Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Polls: 1930s (Results), 1972 (Jun 21st), 1954 awards (Jun 22nd), 2010s (Jun 28th)
Challenges: 1950s, Eastern Europe, Banned Films
Film of the Week: Scandal Sheet, July nominations (Jun 28th)

2019 Challenges: Rules and Ideas Discussion

Post Reply
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

2019 Challenges: Rules and Ideas Discussion

#1

Post by sol » December 1st, 2018, 6:35 am

In September this year, we brainstormed and discussed Official Challenge ideas for 2019. During October, we voted on these options and in November we discussed how to schedule the options that proved to be the most popular. With the 2019 Challenge Schedule now in final form, I am opening up a final discussion thread to talk about rules, eligibility, consistency and any other issues that anybody wishes to discuss moving forward.

Image

One of the issues that has arisen at multiple points throughout the year is what to do with including TV episodes in the Official Challenges. I would like to conduct a poll to determine the direction that we should take with this going forward. I think it is first important though to check that I have all the options that have been suggested. This is what I have so far:

Possible ways to deal with TV episodes in 2019
a. Exclude all TV episodes from Official Challenges
b. Cap the maximum points that can be attained for TV episode watches (e.g. 20 points)
c. Cap the maximum percentage of points attained for TV episode watched (e.g. 20%)
d. Alter the 60 minutes of TV episodes to a higher threshold (e.g. 120 or 180 minutes)
e. Only permit TV episodes that are Official Checks
e. Only allow entire series/seasons (e.g. 1 season = 1 point)
f. Leave it up to whoever hosts the Challenge to make the decision

Some consistency things to think about:
- Some challenges have feature film length as 45mins; others as 40mins (does this need to be consistent?)
- There was something else, but it's slipped my mind...

Any feedback on the speed with which I have been rolling out these threads?
- Do you want more/less time to discuss Challenge options before voting for them? (we had about three weeks this year)
- Do you want more/less time to vote for Challenge options before results are compiled? (we had around five weeks this year)
- Do you want more/less time to schedule the successful options for the following year? (it took us around 9 days this year)

I could start these threads later in the year (e.g. begin halfway through September) next year. Assuming that I'm still up to the tasks of doing them.

Image

Other useful information:

LINKS
September Challenge Ideas Discussion thread
October Challenge Awards & Stats Discussion thread
November Setting Up the Schedule thread

2019 Challenge Schedule
MonthCountry ChallengeGenre/Decade ChallengeTheme Challenge
January Russia/USSR Sci-Fi/Fantasy Rosenbaum Essentials
February China/HK/Taiwan 1930s Academy Award Nominees
March France War Directed by Women
April Australia/NZ/Oceania 1940s Doubling the Canon Nominees
May Iran Western In Competition at Cannes
June Eastern Europe 1950s Banned Films/Video Nasty
July Benelux Mystery/Suspense/Thriller Low IMDb Rating
August UK/Ireland Romance <400 Checks
September Japan 21st Century Silent Era
October Latin America & Caribbean Horror TSPDT + TSPDT 21st Century
November Korean Peninsula Film Noir Unofficial
December Italy Documentary Conquering the World
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

psychotronicbeatnik
Donator
Posts: 1330
Joined: Feb 04, 2017
Location: Oregon
Contact:

#2

Post by psychotronicbeatnik » December 1st, 2018, 6:46 pm

I would like to see TV still allowed. There are naturally some challenges that will automatically eliminate it - most of the challenges based on lists or earlier decades for instance - but if it fits the challenge then it should be allowed.

I understand the frustration with length but I think many hosts have been going too far in the opposite direction. 90 minutes of TV for a point would be a reasonable length.

Rather than limit to a certain number of episodes, I would rather see a percentage limit imposed. 25% of a person's viewings can be TV. That means if someone is willing to watch 75 movies then they can also watch and get 25 points from TV. The 20 limit on TV that was imposed in one challenge this year didn't even allow for the watching of an entire season of most series.

There must be a clear clarification between TV and mini-series unless the same rules apply to both.

Feature film length should be standardized across all challenges. It seems like this last year it was always set at 40 minutes but maybe i missed something.

The timing of the discussions/polls for setting the challenges felt about right but i would be OK with speeding it up. Maybe allow two weeks for each set of polls/discussions.

Something else that needs to be addressed is people who wait late in the game to post. It's very disheartening to be the leader or competing for the lead in a challenge all month long only to have someone get ahead of you in a single post. It's fine to let people be in the challenge and not post until late in the game but they should not be allowed to win.

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#3

Post by maxwelldeux » December 1st, 2018, 7:19 pm

I'm also in the "let TV in" camp. I think it can be a great way to experience different cultures, genres, etc. With the exception of the "Unofficial" challenge, I'd have no problems with TV being included at all.

What I hate the most are the different rules for TV. As a challenge participant, I hate having to track TV in some weird way; I'm set up to handle features and shorts, but having to track and automate a way to count the TV I might watch is annoying. As a challenge host, I hate having to track and monitor additional rules - it's why I haven't implemented them in the challenges I host.

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#4

Post by sol » December 2nd, 2018, 1:53 am

psychotronicbeatnik wrote:
December 1st, 2018, 6:46 pm
Rather than limit to a certain number of episodes, I would rather see a percentage limit imposed. 25% of a person's viewings can be TV.
As indicated above, this will be one of the options that you'll be able to vote for when I release the poll on the subject.
psychotronicbeatnik wrote:
December 1st, 2018, 6:46 pm
Something else that needs to be addressed is people who wait late in the game to post. It's very disheartening to be the leader or competing for the lead in a challenge all month long only to have someone get ahead of you in a single post. It's fine to let people be in the challenge and not post until late in the game but they should not be allowed to win.
I agree that this is an issue, and I actually don't think it should be fine for participants to post at the last minute regardless of whether or not they win. There are a couple of participants who have done just that this month and I can tell you it's quite disheartening to see their long lists of films seen that they have kept hidden/secretive. I understand that there are sometimes extenuating circumstances, but both of these users were very active on the message boards during November and could have easily posted an update partway through the month.

Unfortunately, I don't have an easy solution to this problem. I suppose in terms of fairness, we could ask participants to indicate at the start of the month whether they are going to play Invisible Man style or not. And maybe then get them to link us to their iCM pages or something so that the more competitive participants out there can keep track of the competition. I don't know. I realise that this is not the biggest issue out there since yeah, we're all competing against ourselves and all, but if max is going to start handing out awards next year to everyone who finishes in the top 5 for a given challenge, it doesn't seem very sporting to award all five imaginary statuettes to invisible man participants.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#5

Post by sol » December 2nd, 2018, 2:02 am

maxwelldeux wrote:
December 1st, 2018, 7:19 pm
I'm also in the "let TV in" camp. I think it can be a great way to experience different cultures, genres, etc. With the exception of the "Unofficial" challenge, I'd have no problems with TV being included at all.
Mm. But if we say that the Challenges are all about expanding one's horizons, it is really fair for us to be awarding a Challenge win to the one participant who spends the whole month watching the same TV show?

On a personal note, I don't want a situation in which I need to include TV shows in order to be competitive. I'm a movie watcher first and foremost.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#6

Post by maxwelldeux » December 2nd, 2018, 7:33 am

sol wrote:
December 2nd, 2018, 2:02 am
maxwelldeux wrote:
December 1st, 2018, 7:19 pm
I'm also in the "let TV in" camp. I think it can be a great way to experience different cultures, genres, etc. With the exception of the "Unofficial" challenge, I'd have no problems with TV being included at all.
Mm. But if we say that the Challenges are all about expanding one's horizons, it is really fair for us to be awarding a Challenge win to the one participant who spends the whole month watching the same TV show?

On a personal note, I don't want a situation in which I need to include TV shows in order to be competitive. I'm a movie watcher first and foremost.
To your first point, I have a couple responses. First, let's not overstate the importance of a challenge win - it's an unimportant competition on an unimportant forum. Don't get me wrong - I obviously love this stuff, but it's all for fun and socializing and conversation. Second, I'd argue that the answer to your question is "yes", and it's an issue of breadth vs. depth. While 30 different Iranian documentaries would probably give me a pretty broad idea of the culture, 30 episodes of an Iranian tv series would give a deeper understanding of an aspect of Iranian culture.

To your second point, I get what you're saying. But we all have the same rules and opportunities, and there will always be the gamesmanship aspect of the challenges. So some people are going to push the rules and apply them as written to compete and win or reach milestones. For example, it'd a hell of a coincidence if my watchlist randomly included ~eight 40-60 minute documentaries on the last day of the 1990-Present challenge, the only challenge so far this year where I hit 100 points... This is actually why I wanted to do the overall leaderboard and the various awards; to reward and encourage breadth and depth across the various challenges. Sure people can dominate a challenge or two, but if you look at the top of the challenge leaderboard, you see exactly the folks you'd want to see up there based on challenge participation.

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5196
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#7

Post by albajos » December 2nd, 2018, 9:16 am

I write in the OP usually:

"If you're in the top 3, please post at least every second day."

so if they don't they are simply not following the rules. Of course if the winner is set early (like me in the Nordic) it is possible to be more lenient.

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#8

Post by sol » December 2nd, 2018, 11:19 am

maxwelldeux wrote:
December 2nd, 2018, 7:33 am
Sure people can dominate a challenge or two, but if you look at the top of the challenge leaderboard, you see exactly the folks you'd want to see up there based on challenge participation.
Yeah, I get that, and if nobody else is really fussed about having a consistent approach to TV episodes, I guess we'll just do what we have been doing this year and let individual hosts decide. I did get the feeling throughout the year that there was a move against TV episodes counting, but if that's not the case then, as always, I am okay with bowing to majority view.

Interesting image (it's all you):
SpoilerShow
Image

Though I guess that just goes to show that we talk to each other a lot (no surprise there).

albajos wrote:
December 2nd, 2018, 9:16 am
I write in the OP usually:

"If you're in the top 3, please post at least every second day."

so if they don't they are simply not following the rules.
I like that notion, but I'm not sure how easy it would be to enforce. What would you do if somebody violated the rule? Exclude them? Drop them out of the top 3?

The Criterion/MoC Challenge that I have been hosting has three participants in the top 10 who only posted in the final 48 hours of the Challenge.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
funkybusiness
Donator
Posts: 10419
Joined: Jan 22, 2013
Contact:

#9

Post by funkybusiness » December 2nd, 2018, 11:47 am

:lol: part of my lack of enthusiasm for posting updates in the CC/MoC challenge was because I saw the 72 and zuma have crazy amounts of watches and thought I stood no chance. Turns out I tied 4th! I was the most surprised by that. I should've posted more often but I suffer from some serious procrastination :/

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5196
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#10

Post by albajos » December 2nd, 2018, 2:51 pm

sol wrote:
December 2nd, 2018, 11:19 am
I like that notion, but I'm not sure how easy it would be to enforce. What would you do if somebody violated the rule? Exclude them? Drop them out of the top 3?
It hasn't really been an issue, but if it would happen I wouldn't let them win.

But its all about keeping the competition fair. If we know someone post a list of 25 new movies every sunday then the competition are still somewhat predicatable for the others.

But I wouldn't let someone into the challenge if they end up in the top 3 with their only post.

(It is also much more fun to follow what the others see during the challenge. My last two have been very transparent with everyone be able to check the other movies in a imdb list. Which to me is just a big part of the challenge)

User avatar
3eyes
Donator
Posts: 6513
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

#11

Post by 3eyes » December 3rd, 2018, 2:25 pm

I generally post right away; for TV series I post at the end of a season, or when I've decided I've watched enough.

And as Albie says, it's a gift to others to post as one goes along (especially with comments), so folks can add things to their watchlists.
:run: STILL the Gaffer!

User avatar
shugs
Donator
Posts: 220
Joined: Nov 15, 2014
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

#12

Post by shugs » December 3rd, 2018, 5:48 pm

I don't have anything against TV series (though I'd raise the limit to 90 minutes), but please ban Dancing with the Stars, wrestling matches, cooking shows and other oddities I've seen in some challenges.

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#13

Post by maxwelldeux » December 3rd, 2018, 8:25 pm

shugs wrote:
December 3rd, 2018, 5:48 pm
I don't have anything against TV series (though I'd raise the limit to 90 minutes), but please ban Dancing with the Stars, wrestling matches, cooking shows and other oddities I've seen in some challenges.
Well, as the primary offender of this (I think), my counter would be "let's not have challenges where shitty reality TV could conceivably count." :teehee:

But yeah - with the exception of the Unofficial challenge (where we're likely to exclude TV anyway), none of the challenges next year will have this problem.

User avatar
72allinncallme
Donator
Posts: 2204
Joined: Nov 13, 2016
Contact:

#14

Post by 72allinncallme » December 3rd, 2018, 8:55 pm

maxwelldeux wrote:
December 3rd, 2018, 8:25 pm
shugs wrote:
December 3rd, 2018, 5:48 pm
I don't have anything against TV series (though I'd raise the limit to 90 minutes), but please ban Dancing with the Stars, wrestling matches, cooking shows and other oddities I've seen in some challenges.
Well, as the primary offender of this (I think), my counter would be "let's not have challenges where shitty reality TV could conceivably count." :teehee:

But yeah - with the exception of the Unofficial challenge (where we're likely to exclude TV anyway), none of the challenges next year will have this problem.
Every Country have shitty reality TV. So the problem’s still there. Every month...

I’d vote for a percentage/20p max.

User avatar
RogerTheMovieManiac88
Posts: 1155
Joined: Feb 04, 2017
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Contact:

#15

Post by RogerTheMovieManiac88 » December 5th, 2018, 7:33 am

I don't really watch TV for the challenges but I don't see why those who wish to should be impinged upon. I'm perfectly fine with episodes longer than 40 minutes counting for a point and the normal 60 minutes of shorts rule applying for episodes that have to be added up.

That would be my preference.
That's all, folks!

User avatar
Daviddoes
Posts: 1126
Joined: Aug 06, 2012
Contact:

#16

Post by Daviddoes » December 5th, 2018, 7:54 am

Best Choice:
d. Alter the 60 minutes of TV episodes to a higher threshold (e.g. 120 or 180 minutes)

Second Best:

e. Only permit TV episodes that are Official Checks

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#17

Post by sol » December 5th, 2018, 10:20 am

Daviddoes wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 7:54 am
Second Best:
e. Only permit TV episodes that are Official Checks
This is the option that I would be supporting if we take things to a poll.

At this stage though, I don't know if I will be releasing a poll on the matter since the vast majority of us seem to just want it left up to the individual hosts to do what they want as long as episodes are somehow included. I can still release a poll though if there is the interest for it.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
peeptoad
Posts: 960
Joined: Feb 04, 2017
Location: Boston
Contact:

#18

Post by peeptoad » December 5th, 2018, 10:46 am

regarding the TV eps-

one of these would be my top choice:
c. Cap the maximum percentage of points attained for TV episode watched (e.g. 20%)
d. Alter the 60 minutes of TV episodes to a higher threshold (e.g. 120 or 180 minutes)

and failing either of those I'd go with option e (the first option e that is, "Only permit TV episodes that are Official Checks").
Truthfully, I don't watch much TV (as opposed to film) so I'll be fine with whatever ultimate decision is made.


As for the length of film I say go with either 40 or 45 minutes, but make it consistent throughout. It'd be simpler for me to not have to reference each thread to determine if a film is long enough, but just my opinion.
And I really am fine with what you did this year regarding speed of rolling out the polls. I hope you continue next year though since you did a great job this year (and it's really my first year being active here). :thumbsup:

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5196
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#19

Post by albajos » December 5th, 2018, 1:57 pm

As the challenges are quite different it is very difficult to have one rule for all of them

For example LGBT and Animation will be quite boring without TV-episodes.


So I would go for:
Countries - 3 hour rule (to make the competition fairer. TV is way easier to see to for locals in these challenges, and I would easily get a 30 point boost in Nordic without this rule)
Genres - 25% with 2 hour rule.
Themes - up to the host

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#20

Post by Fergenaprido » December 5th, 2018, 5:12 pm

albajos wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 1:57 pm
As the challenges are quite different it is very difficult to have one rule for all of them

For example LGBT and Animation will be quite boring without TV-episodes.
How so? Both themes/genres have a plethora of films and shorts to choose from.

Also, just to be clear, we're not considering anthology episodes as 'tv', right? As far as I know, these have always been treated like standalone movies for our polls and challenges.

User avatar
3eyes
Donator
Posts: 6513
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

#21

Post by 3eyes » December 5th, 2018, 5:27 pm

I guess I'd say f - leave it up to host

or d. - raise threshold (possibly incorporing Albajos's suggestion about country challenges)
:run: STILL the Gaffer!

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5196
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#22

Post by albajos » December 5th, 2018, 5:37 pm

Fergenaprido wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 5:12 pm
albajos wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 1:57 pm
As the challenges are quite different it is very difficult to have one rule for all of them

For example LGBT and Animation will be quite boring without TV-episodes.
How so? Both themes/genres have a plethora of films and shorts to choose from.
Not LGBT, if you want to cover the whole spectrum of the LGBT community. I, A and P are still very limited.

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#23

Post by maxwelldeux » December 5th, 2018, 7:39 pm

My motivation behind the TV rules are to make it easy. As a challenge participant, I don't like having to track different media types in different ways. Shorts are already annoying to me (I just refuse to track them for any unofficial challenge), and don't want to have to create ANOTHER system to do so. And as a challenge host, I want to put my efforts towards doing fun things (like stats) and not enforcing weird TV rules. Which is why my first choice is to have TV included as normal (or let the hosts decide). And why my second choice is to just disallow TV. It's not that I'm super into ensuring TV is included, but that I don't want to make this harder than it has to be.

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 5719
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#24

Post by sol » December 9th, 2018, 2:46 am

So, do we want a poll on the TV episodes issue? I initially felt a push here towards hosts making their own decisions, but some folks seem to want other options, so a poll might be the simplest way to settle things.

If we go ahead with a poll, I might wait until the 14th or 15th to release it. At that point, it will be around halfway through the month, which should have given everyone plenty of time to chime in here.

I will probably be looking to run the poll for no longer than 10 days. That way it will finish with a whole week still left in December, which will give us some time to discuss the results before any of the January hosts open their threads.

I also think that I should allow participants the ability of choosing up to two options in the poll. Maybe even three. Most here seem to have more than one option that they prefer and such openness in the poll voting may allow us to come up with a decision that most participants are okay with, if not necessarily delighted with.

Any thoughts on this? I can run the poll for less than 10 days if there is concern about there not being enough time at the end of December to discuss the results.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#25

Post by maxwelldeux » December 9th, 2018, 7:12 am

sol wrote:
December 9th, 2018, 2:46 am
So, do we want a poll on the TV episodes issue?
No - and not because of my position, but because I don't think (maybe I'm wrong) we've clarified the TV vs. Miniseries distinction, as well as the "does official matter?" question. It seems to me like a series of nested questions we would need to ask.

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 3471
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#26

Post by OldAle1 » December 9th, 2018, 10:55 pm

My only comment re: the tv issue is that I wonder why TV isn't treated the same as shorts? have the same run time limit for both in other words, 60 or 90 IMO are fine, don't really care which though I might edge towards 90. Given the way "TV" and "film" are becoming the same thing I'm not sure why we should have any distinctions anymore other than purely going by length.

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 5611
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#27

Post by maxwelldeux » December 10th, 2018, 1:05 am

OldAle1 wrote:
December 9th, 2018, 10:55 pm
My only comment re: the tv issue is that I wonder why TV isn't treated the same as shorts? have the same run time limit for both in other words, 60 or 90 IMO are fine, don't really care which though I might edge towards 90. Given the way "TV" and "film" are becoming the same thing I'm not sure why we should have any distinctions anymore other than purely going by length.
This. Well said. :cheers:

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5196
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#28

Post by albajos » December 10th, 2018, 10:52 am

Well, that is just a result of how different the challenges are. If you're hosting a silent challenge it would make sense to keep the shorts limit low as the average length of movies in that area was close to one hour.

If we're running a 2010 challenge the average of movies are closing in on 2 hours, so it would make sense to keep the shorts limit at 2 hours as well.

Post Reply