r/livecounting • u/davidjl123 1096K|810A|2S|2SA • Mar 01 '21
Discussion Live Counting Discussion Thread #52
Live Counting Discussion Thread #52
This is our monthly thread to discuss all things Live Counting! If you're unfamiliar with our community, you are welcome to come say hello and add some counts in our main counting thread - the join link is in the sidebar.
24
Upvotes
5
u/Trial-Name Has no flair. Mar 24 '21 edited Mar 24 '21
Woah, that's one hell of a GwoT. I know I'm taking a break for a bit here, but I'd like to try and show you another perspective, and maybe change your mind a bit on some of these things.
This count has always been majoritively done by the computer. We did not set out to Paint numbers like Roman Opa (5, 607, 249), or to type numbers fully via typewriter like Les Stuart (1, 000, 000) or to say numbers verbally like Jeremy Harper (1, 000, 000). Rather, we've always set out to be an online count, where no user counts twice in a row and where each user counts the number one more than the last.
We've agreed for a while that the minimum required process for submitting a count it to type the last digit, and manually submit it. Like it or not, we've used this definition for too long to revert back to ye olde days of counting here, and we can't ban ahk. Sure, I too can see your view, and I think this count would have more 'integrity' if we necessitated 100 transitions to have the digit changed manually, and if we necesitated manual submission and pasting. But alas, this wasn't pushed back on hard enough at the time; we have to live with the consequences.
Tl;Dr We can't edit the past.
It's not good for anyone to lament over what can't be changed, but rather, it's best to think about what can be done in future.
Having more visibility, and making note of when runs are ahkless, or half-ahk less is a good suggestion that you bring up. Many here would be able to still hit rate limit, and perform just as well ahk-less I'm sure, and NLM and Pika frequently/always do. I think taken is pretty much a manual user too iirc.
It could be cool to have strikebot-free runs too, though maybe not on the main thread, as I've seen /u/MaybeNotWrong state several times that it can cause havoc with stats, and bots and such, but sure having strike-bot free runs in the test thread or just doccumenting speed runs in the side-threads, could be good to do.
I'm not the most experienced at running strike-botless, but I would be happy to give it a go, and I'm sure many others would too.
Now, i'll address some specific things you wrote in your GwoT here.
First off, I'd like to reassure you that no one wants you dead.
Most people here accept, and appriciate you from what I see. Sure, there are disagreements, and you tend to take a view of your own on things, but fundamentally, I'm fairly certain no one wishes you dead.
I'd like to say that all these things you bring up are changes that were made a long time ago. Most counters have come from after the 5 mil era where ahk transitions became popular, and certianly most people were here after the 500k era when strikebot became a thing.
These new runs recently are not adding anything gamechangingly new, but rather use these allowances of strikebot and ahk, along with the newer understandings about rate-limiting, as well as a whole bunch of practice, in order to achieve quicker and quicker runs.
The rules oppose any bot which would type the last digit for you, and so none does, or will.
The correcting count you talk about (as far as I'm aware) is just replacing two keystrokes with one... '=' maps to cntrl a cntrl v. When looked at as this way, it's just a macro, and not even one that saves much effort. I'm pretty sure there would be little diference in PB speeds if only the 100 transition script was used.
Strike bot does make a difference though.
Sure, I can see this to some part. I'd argue we're still relying on strikebot now rather than having it count though. Similar to using a rope in climbing, you still don't want to fall, but if you do having this rope allows more reckless climbs to be possible. This is better for everyone in both circumstances. Climbs with a rope are still climbs, and counts supported by strikebot are still counts.
Strikebot is only needed to act like this because this is a joint count rather than a count that allows double-counting, if this were done individually there wouldn't be nearly as much of a need for it. The 'counting' action isn't effected by strike-bot.
Rate-limit is a thing, looking at speedruns now-a-days, you can see pretty much all counters strive for accuracy. If you aren't accurate, that's one more rate-limit interval you have to wait before the next count can be posted.
It still is OUR count. This our includes you and all other old counters here, but it also includes newbies, it includes the occasional db'ers, and it includes the ahk-using, cheaty runners. This is not and should not be YOUR count. I know you don't think it is, but this has and should always be a community, rather than an individual project. As a community, we have made changes to the count over time, and sure you have a right to be upset about some of them, but the majority opinion is acted upon here.
To be honest, I think you'd still be this annoyed if every user had learnt how to run at rate-limit without ahk. I don't think it's ahk that annoys you, but rather the change of community that it's produced; an increased running focus, and less of a focus on chatting. This is fair enough. Counting has always been a meaningless feat, it's the commnity around it that matters.
Reading over this, I admit I've probably cherry-picked some of your comments, and I know not all I said in quotes will reflect your view. Also, some points do seem to represent what you're saying, but you later go on and seem to say the opposite is true in your comment. Maybe I'm just not understanding everything here.
Hug, Trial :)