all parties happy, since there are diametrically opposing views held on a few issues. So, through some chat with kraflab (and please, kraf, correct me if I remember things wrong), we the most sensible and respectful way would be to follow the "obsoletion" of CN requirements for ports. This would mean all current pacifist records remain pacifist, since the new standard only broadens what's allowed, but they also become "legacy pacifist" (labeling tbd, probably involving the word "glide"). Then, if it's pointed out that a new record beats the old one while using the expanded ruleset, the old record retains a marker of the legacy record. Also, hardcores can still simply record with the legacy ruleset in mind, and the archive would still reflect that with that marker. Just don't call it "true pacifist", that would not be true at all, heh. As for the particulars, I believe the new expanded version would: Allow all crusher damage. Frankly, the intention clause is murky and distinction between switch and walkover activation is arbitrary. Yes, it means a pacifist could crush the map06 spider, but who said being pacifist equals being a good person? Allow all telefragging. Again, intentionality is the bane here. Does it allow hypocritical maxing? Perhaps. The amount of runs where telefragging a monster instead of not telefragging it results in a faster time, however, should be very limited. The fact that the engine traces telefrag damage amount to the player is a concept worth considering, but also a heavily asterisked case, since Doom mapping switched to relying on telefragging for various specific tasks, like resetting player arsenal between maps. Allow all infight provocation. Was already allowed in the old ruleset and it is one major argument against the capricious nature of "intent". Do not allow exploding barrel chains that hurt monsters, unless triggered by monster fire, crushing or telefragging. Shooting a barrel that hurts monsters is an extremely common mechanism of Doom gameplay and it'd utterly change the nature of the category. Since ridiculous corner case can make this bullet point surprisingly murky, the idea would be "innocent until proven guilty" and the runner can claim pacifist until someone Phoenix Wright's them. I fully understand that there will be a segment of runners who will not agree with the changes - but I think we need a resolution even if it means bifurcating the category.
  11. dew

    DOS Doom Code Execution

    > when u fail to control the narrative but still keep trying
  12. dew

    MasterOFDeath

    My condolences, I knew patches only briefly, but he seemed a good person and I feel for anyone he left behind.
  13. I hate you. No seriously, this is so convoluted it loops into hilarious. You definitely have a point, but I don't feel strongly about either decision. Would love to hear some opinions, halp!
×