I understood at the very beginning that to have a list that is at least one step higher than the honor system, if not more, would draw a line in the sand. Any time a line is drawn it is very possible that real, authentic scores, not meeting the criteria, would not be on the list. As unfortunate as that is, we have listed some high scores that has a level of accountability attached to it. Obviously, the list is not official in the sense that it is to be exhaustive, and 100% accurate. We do want there to be some factual proof beyond a possible photo-cropped picture, or word of mouth. I don't think that anyone wants to draw people's scores into question, but in order to apply the criteria consistently, unfortunately, there does need to be some discussion that will take place. Such discussion or final omissions from the list in no way illegitimatizes the validity of someone's high score, any more than Ethan's scores being non-submitable to TG makes his accomplishments any less valid. It is hoped that everyone understands all the implications of this reality.
I have been compiling criteria and it has grown into the following so far: "All scores must be either verified by TwinGalaxies, have been eye witnessed by a member of the DK Community, or played on Twitch (even if replay of inp) or any equivalent. MARP submissions or any other INP’s used must be WolfMAME-only INPs due to advantages allowed by other emulators. Screenshots and photographs are not adequate evidence of a genuine score. All scores on this list must be peer-reviewed in one manner or another. I apologize if this rule excludes anyone's personal best but I wanted this list to function at least one step higher than an honor system." We could add that partial video evidence grouped together with peer support is sufficient.
We have not discussed whether or not the final moments of a game video taped and placed on youtube is sufficient, but I don't see why not if the reputation of the player is well known, and one can vouch for their character.
Obviously, no attempt has been made at favoritism. No attempt has been made, that I am aware of, to apply some kind of double standard. It is my understanding that Steve Wagner's score was supported by a peer within our community. Until Hank's post we have not heard anything concerning Ben Mazowita. So, if Hank supports Ben Mazowita's score, and has offered video proof, then I think that his score should be listed on our high score list. If there are no objections, or suspicions then it shall be added.
We have discussed David Hansen's score. One person gave him two thumbs up, and we had one that drew some caution concerning his score. Does anyone object to David Hansen being on the list based on our criteria. It is my understanding that it didn't and that is why it was not on the list.
EDIT: As of now the list mentions the source of the scores. This offers degrees of certainty concerning scores. The scores that are sourced from TwinGalaxies obviously ensures that the highest standards and verification has occurred. Some have done some higher scores live on Twitch, no verification done on the machines, but have slightly lower scores on the TG scoreboard. We know that it is likely that if they are using the same machines that they have been verified at one time. And then there are those that have done live on Twitch that don't have any scores on TG. Some have seen the score live at an event. For some we may only have partial video of their games, and we could list these as sourced by YouTube. So on and so forth. Even on the list that we have there are degrees of certainty, as far as evidence is concerned.