Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 3647472" data-attributes="member: 94">Errrg, there's too much overhead with that-- and it doesn't allow the entries to come in publicly.Pairing people off also means we have a series of &quot;brackets&quot; which commits winners to continuing on to the next bracket, and eliminates the &quot;horse race&quot; aspect of the open field.The simplicity of the &quot;I'll play!&quot; post followed by &quot;Ok! Here's your entry!&quot; means that people can join very easily. (And honestly, we only had 10 entries or so last time, let's not make it harder to play.)Based on your feedback so far I think we're really tilting at two different things here.1) The desire to not get saddled with an unwieldy entry2) The desire for head-to-head competition vs. the open field.With regards to #2, I like the open field. It is faster to adjudicate and gives the voters a chance to see everything at the same time, and doesn't require me to commit to judging this thing like a tournament.So honing in on what we can accomplish wrt #1, maybe the first thing to do is to review our list of ingredients and perhaps weed a few out and change a few around?That, coupled with the competitor's choice of adding a word to his ingredients once he gets them? Give every competitor two titles to choose from?Though I feel very strongly that &quot;rising to the challenge&quot; is an important part of proving your mettle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 3647472, member: 94"] Errrg, there's too much overhead with that-- and it doesn't allow the entries to come in publicly. Pairing people off also means we have a series of "brackets" which commits winners to continuing on to the next bracket, and eliminates the "horse race" aspect of the open field. The simplicity of the "I'll play!" post followed by "Ok! Here's your entry!" means that people can join very easily. (And honestly, we only had 10 entries or so last time, let's not make it harder to play.) Based on your feedback so far I think we're really tilting at two different things here. 1) The desire to not get saddled with an unwieldy entry 2) The desire for head-to-head competition vs. the open field. With regards to #2, I like the open field. It is faster to adjudicate and gives the voters a chance to see everything at the same time, and doesn't require me to commit to judging this thing like a tournament. So honing in on what we can accomplish wrt #1, maybe the first thing to do is to review our list of ingredients and perhaps weed a few out and change a few around? That, coupled with the competitor's choice of adding a word to his ingredients once he gets them? Give every competitor two titles to choose from? Though I feel very strongly that "rising to the challenge" is an important part of proving your mettle. [/QUOTE]

Verification