Re: Piecepack Design Contest

["sshum2003" <sshum2003@...>]

--- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Schoessow" 
<mikeschoessow@c...> wrote:
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: sshum2003 
>   To: piecepack@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 9:01 AM
>   Subject: [piecepack] Re: Piecepack Design Contest
> 
> 
> 
>   --- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "mschoessow" 
<mikeschoessow@c...> 
>   wrote:
I think we need to decide what to do about the design contest. It is  
quite evident that the winners of the last contest are not interested 
>   >> in being involved in the next one. It's possible I'm wrong 
about that 
>   >> but I'm not willing to wait in silence any longer hoping. 
>   >> 
>   >> So, the question is, what happens next? Let's have some posts 
about 
>   >> this. What do people think? One way or another, I'm determined 
that 
>   >> the design competitions are not going to end at this time! 
>   >> 
>   >> -Mike
> 
>   >I thought that they were waiting until after Mesomorph Games 
contest 
>   >was over, but could not find a post indicating such is the case.
> 
>   I suppose that's possible but I believe it is just speculation at 
this point. A couple months ago I asked Karol what was going on with 
the contests. She told me that following the previous contest the 
winners had indicated that they would be willing to define and judge 
the next one (and I seem to recall that being posted here as well) 
and she suggested I post my query to the group. I did that, 
specifically asking the winners to respond. That was quite a while 
ago. Since they have been silent, I assume they have likely changed 
their mind and do not plan to be involved in the next contest. I have 
no problem with the winner(s) of a contest not working on the next 
one, but it would be good to know for sure what's happening one way 
or the other. As I mentioned, I'm tired of waiting in the dark.
>   I agree that it would be best to coordinate the timing of the 
next and all future piecepack game design contests with the present 
and future expansion piecepack game design contests (assuming there 
will be future expansion contests). If there are going to be more 
expansion piecepack contests then I think the best way to go is to 
stagger the timing. This will have two advantages. Firstly, it will 
allow the time between the rules posting (announcement of new theme) 
and the submission deadline to be longer, giving more time for 
quality design. Secondly, it will allow a reasonable amount of time 
for judging (if we keep getting 10-20 entries, judging is always 
going to take longer than it did earlier when we were only seeing 5-
10 entries, so we might as well plan for that rather than always 
needing to announce a delay in the results). Even with the extra time 
allowed for design and judging, with two overlapping staggered 
contests the time between contests should be similar to or even 
slightly less than it was in the past. In a situation like this it's 
all good; more time for designing, more time for judging, as many or 
more games per year as before, and just as many opportunities to 
enter games in contests as before. 
> 
> 
>   >Perhaps we could open the judging up to the "Bests" since there 
was no 
>   >declared single 1st runner up.  Priority give in order of their 
scores 
>   >for those that wish to judge.  Perhaps excluding those that have 
judged 
>   >before, to give those who have not judge a chance first. 
> 
>   I'm fine with either of those ideas. I would be willing to 
organize the next contest (define a theme and judge the entries) 
along with my brother Steve if it came down to that, but I would also 
be perfectly happy to have someone else judge. Regarding the idea of 
disallowing former judges from judging, I don't have a problem with 
that short term, but long term it will mean that an ever-growing 
group of the most enthusiastic game designers(all of whom have 
themselves designed winning games) will be excluded and that could be 
a problem if piecepack group membership doesn't continue to grow in a 
healthy way into the indefinite future. I think the most important 
thing is that whoever agrees to do the judging is enthusiastic and 
eager, as opposed to someone reluctantly agreeing to judge because 
nobody else wants to. Reluctant judges will probably not put the time 
into it that the designers deserve.

sshum2003: please reread what I wrote as previous judges are not 
excuded it is just initally open to the Bests first:
"Perhaps we could open the judging up to the "Bests" since there was 
no declared single 1st runner up. Priority give in order of their 
scores for those that wish to judge. Perhaps excluding those that 
have judged before, to give those who have not judge a chance first. 
If none of the bests wish to judge open it up to previous 
winners/judges and/or previous runners up in some fashion."

This is to give some logical order to who to ask if they wish to run 
the contest.  Under this setup we would ask in this order:
Jeb Havens & Ian Schreiber		"In" Crowd	Winner	29.97 
(currently no response)			
Jonathan Dietrich, Ken MacKeigan & Julie Taylor		Triactor: A 
Day at the Piecepack Downs 	Best Eye Candy 	22.48
Jim Adams & Amy Enge		Elephant Run 	Best Children's Game
	21.93			
Brad Johnson & Phillip Lerche		Magistratum	Best Use of 
Theme	23.14	(Phillip was a previous Judge [History Repeats Itself 
Winner: Pharaoh's Heir] so while their score was more than Jim & 
Amy's my suggested order would place him/them third in line) 
 If none of them are interest then open it up to previous judges:
James Kyle
Ron and Marty Hale-Evans	Time Marches On Winner	
Michael Schoessow	Ludic Synergy Winner
Rob LeGood	Changing Landscapes Winner: New City	
Clark Rodeffer 	Solitary Confinement Winner: Piece Packing Pirates
				
So no previous judges would be excluded.  This order would allow for 
new person(s) to be given the choice of being judge(s) before the 
previous judges.  

--- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Schoessow" 
<mikeschoessow@c...> wrote:   
>   Regarding Leo's ideas (separate post) for a piecepack graphics 
design contest or one requiring games based on re-themed tiles, I 
don't have a problem with this if someone wants to organize it. There 
are many fascinating possibilities for suits, some of which have been 
posted here over the years, and if suits are customized for a 
particular game, it opens up opportunities for greater theme 
attachment in non-abstract games, which is good. On the other hand 
it's also true that it moves things incrementally further away from 
the basic idea behind piecepack, which is to provide a set of generic 
board game bits that can be used to play many games, as a deck of 
cards is to board games. I suggest that this would be a good topic 
for more discussion. For example, how about a piecepack set that 
comes with multiple sets of peal-off / stick-on graphics so customers 
can choose which theme they want? A contest and group-wide voting 
could be organized for deciding which graphics sets to include. Just 
a thought.
> 
>   I disgree (implying no disrespect of sshum2003's opinion) with 
the sentimate implied by "...yet another game rule design contest". 
I, for one, eagerly look forward to each new batch of games. I'll 
admit that I also look forward to being able to enter my own 
designs :-). Whatever else happens, I want the standard piecepack 
game design competition to continue, and I hope many others want this 
too.
> 
>   -Mike
sshum2003:  I am not sure how you think I implied this?  I assume 
that is your opinion as you opened the "floor" to discuss "yet 
another rule design contest". I just tried to create some logical why 
to to choose someone as replacement judge(s) if the contest winners 
back out.