I tried typing three different posts about the way this topic has progressed, but not one of them sat right with me. So instead of writing a nice, logical post that somehow sifts through the bickering and creates a nice resolution, I'm going to say what I actually want to say.
SDM, you argue like an asshole. The posts you made in the past few minutes are sedate, and I appreciate that. However, the majority of your posts in the topic are not. Making claims that you have no official stance on things and accusing individuals of misconstruing what you're saying even as I and several people I talk to interpret your words the same way without us influencing each other, telling us what is and is not "competitive" and saying it relies just on what's done in the level when you know full well it takes competitive skill to set up runs in the first place (e.g., carrying slope glitch from Act 1 to Act 2) and a savestate makes it much easier, saying that convenience isn't a factor when your vouching for Parax's ruling clearly oozes of "it doesn't inconvenience me, so let's not go any farther because that would", personal attacks aimed at people while you yell at them for making personal attacks, Latin just for the sake of making people have to go look it up... every post you've made lately has infuriated me to some extent, and if you didn't mean for them to be that way, then I need you to stop typing until you can express yourself properly
sonicandamy posted a valid concern about an emulation issue with Dolphin. The fact that we so quickly moved to "all emulators likely have serious problems" blows my mind. Dolphin and Bluestacks are clearly a different case than a Genesis emulator due to the processing power needed to run it. If we want to insist on accuracy for emulating weaker systems, then we should be pushing for usage of accurate emulators instead of creating extra hurdles. For example, we could insist on Regen
instead of the more inaccurate Gens variants for applicable games. Beyond that, sonicandamy has been allowed to do more than present his valid point and what he thinks should be done; he's been allowed to actively debate in one of the most argumentative threads on the forum. Granted, his behavior hasn't been terrible so far, but allowing somebody who has repeatedly bandodged and has even posted to YouTube that Parax takes bribes of boob pics for TSC decisions and that I stole the $4000 we raised for charity is basically letting him know that it's okay to make the staff look like fools if he occasionally does something productive. I'm rather sickened that he's still being allowed here to argue a situation that is evolving beyond the issue he presented, but I guess that concern ultimately doesn't solve this debate. I did have to get it off my chest, though.
Here's the deal. If you want to post here, you get to say what you think TSC's stance on emulation should be and why another ruling would have problems. That doesn't mean to find exactly what your debate opponent has said and knock it down point by point; this isn't about saying your opponent's reasoning is faulty. It means you should mention the issues that matter to you the most and say how they get addressed with your desired ruling. You get one post
from here on out, and you can edit it to add points/concerns if you think of them on your own or by reading another post, but you are not to say "addressing the post below, I disagree because..." or similar because it's been quite the argument starter so far. I want to see people argue a point without playing some sort of psychological game. If I can teach high school students to do it, then the twenty-somethings that are currently arguing can do it too.
Any personal attacks, either directly or indirectly, will lead to a tempban. Do I make myself clear?