2022 Challenges: Leaderboard and Hosting Feedback

[sol]

Leaderboard History

In 2017, maxwelldeux did something wonderful for the forum. After taking community feedback, he turned the Official Challenge Series into the Challenge Olympics, presenting monthly awards and honours for those who do well in the Official Challenges as well as a leaderboard that tracked and ranked every single participant (in each challenge for the year) in terms of how high they finished on each challenge's OP leaderboard. This gave extra motivation for the vast majority of participants who were never able to watch enough films to ever a win a challenge as their efforts would still be recognised.

In early 2020 amid the height of Covid-19, maxwelldeux requested help with running the Challenge Olympics Awards and Leaderboard. Throughout 2020, I helped max to manage the awards by updating information into his amazingly detailed spreadsheets. Towards the end of 2020, max announced that he was no longer going to run the Olympics and Leaderboard. With nobody else volunteering to take the task on, I said that I would maintain a leaderboard (but no individual awards), although in a reduced capacity that gave points for finishing in the top 1, top 5, top 10 or top 20 of each individual challenge.

Thus, the 2021 Official Challenge Leaderboard was born. With 100 different users finishing in the top 20 of at least one challenge in 2021, the leaderboard might seem like a success, but I have wondered myself just how often others refer to it. The thread seldom attracts replies from other users and I don't know if this is the case of other users having nothing to say or simply not caring about the results.

Updating the leaderboard each month isn't a lot of work. But it is some additional work for me each month (around 30-45 minutes). The extra work is not so much the issue, but I have also begun to wonder if having a leaderboard is hurting the Official Challenge Series. Some of my concerns include watching diversity diminishing as a result of participants trying to watch challenge doubles/triples (films eligible for more than one challenge) and less unofficial challenges in operation than ever before, possibly because most participants are fixated on challenges that they can score points for participating in.

Not to dwell on the possible negatives, I am interested in challenge leaderboard improvement suggestions too. I don't have the spare time or Excel spreadsheet skills to do something as complex as the Challenge Olympics that maxwelldeux used to run, but I am happy to hand over the challenge leaderboard reigns to someone else if there is somebody interested in including more data than I have tracked myself this year.

So, please vote in the poll or reply to this thread. The poll is anonymous, so if you are all too scared to tell me outright that the leaderboard sucks, you can inform me anonymously.

But that's only one of two topics that I would like to discuss.

Incentives for Hosting

Ever since we decided to expand the monthly challenges to three per month, we have never had a shortage of volunteers to host. Until now. Despite challenge participation being stronger than ever, it was a real task finding challenge hosts for November and December. Hosting doesn't take a lot of time unless you include extensive bonus challenges, and even while under the pump at work this month and last month, I have managed to give the OPs of my November and December challenges an update almost every second day. I do feel though that some incentives would not hurt. On the same account though, I don't want folks volunteering to host just in order to gain the incentive and then only updating the OP once during the entire month. Here are some ideas that I have come up with myself. Some would rate as a minimal incentive, some would be quite massive; I'm totally open to ideas. And we could continue with no incentives too. Some of these ideas are tied into a leaderboard existing, so obviously aren't doable if we vote to ditch the leaderboard.

Possible Incentives

• Everybody who hosts gets to recommend a film. Every participant who watches the host recommendation gets a bonus point on the leaderboard.
• Every challenge that you host earns you a bonus point on the challenge leaderboard. This should equal a maximum of 12 extra leaderboard points.
• Every challenge that you host earns you a bonus challenge suggestion for 2023 (this is usually capped at three suggestions per participant).
• Every challenge that you host earns you a bonus 3-vote when voting in the final poll for 2023 challenge ideas.
• Every challenge that you host earns you a bonus 2-vote when voting in the final poll for 2023 challenge ideas.
• Every challenge that you host earns you a bonus 1-vote when voting in the final poll for 2023 challenge ideas.
• Whoever hosts the most (how do we determine this?) gets bonus votes in the final poll for 2023 challenge ideas.
• Whoever hosts at least two/three/four challenges earns bonus votes in the final poll for 2023 challenge ideas.

Other ideas? Thoughts? Feedback?

Apologies for leaving this thread until so late in the year but work has been very stressful and time-consuming of late.

[gunnar]

I like the leaderboard and point system as it stands, though I wouldn't want to run it. I'm relatively new to the board and haven't looked back at the Challenge Olympics. Being somewhat new, I hesitated a bit in volunteering for the Documentary Challenge, but did so since I had a huge backlog that I planned to work through this month and wanted to see that challenge held. Hosting isn't really a lot of extra work and I update the leaderboard every time I post my own watches.

I don't know at this time if I'd want to host a challenge that I wasn't at least slightly participating in, though if I did, I likely wouldn't update it as often. None of the incentives suggested would really be much of an incentive to me, though the first two that were listed are slightly interesting.

So far, when I've chosen to participate in a challenge, I've chosen one challenge to focus on and any 'double dipping' is a side benefit. This month, I'm working on Academy Award nominated documentaries and many of them are unofficial. I've also chosen to participate in a few challenges in a small way, like the Eastern European one that coincided with some of the films that I wanted to watch. The leaderboard didn't really come into consideration.

I'm sorry that work is being extra stressful for you, though the holidays are often pretty stressful for many people so I don't think that you're alone in this, at least. It doesn't make it easier, but hopefully it passes soon.

[sol]

Thanks for the feedback, gunnar - and I am glad that you are finding the leaderboard interesting/useful. At this stage though, I won't be running a leaderboard next year. It's only been a few hours, so we'll see how the poll shifts and changes, but as of me typing this, we're at 50% who only sometimes look at the leaderboard and 33% who don't find it useful at all.

Regarding hosting incentives, I would probably say that the first two are indeed the most viable since they don't impact on the democratic say of the challenge schedule polls. If we don't go with a leaderboard next year though, those incentive options won't be doable, so maybe I'll just go for the third option as an extra incentive: allowing more challenges suggestions for those who host most often.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

[beavis]

I like the challenges as a feature of this forum and do want to continue participating in them.
For me this participation is random (when the time and the topic are right) and not about points. I see it as a challenge for myself and a commitment I make for a month to the forum to report on what I am seeing. Of course I like to do well in such a month compared to the others participating, but I do not really care about winning or points.

After participating this year in the first few months I must say I did look at the leaderboard occacionally, just to see how it worked and easy it would be for me to climb the ranks if I would report *everything* I watched that would count towards the challenges. But it did not convince me to do that (I do not have the time or inclination to write about everything I see). After that I did not look at that thread anymore and it is not something that really interest me.

Hosting is a commitment. I guess the time is very doable when you already participate in the challenge, but it also feels like a responsability (to make it fun, to be active daily, to not make mistakes). I haven't done it up till now and don't prefer to take it on unless the situation would be that there would be no challenge if I didn't do it Incentives might work... I might like the idea that people had to watch my recommendations... but at the same time I'd hate to force people to watch my recommendations .... so... I'm in two minds about the whole thing. And I don't know why... Maybe it is the fact that I want to keep my commitment to the challenges as loose as possible so I can continue to randomly join, and then leave it for a while before joining again...

[peeptoad]

I went with the middle option (sometimes check my progress). I think the leader board is a nice add-on to the challenges, but I wouldn't say it's a factor in my participation in them.

As for hosting incentives-
I agree with those options that would give a host more weight in voting for challenge theme ideas. Personally, I plan on trying to host at minimum ~2/year going forward, regardless of any additional benefits for that. I figure that makes up for my random, sometimes meager participation.

On the note of the bonus vote for ideas: LoneWolf had this great idea to alternate the non-annual genres (action/adv, comedy, mystery/thriller, etc.) similar to the way geographical areas are alternated. ... just in case that has a downstream effect on the incentives thing.

[sol]

Incentives might work... I might like the idea that people had to watch my recommendations... but at the same time I'd hate to force people to watch my recommendations

To be clear, if we went down that pathway, nobody would be forced to watch anything. You'd just a bonus point if you did watch a rec. But I don't even know if this will be an incentive option anyway with (likely) no challenge leaderboard in 2022.

I went with the middle option (sometimes check my progress). I think the leader board is a nice add-on to the challenges, but I wouldn't say it's a factor in my participation in them.

No worries. This seems to be where most people are at, so I think I'll can the leaderboard at this stage. The initial idea was to give more motivation to participate in more challenges and a way to reward those who do well in challenges but can't ever win them, but it doesn't seem that most people are currently using it for that purpose.

As for hosting incentives-
I agree with those options that would give a host more weight in voting for challenge theme ideas.

Yeah, I don't mind that either. I guess it's the case of whether those who are too busy to host get annoyed that challenge hosts get a bigger say... but perhaps they should get a bigger say.

On the note of the bonus vote for ideas: LoneWolf had this great idea to alternate the non-annual genres (action/adv, comedy, mystery/thriller, etc.) similar to the way geographical areas are alternated.

Yes, we are going ahead with that for the 2023 Challenge Schedule. I thought I said as much in October, but maybe I didn't make it clear.

[peeptoad]

Yes, we are going ahead with that for the 2023 Challenge Schedule. I thought I said as much in October, but maybe I didn't make it clear.

I think I understood that it was under strong consideration at least. I mostly mentioned that because it may reduce some of the voting options, thereby also potentially some of the added benefits for hosts.

[sol]

Yes, we are going ahead with that for the 2023 Challenge Schedule. I thought I said as much in October, but maybe I didn't make it clear.

I think I understood that it was under strong consideration at least. I mostly mentioned that because it may reduce some of the voting options, thereby also potentially some of the added benefits for hosts.

Right, I see what you're saying. The 2023 Challenge schedule will (at this stage) have 12 permanent challenges + 12 country/region challenges + 3 genre challenges, which means that there will be only be nine blank slots to fill. Regarding the benefit, I think it would still be there, and if we are only voting on nine slots to be filled, an extra 3-vote could go a long way...

For anybody else reading this, don't worry, I'll explain the potential changes in greater detail in the September planning thread next year and there will be room to debate/discuss it then.

[Lonewolf2003]

About the leaderboard; I voted for the “sometimes check” option. The leaderboard is fun to have, but my ranking on it isn’t the reason to participate in challenges. Challenges are a fun and good way to organize and prioritize what to watch each month. Of course it’s nice to score points and see how well I do in that challenge and overall, like how it’s nice to win a friendly game of football against friends or to see how well you did in the Christmas pub quiz at work. Which is to say I don’t not care about them, but also don’t care enough to comment in that thread on my ranking

Hosting; personally for me none of those would be incentive to host any. What would be make me more willing to hosting is when it would be less of a commitment, when there would be more relaxation on how frequent the host should update the OP. I’m not going to host when there is an obligation to do so every other day. I think zzzorf updated the OP less than that in Noir and this month. I see no problems with that. And I’m curious how many people really need/want such frequent updates when most mostly participate for themselves and not for their ranking in a challenge.

[sol]

About the leaderboard; I voted for the “sometimes check” option. The leaderboard is fun to have, but my ranking on it isn’t the reason to participate in challenges.

For me, it's the reason to participate in every challenge and spread my viewings out between them rather than focus on one or two challenges. But if most folks aren't using the leaderboard for this reason, I don't know if it makes sense to keep it going just for me.

Curiously enough, somebody has voted for the "leaderboard is essential" option, but has not replied to this thread. Whoever that is, please me let me know on this thread because at this stage you would be taking the task on. I'm reluctant to run another leaderboard with (currently) 80% of participations not often referring to it or not finding it useful at all.

Hosting; personally for me none of those would be incentive to host any. What would be make me more willing to hosting is when it would be less of a commitment, when there would be more relaxation on how frequent the host should update the OP. I’m not going to host when there is an obligation to do so every other day. I think zzzorf updated the OP less than that in Noir and this month. I see no problems with that. And I’m curious how many people really need/want such frequent updates when most mostly participate for themselves and not for their ranking in a challenge.

It's an interesting point and I guess I could always put a survey together about what participants value in a challenge host: regular updates, bonus challenge, recommendations, etc. Regular updates has always been pretty important to me as a participant, and I don't think it was ideal for a challenge as busy as noir that we were unable to find someone with more spare time to host. That said, maybe you're right, and if we are canning the leaderboard next year it might be less important to have regular updates. It's just that with some folks trying to "level up" with the current leaderboard structure, it makes sense to have regular updates of where everyone is sitting. Also, as a host, I would rather spending 5 or 10 minutes every 48 hours updating the OP, rather than 35 or 40 minutes every two weeks, but maybe that's just me and a personal preference to spread the load out. But yeah, if there's no leaderboard next year and it is all about personal goals, regular updates might become a thing of the past...

[blocho]

I just want to chime in for anyone hesitant about hosting a challenge, that it absolutely does not have to be much work. All the stat-tracking and bonus challenges are optional things that a few hosts do because they enjoy them. They're not required. The only things that are required is to make an OP and occasionally update the standings.

[Lonewolf2003]

About the leaderboard; I voted for the “sometimes check” option. The leaderboard is fun to have, but my ranking on it isn’t the reason to participate in challenges.

For me, it's the reason to participate in every challenge and spread my viewings out between them rather than focus on one or two challenges. But if most folks aren't using the leaderboard for this reason, I don't know if it makes sense to keep it going just for me.

Curiously enough, somebody has voted for the "leaderboard is essential" option, but has not replied to this thread. Whoever that is, please me let me know on this thread because at this stage you would be taking the task on. I'm reluctant to run another leaderboard with (currently) 80% of participations not often referring to it or not finding it useful at all.

To be clear; while I don't check it often, I do like the leadershipboard and would like to keep it. I appreciate all your time and effort you put into it. Of course it's totally up to you if you want to put your valuable time into something that is nice to have, instead of a must have.

Hosting; personally for me none of those would be incentive to host any. What would be make me more willing to hosting is when it would be less of a commitment, when there would be more relaxation on how frequent the host should update the OP. I’m not going to host when there is an obligation to do so every other day. I think zzzorf updated the OP less than that in Noir and this month. I see no problems with that. And I’m curious how many people really need/want such frequent updates when most mostly participate for themselves and not for their ranking in a challenge.

It's an interesting point and I guess I could always put a survey together about what participants value in a challenge host: regular updates, bonus challenge, recommendations, etc. Regular updates has always been pretty important to me as a participant, and I don't think it was ideal for a challenge as busy as noir that we were unable to find someone with more spare time to host. That said, maybe you're right, and if we are canning the leaderboard next year it might be less important to have regular updates. It's just that with some folks trying to "level up" with the current leaderboard structure, it makes sense to have regular updates of where everyone is sitting. Also, as a host, I would rather spending 5 or 10 minutes every 48 hours updating the OP, rather than 35 or 40 minutes every two weeks, but maybe that's just me and a personal preference to spread the load out. But yeah, if there's no leaderboard next year and it is all about personal goals, regular updates might become a thing of the past...

That's an good idea indeed to survey that. Cause I'm curious how many those "some folks" are. Since almost in every thread about challenge participation the tenor of the vast majority comes down to "I participate for myself and don't care much about my ranking in the challenge (or overall)".

Now maybe there are a few who do really care about leveling up. Well than one of those folks should host the leadershipboard, if you don't want to anymore indeed.

[Onderhond]

Just for the record, I put "The challenge leaderboard does not enhance the Official Challenge series." I don't quite understand the competitive aspect of the challenge as it stands, so the leaderboard sounds even more pointless to me. Doesn't mean I want it to go, but I certainly wouldn't miss it.

[sol]

To be clear; while I don't check it often, I do like the leadershipboard and would like to keep it. I appreciate all your time and effort you put into it. Of course it's totally up to you if you want to put your valuable time into something that is nice to have, instead of a must have.

I suppose I could have worded the poll questions slightly differently, but what would keep me going is knowing that the leaderboard was often being referred to, as opposed to it being something that folks just like looking at every once in a while.

Now maybe there are a few who do really care about leveling up. Well than one of those folks should host the leadershipboard, if you don't want to anymore indeed.

Well, we are now up to two participants who have anonymously said that they are happy to run a leaderboard next year. So I guess we'll see if that eventuates. Unless the poll results massively turn around, I'm happy to either let the leaderboard slip into oblivion, or let it be taken over by whoever feels like maintaining it.

[sortile9io]

I take a look at the leaderboard every now and then, usually to end up with the feeling that things stay overall more or less the same: me stuck in the middle, flavo topping the charts with astonishing figures and a few other participants trying desperately to catch up with him. It certainly hasn't changed my participating habits but I consider it a valuable piece of information that summarizes the competitive side of one of the busiest activities in this forum and can see also why some people might find it essential (or nearly).

As for the hosting incentives, I'm not sure to what extent those bonuses might work but offering some kind of reward to the most laborious hosts seems fair to me anyway. I was thinking more about giving priority to their preferences when setting up the calendar (not the themes) for the following year.

[sol]

I consider it a valuable piece of information that summarizes the competitive side of one of the busiest activities in this forum and can see also why some people might find it essential (or nearly).

Yes, same, I think. Though with (currently) 85% of respondents not being among those who consider it essential or extremely important, I don't really feel motivated to keep it going next year.

As for the hosting incentives, I'm not sure to what extent those bonuses might work but offering some kind of reward to the most laborious hosts seems fair to me anyway. I was thinking more about giving priority to their preferences when setting up the calendar (not the themes) for the following year.

That's an interesting, though I don't know how exactly that would work, especially if two of them disagree. Also, I'd ideally want an incentive that increases with every extra challenge hosted.

More challenge suggestions might be the fairest/simplest. Average punter gets to suggest three ideas, but you can suggest one extra for every challenge that you host.

[sortile9io]

As for the hosting incentives, I'm not sure to what extent those bonuses might work but offering some kind of reward to the most laborious hosts seems fair to me anyway. I was thinking more about giving priority to their preferences when setting up the calendar (not the themes) for the following year.

That's an interesting, though I don't know how exactly that would work, especially if two of them disagree. Also, I'd ideally want an incentive that increases with every extra challenge hosted.

In that case, you (or whoever manages the "setting the schedule" topic) would have the final word. That's pretty much the same situation that we've got now. Or a "first come, first served" rule could be applied, as we do in the Film World Cup when managers pick countries. You can make it incremental by giving each host one slot in the calendar for every N challenges that he hosted in the past year.

Do you think that the leaderboard job could be divided into smaller tasks (like collecting data, updating the chart, posting results) to be carried out by different people (without making a mess)? Just to, at least, ease the effort.

[sol]

In that case, you (or whoever manages the "setting the schedule" topic) would have the final word. That's pretty much the same situation that we've got now. Or a "first come, first served" rule could be applied, as we do in the Film World Cup when managers pick countries. You can make it incremental by giving each host one slot in the calendar for every N challenges that he hosted in the past year.

Yeah, dunno, sounds complicated especially since certain permanent challenges have a permanent month and so on. What I could definitely do though is release another poll to vote on incentives for hosting once this poll wraps up - that way I can accurately gauge just what folks are interested in.

Do you think that the leaderboard job could be divided into smaller tasks (like collecting data, updating the chart, posting results) to be carried out by different people (without making a mess)? Just to, at least, ease the effort.

It could be, but the workload is not so much the issue. It's more so that I feel that I am only really doing it at the moment for myself, gunnar and the two anonymous users who checked the "is essential" box.

Also, I'm starting to (perhaps) look forward to some of the freedoms that would come with no leaderboard next year. At the moment, I feel compelled to participate in every challenge in every month and next year might be a richer cinematic year for me if I focus on challenges that I am keen on rather than deliberately spreading my viewings around.

[Lonewolf2003]

In that case, you (or whoever manages the "setting the schedule" topic) would have the final word. That's pretty much the same situation that we've got now. Or a "first come, first served" rule could be applied, as we do in the Film World Cup when managers pick countries. You can make it incremental by giving each host one slot in the calendar for every N challenges that he hosted in the past year.

Yeah, dunno, sounds complicated especially since certain permanent challenges have a permanent month and so on. What I could definitely do though is release another poll to vote on incentives for hosting once this poll wraps up - that way I can accurately gauge just what folks are interested in.

Do you think that the leaderboard job could be divided into smaller tasks (like collecting data, updating the chart, posting results) to be carried out by different people (without making a mess)? Just to, at least, ease the effort.

It could be, but the workload is not so much the issue. It's more so that I feel that I am only really doing it at the moment for myself, gunnar and the two anonymous users who checked the "is essential" box.

Also, I'm starting to (perhaps) look forward to some of the freedoms that would come with no leaderboard next year. At the moment, I feel compelled to participate in every challenge in every month and next year might be a richer cinematic year for me if I focus on challenges that I am keen on rather than deliberately spreading my viewings around.

I think you shoud look at it that you are also doing it for me and the other 11 who sometimes check it.

[sol]

I think you shoud look at it that you are also doing it for me and the other 11 who sometimes check it.

Yeah, I dunno, maybe.

Let's see what other responses come this way before the poll closes. Maybe even the two anonymous essentialists will reveal who they are. Heh, it seems that one of the anonymous users who offered to run the leaderboard has changed their mind. Well, I did allow users to change their vote in the poll here for a reason...

[Lonewolf2003]

I think you shoud look at it that you are also doing it for me and the other 11 who sometimes check it.

Yeah, I dunno, maybe.

Let's see what other responses come this way before the poll closes. Maybe even the two anonymous essentialists will reveal who they are. Heh, it seems that one of the anonymous users who offered to run the leaderboard has changed their mind. Well, I did allow users to change their vote in the poll here for a reason...

Of course it’s up to you if it is worth all your time and effort. But doing it for people who sometimes check it, doesn’t mean it’s futile or pointless.

[Fergenaprido]

Hosting; personally for me none of those would be incentive to host any. What would be make me more willing to hosting is when it would be less of a commitment, when there would be more relaxation on how frequent the host should update the OP. I’m not going to host when there is an obligation to do so every other day. I think zzzorf updated the OP less than that in Noir and this month. I see no problems with that. And I’m curious how many people really need/want such frequent updates when most mostly participate for themselves and not for their ranking in a challenge.

It's an interesting point and I guess I could always put a survey together about what participants value in a challenge host: regular updates, bonus challenge, recommendations, etc. Regular updates has always been pretty important to me as a participant, and I don't think it was ideal for a challenge as busy as noir that we were unable to find someone with more spare time to host. That said, maybe you're right, and if we are canning the leaderboard next year it might be less important to have regular updates. It's just that with some folks trying to "level up" with the current leaderboard structure, it makes sense to have regular updates of where everyone is sitting. Also, as a host, I would rather spending 5 or 10 minutes every 48 hours updating the OP, rather than 35 or 40 minutes every two weeks, but maybe that's just me and a personal preference to spread the load out. But yeah, if there's no leaderboard next year and it is all about personal goals, regular updates might become a thing of the past...

That's an good idea indeed to survey that. Cause I'm curious how many those "some folks" are. Since almost in every thread about challenge participation the tenor of the vast majority comes down to "I participate for myself and don't care much about my ranking in the challenge (or overall)".

Now maybe there are a few who do really care about leveling up. Well than one of those folks should host the leadershipboard, if you don't want to anymore indeed.

I agree that if hosting were less of a commitment, more people would probably be willing to host. I think previous hosts set the bar really high with all of the amazing statistics, bonus challenges, and frequent updates that it's made others hesitant to host if they don't feel that they can keep up that same pace. I don't mind hosting a few challenges a year (you can sign me up for the Canada challenge again as host next year... I've already got a bonus challenge in mind I want to use), especially if no one else is willing, but I make it very clear that I'm not going to be updating every day or two - I find that too tedious and I'd rather use spend that time watching films myself. I admittedly do put in a fair bit of effort in the bonus challenges for the ones I host that I really like (Canada + Queer, mostly), but that part is fun for me so i don't mind the extra work it takes. I stick to a weekly update schedule as best as I can, and I think most participants haven't minded that too much thus far.

Also, I'm starting to (perhaps) look forward to some of the freedoms that would come with no leaderboard next year. At the moment, I feel compelled to participate in every challenge in every month and next year might be a richer cinematic year for me if I focus on challenges that I am keen on rather than deliberately spreading my viewings around.

I got really into the challenges the first year of the olympics, but after that I felt really drained by film watching as I was forcing myself to watch things for the challenges, instead of following where my natural interests lay. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for pushing one's film boundaries and watching things outside of one's usual comfort zone, but I found the hyper-competitive challenge environment exhausting, especially with the strict update rules. It just stopped being fun. I think the challenge leaderboard is cool, but not essential. I participate in only a handful of challenges each year, and it's mostly the ones that I'm either hosting or that have a poll coming up that I want to prepare for. I don't generally need incentives to watch films from different countries or in different genres, and I'd rather watch them spread out over the year instead of cramming them into a month, as I've noticed I have trouble remembering and distinguishing between similar films if I watch them to close together.

The stats have been cool to see over the years, so thanks to you (and max) for your service.

[sol]

I agree that if hosting were less of a commitment, more people would probably be willing to host. I think previous hosts set the bar really high with all of the amazing statistics, bonus challenges, and frequent updates that it's made others hesitant to host if they don't feel that they can keep up that same pace. I don't mind hosting a few challenges a year (you can sign me up for the Canada challenge again as host next year... I've already got a bonus challenge in mind I want to use), especially if no one else is willing, but I make it very clear that I'm not going to be updating every day or two - I find that too tedious and I'd rather use spend that time watching films myself.

That's really interesting to hear. Personally speaking, updating the leaderboard is pretty much the easiest thing that I have to do as a challenge host. The stuff that I find harder are maintaining bonus challenges (even with hashtags I tend to overlook things), providing stats/pie charts and determining eligibility - especially when I'm asked for a ruling on a film or series that I know nothing about. But different strokes for different folks. Maybe I've just become super-efficient at updating spreadsheets, but individual challenge leaderboards are a breeze. It's the extra stuff (eligibility; bonus challenges; stats, etc.) that sometimes get me down.

The stats have been cool to see over the years, so thanks to you (and max) for your service.

No problem. It's been fascinating for me too. I'm curious to see how next year goes without a leaderboard in place. It will be interesting to see how challenge participation changes (if at all) and if there are noticeable shifts or changes, we can discuss late next year whether anybody wants to start a leaderboard again.

[flavo5000]

The stats have been cool to see over the years, so thanks to you (and max) for your service.

No problem. It's been fascinating for me too. I'm curious to see how next year goes without a leaderboard in place. It will be interesting to see how challenge participation changes (if at all) and if there are noticeable shifts or changes, we can discuss late next year whether anybody wants to start a leaderboard again.

I predict you'll see higher numbers in single challenges and less emphasis on doubles or triples. I've definitely noticed more purple spreading themselves across the challenges since the leaderboard was introduced.

[sol]

Poll ended a few hours, so just to confirm:

With 87% of participants not regularly referring to the current leaderboard:

• In 2022, I will NOT be running an Official Challenge leaderboard
• If somebody else wants to run a leaderboard instead they are more than welcome to
• If nobody else steps up, I may run this poll again before the 2023 Challenge Series begins and gauge whether interest has changed
• For every challenge that you host (or have hosted) from Oct 2021 to Sep 2022, you will be able to make an extra challenge suggestion for 2023