Posts by Matthew Young35

Taylor Morales31 said:The guy explicitly stated he's running Windows 7 now...
...

I haven't actually read the post following the one I just quoted.

Benjamin King2 said:What kind of "blockage" are you even talking about? If you're running a DirectX 9 card, obviously you aren't going to play games that require DirectX 10 or 11. Especially not if you're still stuck on Windows XP.

If they're using Windows XP, they can't run DirectX 10 or 11 games, regardless of whether their graphics card supports them or not.
There is no such thing as DirectX 10 or 11 for Windows XP.
At least, that's my understanding.

redheron12 said:Well, there will likely be a vote—just have a little confidence in yourself.😁

To be honest, I’m completely exhausted by all of this. If we don't see some drastic shifts in how moderation works and how trolling is handled, I'm done participating in these threads. It isn't an empty threat; 🤷, I know you're all preoccupied with whether I'll stick around or not, but I'm simply stating a fact.
It has become genuinely exhausting having to wade through mountains of legalistic jargon just to figure out if someone earned a single point more or less.
It's exhausting, my friend.

redheron12 said:Still, I’d take anarchy over a dictatorship any day... in every sense of the word.

Then by all means, carry on.
Without me.

redheron12 said:In short... "get lost, because I'm the host"—which is basically what we already have.😁

No, what we have now is pure anarchy.
And not the good kind.

Whatever happens, happens.
I’ll step up as host, provided we play by the rules I’ve laid out.
In my view, they’re solid rules—practical, enforceable, and straightforward.
Are they perfectly fair? Perhaps not... but then again, life isn't exactly fair, is it?
All I'm offering is blood, sweat, and tears... specifically for the trolls.

Jason Campbell70 said:Interesting "arguments," especially coming from someone who spent the last 24 hours on this thread complaining about how "certain people are trolling."

Since stormybadger8 brought it up...
If MAXYM knows the rulebook better than anyone, we've seen it in every single instance where he's used logic to prove his point during debates over rules—or rather, how they apply to current racing.
Because of that, I honestly think MAXYM would be the perfect candidate for host.
But there's a catch: he can't participate in the next championship as a competitor.

It’s either me or MAXYM. There isn't a third option that works just as well.

If nothing else, I'm glad my suggestion was so well received, whether through the current rulebook or as part of the proposals for a potential one.

Here are the most critical points from my proposal that I would like others to incorporate into their own rules.

4. The final standings shall be announced by the championship host or someone specifically authorized by them.

6. Transcribing results is permitted.

7. If a player is dissatisfied, they may lodge a complaint with the host. If the host stands by their decision, the player must either accept the ruling or withdraw from the competition. However, if they can gather more than half of the competitors to support their grievance, the host shall be removed from their position.

9. The HOST and the MODERATORS are responsible for ensuring the smooth running of the competition.

10. Rules are to be interpreted in good faith. Therefore, if anyone exploits a loophole to gain a scoring advantage or simply to troll for the sake of it, they will be ignored. Furthermore, moderators are encouraged to issue appropriate penalties in accordance with the site's anti-trolling policies.

Everything else is secondary.

Alright, I’m putting my name in the hat too.

Here is how I propose we run things.

1. All predictions must be submitted no later than the start of qualifying.

2. Your prediction should consist of a top 5 driver selection.

3. Scoring works like this: you get 3 points if you nail the winner, and 1 point for every other driver you correctly place in the top 5, regardless of their specific position.

4. The final standings will be announced by the host or an authorized deputy.

5. In the event of a tie, the player who submitted their prediction earlier takes the lead.

6. Copying others' picks is permitted.

7. If a participant is unhappy with a call, they may appeal to the host. If the host stands by the decision, the player must either accept it or exit the competition. Should a majority of the participants side against the host, a change in leadership will occur.

8. Points will be awarded as follows:
1-25
2-18
3-15
4-12
5-10
6-8
7-6
8-4
9-2
10-1

9. The host and the moderators are responsible for ensuring the smooth operation of the competition.

10. Rules are to be interpreted in good faith. If anyone attempts to exploit a loophole for points or simply to troll for the sake of it, they will be ignored, and I call upon the moderators to issue appropriate penalties according to the site's rules regarding trolling.

ADDENDUM:
We might see minor tweaks to these rules during our discussions, but the core principles will remain unchanged.
The primary goal here is to simplify the process and eliminate the kind of trolling that ruins a good competition.

stormybadger8 said:Well, you've got that wrong.🤣🤣🤣
I know we have three lawyers on this forum😁 they don't hang out here much, but they drop by... two of them even played in all the competitions, as far as I know.😁

The other way is for the Host to write their own set of rules, state their decisions clearly and loudly, back them up with logic, and then refuse to backtrack.
If trolling or arguing starts up, then the moderator can just hand out bans without hesitation...
People can complain all they want afterward, but they chose this Host and these rules themselves; they chose to play.

That's exactly why I'm saying I'll only play if the Host writes their own rules. If we stick to the old ones, I'm out—mostly because of the constant whining and trolling about whether the moderator is biased due to their own results and all that.
But yeah, if I have to ban someone... oh, I definitely will.😍

To be honest, I haven't seen much point in punishing posts like "this is how I thought it meant," or "that's how he intended it," or "this is how we've always done it," because Max wrote those rules... so clearly, nobody can interpret them better than Max, right?
And besides, how is the Host supposed to interpret what Max was thinking when he wrote them? Other players can try to interpret them the same way.
It's ridiculous how many times we've seen nonsense where the Host's decisions are challenged using the logic of what the rule-writer supposedly meant—like, "it says A here but B there," or "why use A instead of B right now?" and so on.

Here’s my take on it:
Max can spend the rest of his life explaining whatever he meant regarding Bjesomar's rule, but for me, the only person who matters when clarifying doubts about that rule is Bjesomar himself.☕
And unfortunately, that same logic works both ways.😬

And even if he actually gives a wise explanation... and then uses that chance to go on a massive trolling spree... if I give him a warning card, it just looks like I'm trying to shut him up, while he plays the poor, innocent guy who's just trying to help explain the rules...
And he’s definitely not the only one pulling that stunt. There are plenty of others... honestly, pretty much everyone involved in those debates ends up doing the same thing eventually.

Most people would be incredibly grateful if you actually did shut him up.
☕
Besides, we might actually have a larger field of competitors.

What we have here isn't a real competition; it's an endless loop of debating the rulebook.
The rules aren't here to facilitate the competition; rather, the competition exists merely as an excuse to argue about the rules.

Some people enjoy that dynamic, but most don't. And that is precisely why the number of participants keeps dwindling.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's my take on it.

stormybadger8 said:Of course things would change.
If the host writes their own rules, then nobody gets to argue about what the previous rule-writer intended or how Max used to run things back in the day.
If there's a dispute, the host makes an argued decision and that's that. Period.

Up until now, everything has been a mess because Max spent half his time explaining his logic, and everyone else was doing the same thing...
With new rules, there's no more "but this is how it used to be" or "this is what Max meant when he wrote the rules."

Plus, the host could easily just drop a clause in the handbook like this:

Once results are posted, any player who thinks they were wronged or that the math is off has a 48-hour window to file an appeal.
Other players have no right to play lawyer or file appeals on behalf of someone else.
After that deadline passes, the results are final.☕

And 👋 that's it. Anyone who ignores that rule and tries to drag us into endless debates gets carded for trolling.
But you can't expect me to go around handing out cards just because someone is trying to explain how they followed the current rules, or what they thought the rules meant, or how things were handled similarly in the past under the same rulebook...

No matter how perfect we make the rulebook (and let's be honest, none of us are practicing criminal defense attorneys), people will never be satisfied. They'll just troll.

The only way this championship actually functions is if the host acts like a dictator—deciding on the fly how to apply the rules (whether they are two lines or fifty pages long) and mercilessly banning anyone who dares question his interpretation.
The current setup has become exhausting for most of us, serving as nothing more than fuel for a few trolls to amuse themselves.

stormybadger8 said:So, why do I think it's way better if the host actually writes their own rules? Honestly, I’d even prefer a total overhaul with a completely different scoring system.

Up until now, we've dealt with nothing but nonsense where someone else writes the rules, the hosts just copy-paste them without even reading them... and it happens all the time where the hosts aren't even sure how to handle a situation, so they end up asking everyone and their mother for advice.
Then, naturally, everyone starts interpreting and explaining the rules their own way, a decision gets made... and then, of course, the person who originally wrote the rules shows up... and suddenly you've got a whole debate about what was "intended" or how things used to be done.
And in the end, you just have total chaos because the new decision usually contradicts whatever happened before.

That's exactly why I think this is the most important factor. I’m voting for whoever writes their own rules. If we don't pick them and end up stuck with the same old "copy-paste" rules again, I might just skip the championship entirely.

Why do you think anything would change if someone just wrote new rules from scratch?
It would be the exact same shit.
The same people would still be trolling.
Just a handful of them, whose sole purpose in life is to troll and nothing else.
Until the moderators hand out four or five permanent bans, there won't be a competition that attracts anyone other than a few trolls.
☕

Since I was mentioned, I figured I should weigh in.
I have absolutely no intention of participating as long as a small handful of people are allowed to spend their time nitpicking the rulebook and trolling everyone else just for the sake of it. It’s pretty obvious who we’re talking about.
Honestly, it has become exhausting.
Until that dynamic changes, you won't see me among the competitors—and if history is any indication, many others will be staying away too.

Might as well leave my thoughts here too.
I’m stepping away from all the competitions.

I'm withdrawing from the competition.

swiftdriver30 said:So, I was wondering if anyone could help me out here. Does anyone have a list of all the services in Windows 7 Ultimate that aren't strictly necessary? I'm looking to "slim down" my OS a bit. It feels like there's a mountain of useless background processes running constantly... does anyone know a way to trim them down? Or perhaps a better way to optimize the system entirely? I realize hardware specs are the main driver for speed, but surely there's some fine-tuning I can do to squeeze out a little more performance. Thanks.

That isn't really possible, because nobody knows exactly what you'll be doing on that computer.

So, I just dropped two posts back-to-back on that other thread. For some reason, the second one is showing up as if it was posted a full minute before the first.

|There could be a handful of reasons for a glitch like that. My money is on the NTP or perhaps an admin who has nothing better to do than constantly tinker with the server clock.
It might also stem from some sort of misconfigured disk cache.
Or, who knows? Maybe an admin accidentally clicked a link instead of actually following it.

Whatever happens, happens. I've sent my response.

By the way, you might want to urge the higher-ups to get a move on with that NTP; the whole situation is starting to get a bit scary.

Christian Williams61 said:Fernando Alonso - Sebastian Vettel
Lewis Hamilton - Jenson Button
Pastor Maldonado - Romain Grosjean
Kimi Raikkonen - Mark Webber
Heikki Kovalainen - Vitaly Petrov

Fernando Alonso - Sebastian Vettel
Lewis Hamilton - Jenson Button
Pastor Maldonado - Romain Grosjean
Kimi Raikkonen - Mark Webber
Heikki Kovalainen - Vitaly Petrov

stormybadger8 said:What are you even😕
The offer is right above your post, man. 😵

My bad, didn't mean to be rude.😁
You're replying to this one:

Something is seriously wrong with the server time.
I’ve seen posts where users are quoting messages that were actually sent after the quote itself was posted.
I am telling you, I really am, there is an issue with the NTP on the server.

Believe it or not, I didn't see this offer.

aukuratz ... what am I supposed to be doing now? Scouring through some ancient archives for an old offer?
🤦

Should I be getting back to Christian Williams61 regarding their offer right about now?