Race positions dataset

[Duplode]

Extracting the race positions from all ZakStunts scoreboards is not a straightforward matter, even with database access. The positions are computed from the replays rather than stored, and there are all sorts of corner cases to look out for -- name changes, draws, disqualifications, and so forth. For my ratings and race strengths project, I opted to review all the scoreboards and prepare the dataset by hand. A CSV file with the data is available at my project's GitHub repository (attached below is a version of the same file as of ZCT243).

The Track, Racer and Rank columns of the CSV contain what it says on the tin. pipsqueak aliases and name changes have already been unified. The Ghost column value is 1 if the pipsqueak is a known ghost, and 0 otherwise. Lastly, the Status column records the following occurrences about a race entry:

• DSQ: Disqualification, from a 00's ZakStunts race (back then, disqualifications were handed by setting the laptime to 9:99.99 rather than deleting the race entry outright).
• INV: Invalid replay, discovered upon review.
• MSC: CTG's 2014 races.
• EX1: Laptime beyond the "300% and 2 SD" cutoff.
• EX2: Lap driven under an alternative ruleset, such as GAR.
• EX3: Lap driven with a clearly uncompetitive car.

Edit, 21:53 ZakStunts time: I have updated the attached file after re-adding a few 2014 season status notes I had accidentally deleted.

[dreadnaut]

Ooooh, that looks like a lot of work, thank you!

I've never 100% trusted old scoreboard, so it would be interesting to fix the database information, if anything is incorrect. My dream is to be able to recalculate scoreboard for any past season, and consistently get the correct data. (That might remain a dream for the tricky newbie league)

I the meanwhile, I put together basic support for ghost / aliases on pipsqueak profiles, in the shape of a new column on zak_racers and a list at the bottom of profile pages. If you have a list of who's who, I can backfill the table

[alanrotoi]

I think ghost existance should be punish with oblivion or at least not as a different kind of alias. It's cheating and it kills the competition and faithful pipsqueaks will. It wouldn't be another anecdotal column in a database, it must be remarked as a wrong way of behaviour to avoid them.

[dreadnaut]

I think ghost existance should be punish with oblivion or at least not as a different kind of alias. It's cheating and it kills the competition and faithful pipsqueaks will. It wouldn't be another anecdotal column in a database, it must be remarked as a wrong way of behaviour to avoid them.

I mostly agree with the sentiment, but I also feel the duty to record historical information. "Social forgetting" is a thing, and does not improve the chances of unwanted behaviour not repeating.

Would you differentiate between a "clean alias" and a "ghost alias"? Or would you add a word of warning or disclaimer next to the "alias" list?

[Cas]

Yes, I agree with Dreadnaut, and at the same time, can't help but understand Alan. History is important. We have to remember the bad guys and the bad deeds too. Like, in WW2, how could we explain the facts without talking about Hitler?

Un ejemplo más nacional es la remoción de los cuadros de los dictadores. Yo también los odio, pero son historia. Creo que deberían estar ahí. Deberían ponerles un contorno negro o algo así, pero lo aprendido es nuestro patrimonio.

But yeah, it sucks to have something good stained with bad deeds. Yet, as long as there's a way to filter that info in or out, I guess we can deal with it.

[Duplode]

The CSV file is now at my project's GitHub repository; I will try to update it semi-regularly at least.

I the meanwhile, I put together basic support for ghost / aliases on pipsqueak profiles, in the shape of a new column on zak_racers and a list at the bottom of profile pages. If you have a list of who's who, I can backfill the table

That's a good thing to have! As for the list, I have much of the information, but it is not cleaned up yet:

• The ghost list I used to generate the column in the CSV is this one; however, it doesn't mention the provenance of the ghosts, doesn't attempt to distinguish between joke entries and shadier kinds of ghosts, and includes some non-ZakStunts ghosts and even the DSI opponents.
• As for aliases and name changes, they are noted in comments further down the file, though I didn't give much thought about which name to keep when there are multiple reasonable options. In any case, adding those to the new database column looks like a good place to start, so I'll do it now.

I agree on having a way to tell apart legitimate aliases from ghosts, the basic distinction being whether they were used alongside other names by the same person in the same race. The ghosts might be listed separately from the aliases on the profile page, and/or greyed out on the scoreboards.

[Daniel3D]

OFF TOPIC, CAS made me think off it..  [sorry, CAS but you made me go through google translate and remember all this]

Un ejemplo más nacional es la remoción de los cuadros de los dictadores. Yo también los odio, pero son historia. Creo que deberían estar ahí. Deberían ponerles un contorno negro o algo así, pero lo aprendido es nuestro patrimonio.

I agree, in Belgium (that was Neutral in WW1 but was invaded anyway) they post black flags along the fields that have had battles. There are thousands, and they are still maintained after more than a century. There is a memorial that bears the names of more than 54,000 officers and men whose graves are not known, and they remember it every day with the last post. So we will never forget.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiWL2BCfhGg

Ypres (now Ieper) is a town in the Province of West Flanders. The Memorial is situated at the eastern side of the town on the road to Menin (Menen) and Courtrai (Kortrijk). Each night at 8 pm the traffic is stopped at the Menin Gate while buglers of the Last Post Association sound the Last Post in the roadway under the Memorial's arches.

[Daniel3D]

Would you differentiate between a "clean alias" and a "ghost alias"? Or would you add a word of warning or disclaimer next to the "alias" list?

There is a ghost, (someone secretly participates under a different name while racing with its own)
There is an alias. (someone openly participates under a different or a new name and not with another)

They can not exist in the same list in my opinion. Their use and intention is very different.

[alanrotoi]

I think ghost existance should be punish with oblivion or at least not as a different kind of alias. It's cheating and it kills the competition and faithful pipsqueaks will. It wouldn't be another anecdotal column in a database, it must be remarked as a wrong way of behaviour to avoid them.

I mostly agree with the sentiment, but I also feel the duty to record historical information. "Social forgetting" is a thing, and does not improve the chances of unwanted behaviour not repeating.

Would you differentiate between a "clean alias" and a "ghost alias"? Or would you add a word of warning or disclaimer next to the "alias" list?

A bad choise of words from me. If we forget them we may repeat the same story. Ghosts doesn't deserve to be in the same list of pipsqueaks. It wasn't pleasant to see in the scoreboard some new names and you knew they were ghosts but nothing happens... for years. Someday Zak decided to stop it and did something. Maybe some new ghosts keep appearing from time to time filling the scoreboard but they are not decisive or insulting.

Maybe using a [ghost] or a [fake pipsqueak] instead of its name and redirecting it to a different list of ghosts. Remember many people left the community because of them, some projects (like track design contest) were destroyed and many races forgettable.

[dreadnaut]

(Apologies for hijacking your thread, Duplode )

I think I get it now, and I see how my solution of showing ghost as aliases makes them somehow "legitimate", which is not a good idea.

I have reverted the profile changes for the moment, and ghost information won't be visible until we come up with a better idea.

[Duplode]

Here's what I'd suggest after thinking a little more about it:

• Distinguish aliases from ghosts on the database (by splitting the new column, or with an extra flag on the profile, etc.);
• For real pipsqueaks, list only the benign aliases under "Known Aliases" in the profile;
• For ghosts, mention the ghost status and perhaps the ghost owner in the profile of the ghost, but not vice-versa; and
• Make the ghost status directly visible on the scoreboards, perhaps with a grey background on the scoreboard row, or with a ghost 👻 icon.

I have added the legitimate aliases I know of to the database. I think there should be no problem with displaying those; it only gets thornier with the ghosts.

[Cas]

Yep, sorry, I also added too much branch opinion. But in general, we all agree. It's good for registry, but at the same time, it should be very clear they're not the same for respect to honest pipsqueaks