Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
NOTE: Board emails should be working again. Information on forum upgrade and style issues.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 22 released November 17th * EXCLUSIVE * We Are Mentioned in a Book!!! Interview with Mary Guillermin on Rapture, JG & More)
Polls: Favourite Movies (Results), 1998 (Apr 15th), DtC - Ratings (Apr 26th), Coming of Age (Apr 30th)
Challenges: Doubling the Canon, Animation, Middle East
Film of the Week: Monday, May nominations (Apr 30th)

2021 Challenges: Leaderboard and Rules Finalisation

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

2021 Challenges: Leaderboard and Rules Finalisation

#1

Post by sol »

Image

2021 Challenges: Leaderboard and Rules Finalisation

Over the past couple of weeks we have had some rigorous discussions about what we would like to see as a community with the Challenge Series in 2021. We had a discussion thread on the subject and a poll that actually led to even more discussion about where we want to take things moving forward.

With December fast approaching, I think it would be beneficial to finalise some decisions. I'm going to use this OP to state where we stand at the moment and where I would like to take the Official Challenge Series in 2021 since nobody else (so far) has volunteered to step in and take over the reigns since max announced his retirement. If you want to take over instead, now is your time to speak up offer an alternative to what I am proposing!

Points & Overall Leaderboard

There has been a lot of discussion on both of the threads linked-to above about what to do with the overall leaderboard going forward and whether to get rid of points altogether. It is my feeling that there is enough interest in maintaining points to keep an overall leaderboard in place.

Assuming that I will hosting next year's overall leaderboard (speak up NOW if you want to host instead), I want to go with a "less aggressive" and less competitive leaderboard that does not place a large points difference between first and last place. This is the model that I have been championing for a while now, and seconded by sebby, Roger (and a few others who I may have forgotten), this is what I would like to track in 2021 -- assuming that I am hosting the overall leaderboard next year:

RankParticipantPointsChallenges WonTop 5 FinishesTop 10 FinishersTop 20 Finishers
-------


The Tracking TV Dilemma

This is a thornier issue and something that I would be keen to take feedback on, but as mentioned above, I think we should be looking to finalise what we want to do about this pretty quickly, December being just around the corner and all.

These are the results of the poll that we had on the matter:

Image

My thinking is that with 77% of participants wanting a consistent approach to tracking shorts and episodes, it would only be fair to reach some compromise between two most popular options.

We could...
  • Use a compromise runtime - Peaceful floated 80mins = 1pt and that neatly covers 40-44min episodes
  • Let individual challenge host decide if they want to use 60min or 90min for everything not-a-movie
  • Have another (briefer) poll to decide 60 vs 90mins
  • Just go with what got the most votes?
My own personal preference would be an 80min compromise and finally put this issue to bed. But then there are those that didn't vote in the poll because they didn't chime in on the discussion thread and then discovered that they were not happy with either 60 or 90mins. :shrug: It's a thorny issue, but one that I think we somehow need to finalise.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
shugs
Donator
Posts: 710
Joined: November 15th, 2014, 7:00 am
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

#2

Post by shugs »

sol wrote: November 27th, 2020, 10:10 am Use a compromise runtime - Peaceful floated 80mins = 1pt and that neatly covers 40-44min episodes
:thumbsup:
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11118
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#3

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Thanks again for the great summary and leading this discussion!

Going ahead with your new plan for the leaderboard seems indeed the best way to go. Tho I still wouldn't be against a complete overhaul of the whole challenge structure, I'm totally fine with doing it this way since I don't want to spoil other people's fun that do like a competitive aspect.

Regarding the run-time poll. Indeed a majority voted for a consistent approach to tracking shorts and episodes, so I think we should go with that. Personally I voted for 60 mins, but if most people want 90 mins I'm okay with that too. Since the compromise of 75 minutes, which is very close to the other compromise of 80 min, only got 1 vote I think there's little support for that. My suggestion is to go with the 90 minutes rule.We can always re-evaluate and adjust this rule next year again.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11118
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#4

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Al this compromising feels like bargaining at a bazaar

- 120 for this!
- I offer 40
- No it's 120
- That's way too high
- Yours is way too low, the average price of a similar product is 90
- Than yours is still way too high
- Okay 90
- 60!
- No 90, that's as low as I will go!
- 40!
- That's lower than your last offer!
- 40 for this half and 60 for the other half
- No I want one price!
- Okay, that easier yes. Still I offer 60!
- 90!
- 60!
- 85!
- 62!
- 82!
- 63!
- 80!
- .....

:D
User avatar
hurluberlu
Donator
Posts: 2422
Joined: January 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#5

Post by hurluberlu »

On the TV dilemma, I think there are enough total votes and enough votes for the 90 rule to adopt it for next season.
#JeSuisCharlie Liberté, Liberté chérie !

Image
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
sebby
Posts: 6757
Joined: July 4th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#6

Post by sebby »

60 and 90 is a large enough gulf and the two were close enoug hin the poll that I vote for the compromise option. Once upon a time I floated 75 as it sits squaerly in between the two numbers, but 80 would also be fine. Honestly I really would just like to avoid the headache of 90 since two eps of a mini or TV so often would fall just short.

Also, rollover minutes. Yea or nay? I've seen people doing it from time to time but it's never been outlined in the rules of a challeneg afaik. might as well mak a ruling now.
User avatar
RogerTheMovieManiac88
Posts: 1987
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Contact:

#7

Post by RogerTheMovieManiac88 »

As much I would love to keep 60 minutes (at least for short films!), a compromise does seem to be the way to go. 80 minutes might be the most sensible number to settle on, in the interests of the TV viewers and the length of episodes.

Thank you for laying this out in such an accessible and informative fashion, Sol - and thanks as well for being open to feedback on options!
That's all, folks!
User avatar
peeptoad
Posts: 2699
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#8

Post by peeptoad »

Lonewolf2003 wrote: November 27th, 2020, 11:39 am Al this compromising feels like bargaining at a bazaar

- 120 for this!
- I offer 40
- No it's 120
- That's way too high
- Yours is way too low, the average price of a similar product is 90
- Than yours is still way too high
- Okay 90
- 60!
- No 90, that's as low as I will go!
- 40!
- That's lower than your last offer!
- 40 for this half and 60 for the other half
- No I want one price!
- Okay, that easier yes. Still I offer 60!
- 90!
- 60!
- 85!
- 62!
- 82!
- 63!
- 80!
- .....

:D
User avatar
flavo5000
Posts: 4312
Joined: July 10th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Arkansas, USA
Contact:

#9

Post by flavo5000 »

I would agree that 80 min is definitely better than 90, mainly for the "slightly too high for two 40 min. episode reason). With 80 vs. 60, basically 40 minute episodes won't be impacted one way or the other. It would require two to get a point either way. 80 min. mainly penalizes 25 min. TV and shorts, basically requiring 4 episodes of TV or an extra 20 minutes of shorts. Eh, it's fine.
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#10

Post by sol »

sebby wrote: November 27th, 2020, 1:12 pm 80 would also be fine. Honestly I really would just like to avoid the headache of 90 since two eps of a mini or TV so often would fall just short.

Also, rollover minutes. Yea or nay? I've seen people doing it from time to time but it's never been outlined in the rules of a challeneg afaik. might as well mak a ruling now.
I don't really have much of an opinion on rolling over minutes. I have never done it before myself, but I don't mind when I see it happen.

And yeah, 80 makes the most sense to me at the moment. The option seems to have adequate support on this thread so far.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11118
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#11

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

sol wrote: November 27th, 2020, 3:07 pm
sebby wrote: November 27th, 2020, 1:12 pm 80 would also be fine. Honestly I really would just like to avoid the headache of 90 since two eps of a mini or TV so often would fall just short.

Also, rollover minutes. Yea or nay? I've seen people doing it from time to time but it's never been outlined in the rules of a challeneg afaik. might as well mak a ruling now.
I don't really have much of an opinion on rolling over minutes. I have never done it before myself, but I don't mind when I see it happen.

And yeah, 80 makes the most sense to me at the moment. The option seems to have adequate support on this thread so far.
If we allow roll-over minutes than I see no problems at all with just going with 90.
User avatar
RogerTheMovieManiac88
Posts: 1987
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Contact:

#12

Post by RogerTheMovieManiac88 »

By ''rollover minutes'', do you mean something like one batch of 90 minutes and another batch of 70 minutes (assuming we go with this 80 minute compromise)? As long as the person reports correctly, I think it would be fine. But, perhaps I am not understanding...
That's all, folks!
blocho
Donator
Posts: 4537
Joined: July 20th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#13

Post by blocho »

Thanks for all your work sol. Whatever you decide on leaderboards is fine with me.

As for TV, 90 minutes has a clear plurality in the poll, so that's what I would support. But 80 is so close to 90 that I really don't care. I'm OK with either one.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12224
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#14

Post by St. Gloede »

I have to admit I never thought about the overall leaderboard (never followed it), I assumed the leaderboard discussion was about the individual leaderboards. I like the set-up though.

-

From the results above it seems the majority want TV at 90m (66%) and shorts at 60m (54%), so that might be the easiest.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11118
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#15

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

RogerTheMovieManiac88 wrote: November 27th, 2020, 4:09 pm By ''rollover minutes'', do you mean something like one batch of 90 minutes and another batch of 70 minutes (assuming we go with this 80 minute compromise)? As long as the person reports correctly, I think it would be fine. But, perhaps I am not understanding...
I meant that you take your leftover minutes from one batch to your next batch. F.e. we go with the 90 minutes rules; you watch 3 episode of 42 minutes. That's 126 minutes. 90m = 1 point. So you have 126-90 = 36 minutes leftover. Which you can count in your next batch.
User avatar
RogerTheMovieManiac88
Posts: 1987
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Contact:

#16

Post by RogerTheMovieManiac88 »

Lonewolf2003 wrote: November 27th, 2020, 5:08 pm
RogerTheMovieManiac88 wrote: November 27th, 2020, 4:09 pm By ''rollover minutes'', do you mean something like one batch of 90 minutes and another batch of 70 minutes (assuming we go with this 80 minute compromise)? As long as the person reports correctly, I think it would be fine. But, perhaps I am not understanding...
I meant that you take your leftover minutes from one batch to your next batch. F.e. we go with the 90 minutes rules; you watch 3 episode of 42 minutes. That's 126 minutes. 90m = 1 point. So you have 126-90 = 36 minutes leftover. Which you can count in your next batch.
Ah, I see. I think such a carrying over of ''surplus'' minutes should be accommodated. That's the main reason why I favoured keeping the 60 minute set-up. It was easy to work and calculate.
That's all, folks!
User avatar
sebby
Posts: 6757
Joined: July 4th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#17

Post by sebby »

Lonewolf2003 wrote: November 27th, 2020, 3:09 pm
sol wrote: November 27th, 2020, 3:07 pm
sebby wrote: November 27th, 2020, 1:12 pm 80 would also be fine. Honestly I really would just like to avoid the headache of 90 since two eps of a mini or TV so often would fall just short.

Also, rollover minutes. Yea or nay? I've seen people doing it from time to time but it's never been outlined in the rules of a challeneg afaik. might as well mak a ruling now.
I don't really have much of an opinion on rolling over minutes. I have never done it before myself, but I don't mind when I see it happen.

And yeah, 80 makes the most sense to me at the moment. The option seems to have adequate support on this thread so far.
If we allow roll-over minutes than I see no problems at all with just going with 90.
I don't think rollover affects the thinking of 80 vs 90; it will just hopefully prevent people from dumping huge totals at the end rather than updating tv/minis/shorts as they go, which would be preferable for a number of reasons.

80 was a compromise that it seemed for a few hours ( :lol: ) settled that debate; if there are people still pushing for a different number, let's just have a 60 vs 90 poll and if one side gets a clear majority (two-thirds?), that's that. If not, we go with a compromise figure of 75 or 80 mins. Thoughts?
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#18

Post by sol »

Let's just keep it at 80 minutes.

Yes, 90mins won in the poll, but there was still significant support for 60mins, so 80mins is a logical compromise as it is closer to 90 than 60. Also, as it has been mentioned many times on this thread, 80mins works better than 90 for tracking TV episodes.

I also think that a compromise is beneficial in order to avoid disenfranchising participants who voted for a shorter runtime.

C'mon, guys, it's almost December, let's wrap this up already. No more polls, please. 80 minutes makes sense.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
blocho
Donator
Posts: 4537
Joined: July 20th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#19

Post by blocho »

Hear hear! I don't imagine anyone has any serious objection, right? Everyone had a chance to be heard. Let us march forth into the sunlight of new challenges.
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 6487
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#20

Post by Onderhond »

I'm fine with the 80 minutes, would prefer to see the rollover minutes go, but it seems I'm one of the few/the only one.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12224
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#21

Post by St. Gloede »

I do think 80 is a bit steep for shorts, but that's what compromises are for. Let's consider this a done deal and start getting excited for December, and 2021.
User avatar
RogerTheMovieManiac88
Posts: 1987
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Contact:

#22

Post by RogerTheMovieManiac88 »

Yeah. I probably won't be watching all that many shorts for the challenges next year, in light of this push up to 80 minutes. I do feel a tinge of sadness at that. However, I recognise that more people voted for 90 minutes (on the basis of TV) and 80 minutes will allow people to work in TV episodes. I imagine I shall be focusing on features for my 2021 challenge viewing.
That's all, folks!
User avatar
albajos
Posts: 6942
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 6:00 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

#23

Post by albajos »

sol, always wanting to fix something that isn't broken


Let the hosts decide, some incentive they must have to host them..


I have never seen anyone else asking for a change. Don't create a poll just because you want to control all challenges yourself

There's quite a difference between an animation challenge where there us so extremely many 7 minute shorts, Comedy challenge with their 22 min episodes vs the more normal runtimes. One overall rule just don't make sense
Last edited by albajos on November 28th, 2020, 10:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 31380
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#24

Post by mightysparks »

I think this is something that needs to be standardized for challenges, not up to every host. That just makes things confusing. I was happy with 60 or 90, so I think 80 is fine. I also think rollover minutes should be allowed because those minutes are still being watched so they should still get counted.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#25

Post by sol »

albajos wrote: November 28th, 2020, 10:41 am I have never seen anyone else asking for a change. Don't create a poll just because you want to control all challenges yourself
I was intrigued by that comment, but then I remembered that you have had quite a few lengthy absences from the forum this year. You may have missed some of the discussion and debate on the issue while you were away.

Here are some snippets of the discussion from the Future Challenges thread:

mjf replying to peeptoad - viewtopic.php?p=658764#p658764
flavo replying to mightysparks - viewtopic.php?p=659131#p659131
jal90 replying to cinephage - viewtopic.php?p=659075#p659075

I am not the only person who has been discussing this issue this year.

I am also not the only person asking for a change:
blocho wrote: November 15th, 2020, 7:03 pm I should add that even if people don't want the runtime system, let's at least decide on a consistent, simpler system. Something like 90 minutes = one point for TV episodes, miniseries episodes, and shorts. Ninety minutes is about the average runtime of a feature, so there's some rough equivalency.
flavo5000 wrote: November 15th, 2020, 8:35 pm On the subject of TV, I will say I'm not AS negative on TV as I was last year. Looking at the challenges this year, I haven't really seen anyone horribly abuse the TV rules like last year. Having said that, on the challenges that do allow TV (and I definitely don't think all of them should like Unofficial), I would support a higher runtime total to count as a point for episodes (60 to 90 minutes probably). Having someone watch 12 40-minute episodes count for the same amount of points as watching 12 2-hour movies seems pretty unbalanced.
shugs wrote: November 16th, 2020, 7:12 am +1 on the "X minutes of anything that's not a feature = 1 point" idea. I think the current rules are pretty convoluted and this would simplify things. 90 minutes sounds like a good middle ground.
maxwelldeux wrote: November 17th, 2020, 6:42 am
blocho wrote: November 17th, 2020, 12:14 am It seems like opinion is coalescing against my proposed runtime system but in favor of my proposed fallback -- 90 minutes = 1 point for all TV episodes, miniseries episodes, and shorts. That's something I can live with.

By the way, I'm in favor of keeping the leaderboards as is
I can live with that too. The biggest thing I like is the consistency across everything.
Daviddoes wrote: November 17th, 2020, 2:23 pm +1 from me for shorts/TV being 90 minutes for a point
And that's just from Page 1 of the discussion thread linked to above.

Oh, and the reason why I had a poll was because it was requested. More than once:
sebby wrote: November 18th, 2020, 8:31 am I would still like a poll to decide the 90 min rule.
I mean, I totally get that if you skimmed through the discussion thread and didn't read the Future Challenge thread, it might appear that I am trying to control things for the sake of it, but as far as I am concerned, all that I am doing it looking to improve the system based on the feedback from others.

I would also disagree that we need to provide more incentives for people to host (since we haven't had trouble recruiting hosts this year) but I guess that's a more subjective comment and perhaps something that could be worked on - though the ability to control Bonus Challenges and promote screenshots from certain films seems to be enough incentive at the moment to drive volunteers to host.

Thanks for the feedback. Great to see you more active again.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 6487
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#26

Post by Onderhond »

mightysparks wrote: November 28th, 2020, 10:46 am I also think rollover minutes should be allowed because those minutes are still being watched so they should still get counted.
That just gives more incentive again to watching anything but feature films. No rollover minutes there.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11118
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#27

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

sol wrote: November 28th, 2020, 2:07 am Let's just keep it at 80 minutes.

Yes, 90mins won in the poll, but there was still significant support for 60mins, so 80mins is a logical compromise as it is closer to 90 than 60. Also, as it has been mentioned many times on this thread, 80mins works better than 90 for tracking TV episodes.

I also think that a compromise is beneficial in order to avoid disenfranchising participants who voted for a shorter runtime.

C'mon, guys, it's almost December, let's wrap this up already. No more polls, please. 80 minutes makes sense.
So we got a whole more month to discuss and poll this. If we reach a decision at 31st of December that's still in time. So I first want a poll about start discussion about what kind of poll we going to do. :P


Sure, I'm totally fine with.
Obgeoff
Posts: 627
Joined: May 29th, 2019, 9:23 am
Contact:

#28

Post by Obgeoff »

80 minutes and the leaderboard is good. I’ll be interested to see if it leads to less shorts being watched in 2021 than 2020 but that’s not something to worry about. I’d be in favour of retaining rollover minutes, otherwise more time gets spent planning my viewing rather than just queueing things up.
Image
User avatar
flavo5000
Posts: 4312
Joined: July 10th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Arkansas, USA
Contact:

#29

Post by flavo5000 »

Maybe it's just me but I've never seen being able to decide on the number of minutes for TV or shorts as a motivation to host a challenge....
User avatar
peeptoad
Posts: 2699
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#30

Post by peeptoad »

sol wrote: November 28th, 2020, 2:07 am Let's just keep it at 80 minutes.
sounds good, sol...
User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 8965
Joined: June 7th, 2016, 6:00 am
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#31

Post by maxwelldeux »

sol wrote: November 28th, 2020, 12:01 pm
albajos wrote: November 28th, 2020, 10:41 am I have never seen anyone else asking for a change. Don't create a poll just because you want to control all challenges yourself
I was intrigued by that comment, but then I remembered that you have had quite a few lengthy absences from the forum this year. You may have missed some of the discussion and debate on the issue while you were away.
maxwelldeux wrote: November 17th, 2020, 6:42 am
blocho wrote: November 17th, 2020, 12:14 am It seems like opinion is coalescing against my proposed runtime system but in favor of my proposed fallback -- 90 minutes = 1 point for all TV episodes, miniseries episodes, and shorts. That's something I can live with.

By the way, I'm in favor of keeping the leaderboards as is
I can live with that too. The biggest thing I like is the consistency across everything.
Don't quote me and include me in the list of people asking for a change - I'm not. And this entire hullabaloo has been really off-putting.
User avatar
shugs
Donator
Posts: 710
Joined: November 15th, 2014, 7:00 am
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

#32

Post by shugs »

Obgeoff wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:04 pm 80 minutes and the leaderboard is good. I’ll be interested to see if it leads to less shorts being watched in 2021 than 2020 but that’s not something to worry about. I’d be in favour of retaining rollover minutes, otherwise more time gets spent planning my viewing rather than just queueing things up.
From my experience as a host, most people don't really watch shorts anyways. There's a more significant number of TV watches. I have the spreadsheets for challenges I've hosted, will generate some stats the next days.
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#33

Post by sol »

maxwelldeux wrote: November 28th, 2020, 8:32 pm Don't quote me and include me in the list of people asking for a change - I'm not. And this entire hullabaloo has been really off-putting.
Hmm. I didn't think that I was quoting you out of context since you mentioned at least a couple of times on the thread how having X minutes shorts and Y minutes for TV episodes was "the worst possible option" since consistency makes it easier to host and participate. Upon rereading the thread and some of the other things you said, it does make sense that you feel that you have been quoted out of context. I apologise; that wasn't my intention.

I have found this whole conversation uncomfortable too. It's a thorny issue, but given all the debates and arguments this year, I feel that we are doing the right thing by airing the topic in the open before 2021.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#34

Post by sol »

shugs wrote: November 28th, 2020, 9:01 pm
Obgeoff wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:04 pm 80 minutes and the leaderboard is good. I’ll be interested to see if it leads to less shorts being watched in 2021 than 2020 but that’s not something to worry about. I’d be in favour of retaining rollover minutes, otherwise more time gets spent planning my viewing rather than just queueing things up.
From my experience as a host, most people don't really watch shorts anyways. There's a more significant number of TV watches. I have the spreadsheets for challenges I've hosted, will generate some stats the next days.
I think this is true, to be honest. I don't have stats on it either right now, but I recall a lot more TV than shorts being logged in the busier challenges such as Horror.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 8965
Joined: June 7th, 2016, 6:00 am
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#35

Post by maxwelldeux »

sol wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:30 am
maxwelldeux wrote: November 28th, 2020, 8:32 pm Don't quote me and include me in the list of people asking for a change - I'm not. And this entire hullabaloo has been really off-putting.
Hmm. I didn't think that I was quoting you out of context since you mentioned at least a couple of times on the thread how having X minutes shorts and Y minutes for TV episodes was "the worst possible option" since consistency makes it easier to host and participate. Upon rereading the thread and some of the other things you said, it does make sense that you feel that you have been quoted out of context. I apologise; that wasn't my intention.

I have found this whole conversation uncomfortable too. It's a thorny issue, but given all the debates and arguments this year, I feel that we are doing the right thing by airing the topic in the open before 2021.
Mountain out of a mole hill. We're solving a problem that doesn't exist. But in the process, we're making everything about the challenges as un-fun as possible. So if we're doing the right thing by trying to suck the fun out of the challenges, then mission accomplished, at least for me.

Why am I not going to do the yearly leaderboard? a) It's no longer fun for me, b) I'm getting nothing out of it personally, c) there seems to be a collective "whatever" about it on the forum now, d) This entire conversation has put me off doing more than the bare minimum for anything relating to the challenges, e) I'm expending far too much mental energy on these stupid challenges.
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#36

Post by sol »

maxwelldeux wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:57 am Why am I not going to do the yearly leaderboard? a) It's no longer fun for me, b) I'm getting nothing out of it personally, c) there seems to be a collective "whatever" about it on the forum now, d) This entire conversation has put me off doing more than the bare minimum for anything relating to the challenges, e) I'm expending far too much mental energy on these stupid challenges.
I'm sorry you feel that way. :( I enjoyed your yearly challenge leaderboard and awards, and I think a lot of other folks did too. I know the results and awards threads didn't always attract replies, but I would imagine that most active participants at least looked your awards and leaderboards and cared about their progress in them.

That said, sure - you shouldn't be doing it if it is no longer fun for you or if you feel like you are expending too much energy on it. I really appreciate all of the time and effort you placed into the Challenge Olympics over the past three years. :hug: :poshclap:
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
72aicm
Donator
Posts: 3518
Joined: November 13th, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#37

Post by 72aicm »

maxwelldeux wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:57 am Mountain out of a mole hill. We're solving a problem that doesn't exist. But in the process, we're making everything about the challenges as un-fun as possible. So if we're doing the right thing by trying to suck the fun out of the challenges, then mission accomplished, at least for me.
Finally a sane paragraph in this whole discussion. 100% agreed.
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 11115
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#38

Post by sol »

Having a consistent amount of time for short films and television episodes should make participation easier. It is possible to plan viewings in advance by knowing the rules that individual hosts will be using (since they are all the same) and it should make hosting easier since the onus is taken away from the host to determine a suitable runtime for eligible TV episodes.

I honestly don't mind returning to what we were doing this year, i.e. hosts choosing themselves whether to use anything from 60 to 180 minutes for television episodes, but this option was put up to vote in the poll (that others requested me to run) and only received one vote. I mean, we *could* ignore the poll results since I have no idea how many participants abstained from voting. Looking at the poll results though, there does seem to be an appetite for consistency between how many minutes of shorts and television episodes are worth a single point, and I don't know if it is likely that a greater number of participants abstained rather than voted in the poll.

It is certainly not my intention to suck the fun out of participating in challenges. These discussions are not fun for me, but I want to avoid squabbling over runtimes in 2021 and the easiest way to do that seemed to be to allow everyone to voice their opinions before the 2021 challenge series begins.

If people want me to step aside, I'm fine to do that. I don't really need the extra workload and stress.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 6487
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#39

Post by Onderhond »

Gonna be so unfun watching all these films instead of TV in 2021. Stupid film forums. :party:
User avatar
72aicm
Donator
Posts: 3518
Joined: November 13th, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#40

Post by 72aicm »

Onderhond wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:54 pm Gonna be so unfun watching all these films instead of TV in 2021. Stupid film forums. :party:
I don’t think I’ve logged a single tv-episode for our forum challenges. And I do not watch that much TV. So that’s not really the point here.
Post Reply