[CONTEST] How can we make future contests BIGGER and BETTER and MORE EXCITING?? 💥

[Mister Phes]

8 hours ago, Danny_Boy4 said:

I see some talk about banning digital entries and think definitely not! We need to keep them so people who don't have enough brick and can't afford them can also enter.

Aye, making contests accessible to those who can't afford bricks is imperative! 

Maybe we should separate digital and physical builds by category.

But ultimately it comes down to prizes...  under the current arrangement we're able to allocate prizes to a maximum of 5 winners, which is a limiting factor as to how categories can be structured.

[Marooned Marin]

7 hours ago, iragm said:

I dislike a 5000-brick frigate competing against an imperial outpost with 200 bricks.

I agree with you, I also dislike those David vs. Goliath head on bouts. My comment on categories was on dividing digital vs. real. I'm against division in that matter, and I've highlighted possible issues if the future contest goes down that road.

Back to your point, regardless of the builders preference (digital of real), future contest should have maximum part limit in given category; call it Mini<50pcz, Medium<3000 or Open>unlimited pcz.

On a mentioned LEGO Ideas that part limit is 3000, and I think that is a fine number both in economical and size aspect.

 

[Mister Phes]

On 9/27/2023 at 8:35 PM, F1stzz said:

Perhaps his miscalculations were the same as yours, hence why he wasn't even mentioned as the runner-up in the final report 🤷🏻‍♂️

8 minutes ago, Marooned Marin said:

Back to your point, regardless of the builders preference (digital of real), future contest should have maximum part limit in given category; call it Mini<50pcz, Medium<3000 or Open>unlimited pcz.

This is why the Mini Set building category was introduced, and had I more preparation time, I would have introduced this category at the contest outset.

But again, to make this work we'd need to divide the prizes accordingly.

Instead of first, second and third place in a single category, we could have three categories with a prize valued corresponding to the part limit

For example:

• Open - 215€ prize
• Medium 70€ prize
• Mini 35€ prize

 

On 9/27/2023 at 8:35 PM, F1stzz said:

Perhaps his miscalculations were the same as yours, hence why he wasn't even mentioned as the runner-up in the final report 🤷🏻‍♂️

Final report has not yet been published, what was shared last weekend was just the winners announcement.

 

 

[Brickshipyard]

9 hours ago, Marooned Marin said:

In regard of real vs. digital...

First scenario (divide and conquer):

Two separate categories is excellent idea, and here is why: if we have two categories then (a builder like myself) can enter both categories with the same build since I build first in digital and then with real bricks, and thus my chances for winning prize raises rapidly.

What's that? Now I hear moans and cries that's not fair, you can enter only one... but wait a minute, how is that fair? I used my CAD knowledge to create something, and then I used my money to build it. Why am I not allowed to compete in two separate categories with the same design after all the effort invested? Mind you, my effort is double than yours.

Before I get hammered down by a lesson on a herd morality - thank you Nietzsche, I'll humour this fairness nonsense and proceed to the second scenario.

Second scenario (call it Tactical competing, like -Tactical voting- only better):

Two separate categories is excellent idea, and here is why: by making two categories, and tyrannically permitting only one per design, a builder like myself can wait and see which category has fewer entries, less winning entries, and then with impeccable timing enter digital or real build category, and thus my chances for winning prize raises rapidly.

Conclusion

Making two separate categories, of us vs. them, solves only one melodramatic problem but at the same time opens another can of worms. So by all means, let's have two categories instead of one.

LEGO Ideas has only one category and the winners are usually those who build the best original design - say... that's an interesting concept!

Proposition

Instead of making two - or ten - categories (where every Tom, Dick, and Harry can feel like a winner), we continue to have one category and focus our time and energy on improving building skills in the medium each of us finds most pleasurable, digital or real - or both, and give our best try each time out.

Ok your perspective on the two categories is helpful and exposes the flaws of having separate categories I would agree one should be allowed to enter both the real life (RL) and digital contests with the exact same design because that would surly mean double the work. I've experienced it myself many times with some rebrickable MOCs. Having said that, there are some aforementioned advantages unique to the digital builders especially as the MOC scale increases that a RL builder just cannot match without the best resources or brick collection. Consistency of brick quality, quick replication of complex walls, layers, etc. rendering effects, I mean the list goes on...

The best solution I can think of to combat these advantages is to have very specific build categories (i.e. ships vs. ships only) and a part count plus piece limitation rule. Heck, to go the extreme Eurobricks could put out a list of parts allowed only in the contest, whether digital or RL. True, that may limit creativity in some regard, but everyone would be building from the same "pile" so to speak. You would be amazed how many alternative builds Rebrickable MOCers can make from one set and that's creativity in itself. Not a terrible idea for a category of building, just sayin'.

But the discussion to make things more fair in general is nonsense you say? Your entire argument is based on why it's fair to have both builder types in one category, yet that's also nonsense by your logic? OK, as long as you know you undermined your own argument.

Per your every Dick, Tom, and Harry comment, everyone from the most novice to experienced builder knows the odds of winning are very difficult and unlikely. Not every participant needs to feel like a winner like you claim. However, the opposite is true and maybe they don't want to feel like automatic losers when entering these contests because the playing field is not level. There is some unmistakable bias towards certain builders and to their digital entries. I like to enter these contests because they are fun and test my skills and I bet many other builder do as well. You included.

Your sour attitude on that reeks of superiority. In fact, your entire response drips with ego. Shame, because it degrades some otherwise really good points. By all means have your opinion, but perhaps spare us the philosophy (Nietzsche) lecture like other participants on this forum are idiots. You know I was wondering about the Shipyard Master role, but you aren't representing/selling it well - not coming off like that.

Unless the Shipyard Master role grants a free pass to be an a$* power, then I sincerely apologize. Pretty sure it doesn't, though. I've read the site rules and you appear to be violating the Manner and Serious Topics one at the risk of myself being labelled a mini-modder. Pathetic I am having to point that one out to a senior staff writer. You think you are above the rules? Did you miss the beginning of this discussion where a participant was told to stop being self entitled and have better sportsmanship? Yes, that was for the contest results, but no less relevant here and now.

 Maybe it's your style of writing and sarcastic tone, but there is a line and you are crossing it. I'll be more impressed with your cunning linguist abilities and vocabulary when you use it to positively contribute and not belittle forum members. I'll await your sassy reply which I have no doubt is coming in spades where you double down on what you wrote and dig yourself a hole. Don't expect me to tango though, I've shared many fresh ideas on how to improve things and did so with respect.... and to quote your most sarcastic line - "say... that's an interesting concept!"

[Yperio_Bricks]

I know a contest in a German forum where you are allowed to use max 101 parts and have to make a picture as a prove of all the parts used in a moc. Other than that it is impossible to say how many parts were used in a moc. And i bet most builders do not know how many parts they used and estimating the number of parts by looking at a finished moc can be way of. And how to count parts that have been used for structural reasons but are invisible? There can be many parts hidden inside a moc. Or house with back wall against facade.

So i would not suggest a part limit but a size limit. Like a 12x12 vignette category for example. So such a vignette has not to compete against a full blown moc or ship. Yes, you can go high in a vignette and i have seen some amazing and creative mocs. You can build a 3 story house or a tower but it will be no modular sized building.

Oh, and two more questions arise that can be discussed. How often should there be a contest? Once a year, every 4 months,...? And if LEGO sponsors only so many prizes a year, should there be contests without prizes?

Edited September 29, 2023 by Yperio_Bricks

[Marooned Marin]

@Brickshipyard

My overly sarcastic written comment was intended to highlight problems and loopholes which someone could take as an advantage if division occurs, which would be shame for future contest.

I'm truly sorry if I have offended you, or any other forum member, because I could have presented the problem in a much lighter tone, touch crucial points, and spare everyone reading this discussion of unnecessary philosophy. Sadly, I do not have a sassy reply for you, nor anything in spades.

[F1stzz]

11 hours ago, iragm said:

It's all good, no hard feelings!

Np, mate, that comment was rather about the metric system for the contest in general 

13 hours ago, Marooned Marin said:

Why am I not allowed to compete in two separate categories with the same design after all the effort invested?

One entry per category sounds fine to me as well, multiple entries per category is what people have a problem with. To be fair, it'd also be easier for authorities to organise things overall as certain established amount of entries = less chaos & routine trying to compile Building Index 'n stuff.

EDIT: now that I have reread your post I gotta add that spamming separate categories with your entry could easily be avoided by having a specified note in the rules. Having your digital design being physically built sure shouldn't count as a separate entry, cuz it's virtually the exact same design. Also, I believe once we have the max piece count preemptively set in the rules (preferably— per category) — there will basically be no huge difference between digital & physical builds anyway, at least amongst MOC veterans.

Quote

[...] a builder like myself can wait and see which category has fewer entries, less winning entries, and then with impeccable timing enter digital or real build category, and thus my chances for winning prize raises rapidly.

Now what's wrong with that?  If you think you are able to outshine the existing entries after analysing 'em & building something superior — go ahead  Not sure how exactly it could raise your chances of winning "rapidly" tho: after all, everyone has their own tastes & likings, but yeah, there's nothing illegal in analysing the competition & thinking of ways to stand out in comparison (as long as you're not directly stealing some fundamental gimmicks like it happened in one case I've mentioned earlier, which I hope will be taken into account for the future set of rules ).

10 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

So in my mind remake a classic set = improve a set and create a classic set = create an original set

In the future I'd say we need to focus solely on the latter one. In the end it's all about creativity, and I don't see much creativity in rebuilding 90s sets using modern parts selection & 21322/10320 techniques (as we basically get something like that almost weekly without any contests).

Edited September 29, 2023 by F1stzz

[durazno33]

7 hours ago, Brickshipyard said:

Unless the Shipyard Master role grants a free pass to be an a$* power, then I sincerely apologize. Pretty sure it doesn't, though. I've read the site rules and you appear to be violating the Manner and Serious Topics one at the risk of myself being labelled a mini-modder. Pathetic I am having to point that one out to a senior staff writer. You think you are above the rules? Did you miss the beginning of this discussion where a participant was told to stop being self entitled and have better sportsmanship? Yes, that was for the contest results, but no less relevant here and now.

How is asking for how the results were calculated for the critics category self entitled or a lack of sportsmanship? It's yet another "over the top", emotional declaration.  Releasing the scorecards doesn't favor me over any other entrant so I fail to understand how it is a sense of entitlement. I simply tried to be personable shared my personal reasons behind wanting the results shared which don't speak for any of the other participants. Since a personable appeal wasn't valued, I am still advocated for all the scores to be released which benefits everyone. So how is that a sense of personal entitlement? 

Having been in many online competitions before and having run some for my local LUG, I know there is a lot that goes into organizing these and there is a certain maturity that the moderator must have when dealing with participants. My frustrations started with the results of the critics competition just being brushed aside after the voting for the general entries was so open and transparent. I think that needs to be a key part of the competition, open and transparent judging.  Not personal attacks when someone asks for more transparency. 

Edited September 29, 2023 by durazno33

[Mister Phes]

12 hours ago, durazno33 said:

How is asking for how the results were calculated for the critics category self entitled or a lack of sportsmanship? It's yet another accusation of Mister Phes that is "over the top". 

There's nothing wrong with asking, and I've told you why the information has not yet been made available yet you keep heckling me - if you just waited patiently there wouldn't be an issue.

But your question was "So the votes for the entries is publicly available but where are the scores of the critics? I'm sure the critics would love to see some feedback for all the many hours of reviews and feedback that they gave to everyone" rather than how the results were calculated.
 

12 hours ago, durazno33 said:

So how is that a sense of personal entitlement?

As I've stated, it's the way you've approached the issue.  I've already acknowledged the Creative Critic could have been better executed, but wasn't due to insufficient time and resources, yet you persist with further scrutiny.

"Without feedback from the judges or explanation justifying the winner, I leave feeling like I wasted my time and am unlikely to participate in the future. [...] For me it is not a question of if I won, but instead would help me gauge if I want to participate in another such competition in the future. I would use the amount of effort I put in to help me gauge the amount of effort I would need to put into future such competitions to help me improve my efforts."

Yes, I'm aware of that - it's not that I won't provide the final reporting, it's because I still haven't had time.  I've explained this in multiple posts, but your refusal to accept the reason makes you seem entitled, as though you're expecting me to drop everything and provide you with the information ASAP.

This discussion would have progressed very differently had you wrote something like;
"When might final reporting on the Creative Critic be available?"

Instead you make presumptuous statements like:
"If it is too much work to do a complete analysis AND report on it, I know that future critic contests probably won't happen and have my answer."
"But if the winner was selected with a statement like, "the leaderboard didn't change much after that point"? what confidence can one have in the integrity of the competition?"

 

12 hours ago, durazno33 said:

  Not personal attacks when someone asks for more transparency. 

In regards to you request for feedback that was meant to be an analogy to describe your sudden departure, not an attack for requesting further information.  Perhaps it wasn't the best choice of words, but I reply to these topics at 3 in the morning when the best choice of words often escape me.

 

12 hours ago, durazno33 said:

My frustrations started with the results of the critics competition just being brushed aside after the voting for the general entries was so open and transparent. I think that needs to be a key part of the competition, open and transparent judging.

I agree with you.  But as I'm repeatedly stating, there wasn't sufficient capacity to do this effectively for this particular contest, hence why this topic exists.

And that's the recurring problem here.  I agree with many your of criticisms and have explained why the contest eventuated the way they did...  yet you seem to be ignoring that reasoning in favour of further criticism,  rather than moving the discussion forward to find solutions for future contests.

So despite what either of us has said, is it impossible for us to find common ground?

To recap:

• I've explained why the Creative Critic eventuated the way it did and there's a lengthier explanation in the first post of this topic
• I've agreed that the reporting should be more transparent
• I've agreed there should be a deeper analysis and reporting on how the recent Creative Critic winner was selected
• And will provide that information when time permits.

 

[MstrOfPppts]

How is building a same creation digitally and physically double the effort?! As if the design phase, coming up with the idea and trying things out doesn't count?! I'd say that once the design is done it's like building a set using instructions which depending on the complexity and size of the set can be a very minor effort to build in the other media.

Anyway, in the past few years I've been in quite some debates regarding this matter, yet still I see no success in convincing me otherwise. Contrary to the usual belief of the opposition, I'm not saying that digital building is not a hobby and that you're not a LEGO fan if you use it. Though I've admitted before that personally I'm not too keen on looking at digital builds in detail, as I've said they lack some character. But what I am trying to convince people here, is that digital builds have an unfair advantage over the physical build. And yes, I've also read some quite good articles about it and am well aware of most of the pros and cons in both digital and physical building. Be it searching for parts, replacing colors, replacing parts in the middle of the build, illegal builds, flexible parts, custom sails, prints, stickers, photography / renders and what not. I also agree that both building styles require a learning curve where neither is easier than the other and no one was born mastering either form of building. But when it comes to competition building, I think we must look at the very top level of builders, where I think that pros in digital building far outweigh the cons and thus create the mentioned unfair advantage!

Usually I see excuses how people are not by their bricks and mostly how wealthy people can afford all the pieces thus they turn to digital building. Well to first, you'll just skip a contest or two until you get back to your collection. I too had no time nor space on my desk to make an entry this time, yet was still not allowed to enter with an older creation fitting the theme. And to the second, how is that fair then that you compete with the amount of imaginary bricks no one could ever afford? Every hobby requires some dedication and is costly and I just can't see digital builds in the same basket with physical ones. Especially when it comes to prizes. Being an organizer I'd much rather give a set to a physical builder who I presume will most probably use it in the upcoming projects, rather than just having it on display or boxed. Or maybe the digital builders would be satisfied with the Eldorado.lxf as a prize?

Although I too have used digital programs for trying things out, testing some angles or color combinations, do some sketches, still physical building with bricks is the hobby for me. Digital building feels a bit like digital stamp collecting. So I'm absolutely rooting for separate categories obviously not minding if digital builds were gone completely. And if the former, absolutely different designs for each category as per the first paragraph!

[_R_R_]

15 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

That's not accurate; the votes from a couple of the dubious accounts were disqualified and I followed up directly one of the voters and can confirm he is indeed a real person who is not the builder that submitted the entries.

I agree with this statement and now we've done the experiment by allowing votes from newly registered members, I confirm it is not worth the complications that arise.

 

I also agree there should be a minimum post requirement to vote.

I was thinking 10 posts minimum if the account was registered prior to the contest announcement, or 20 posts minimum after the contest has been announced.

Sorry about the false statement, I didn't keep track of what was happening 24/7 and was under the impression nothing had happened but glad to be proven otherwise and that my suggestions help you in some way.

As far as the whole digital vs physical builds debate I think we should keep both, just make sure digital builds don't have any "illegal" building techniques or pieces in colors that don't exist. Setting a number of pieces and rules in place for each contest should help with this.

If that still doesn't help then it could always be split in two I suppose. This contest had one build contestant and one critic contestant both get the El Dorado set and the other 2 winners got to personally chose a medium and small set of their choice correct? I think we could narrow down the winners to 3 spots for 3 categories, Physical build, Digital build and Creative critic, all 3 winners get the same prize, could drive the competition further and engage more people while taking care of the whple physical and digital debate.

[Yoggington]

So long as it continues to be a public vote I don't see the problem with having digital & physical builds share a category.

Reading this thread it feels like people will be more eager to reward a physical build - I know I certainly would (once I saw the shipyard build 'in the flesh' I regretted not voting for it previously.

So the digital builders get an advantage in part selection. But the physical builders get an advantage because it's likely they get a vote boost from people who think it's more admirable. It evens out.

 

Assuming any prize pool is limited, then we can't subdivide too much. I think splitting categories by size would be a higher priority. 

Even if there were five prizes, I'd prefer to see a prize & runner-up in the big build, main & runner-up in medium, one prize for mini.

[Mister Phes]

11 hours ago, _R_R_ said:

Sorry about the false statement, I didn't keep track of what was happening 24/7

I can relate to this very well!  It's quite difficult to keep track of everything that's happening.

 

21 hours ago, Brickshipyard said:

Did you miss the beginning of this discussion where a participant was told to stop being self entitled and have better sportsmanship? Yes, that was for the contest results, but no less relevant here and now.

It wasn't because he asked for the results, it's the way he approached the matter.

In the first post of this topic, I provided a lengthy rationale as to why the contest eventuated the way it did and concluded there could be improvement.

Yet he's completely disregarded those circumstances in favour of continual scrutiny, even though I've agreed with many of his criticisms and stated the information will become available when time permits.

So I labelled him as self entitled due to his constant persecution rather than demonstrating the same patience others have. Perhaps I've misinterpreted his posts, but he seemed to be inferring because my efforts haven't met his satisfaction I should drop everything and provide the final Creative Critic reporting immediately.

Maybe you agree with his approach and disapprove of how I've responded so I respect if you wish for no further interaction.

[F1stzz]

18 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Yes, I'm aware of that - it's not that I won't provide the final reporting, it's because I still haven't had time. 

The biggest problem with all of this is that GENERALLY final reports are published BEFORE the winners are announced. That's an established order in any contest or competition in existence. Mentioning some obvious examples, fighter in boxing is not proclaimed the winner of a match before the scores of judges are announced publicly. Same with gymnastics, skating, fencing or any other sport, quite frankly. For our Main contest the votes were available all the time for everyone to check & count BEFORE the winners were determined. But in the case of CC contest, not only the order is opposite — it's been a week since the winner was announced, but the final report, the very thing this announcement should be based on, is still yet to arrive. And there were lots of comments posted by critics since the last update provided on August 21st & up until September 16th, therefore — a lot of data to include for the final report. The trouble started as soon as you've immediately rushed to announce the winner using the outdated calculations made on August 21st after durazno's reminder instead of replying something along the lines of "the report is getting ready to be published soon along with the winner announcement👌" & taking your time to actually construct it. What has followed in fact was you proposing me to comply the report post factum (yeah, the exact one that ideally should have been used to determine the winner in the first place) & calling durazno a "coward with a poor character" only because he chose to make an actual video review for this contest instead of generating traffic to this website each & every day for all these months (not to mention he did post lots of comments earlier, albeit not as regularly as some other participants, who, on the other hand, didn't come up with any video content). Hence why this all resulted in questioning the integrity of competition and the very purpose of CC contest's existence overall — cuz the whole situation was handled borderline disgustingly. But I hope all of us have learned this tough lesson & moving forward we won't make the same mistakes again 

18 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Perhaps it wasn't the best choice of words, but I reply to these topics at 3 in the morning when the best choice of words often escape me.

Please, Governor, avoid replying to such important topics this early, as it seemingly doesn't do us all any favours.

[Mister Phes]

30 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

The biggest problem with all of this is that GENERALLY final reports are published BEFORE the winners are announced. That's an established order in any contest or competition in existence.

Thank you for your summation of recent events.

This is the eight contest to be held in the LEGO pirate and contests are held in other Eurobricks forums regularly.  We've never offered final reports before winners are announced and this is the first time there has ever been an issue - that I'm aware of.

 

30 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

The trouble started as soon as you've immediately rushed to announce the winner using the outdated calculations made on August 21st after durazno's reminder instead of replying something along the lines of "the report is getting ready to be published soon along with the winner announcement👌"

Yes, I could have provided a better response.  However, I did not use the outdated calculations on August 21st to determine the winner, August 21st was the last opportunity I was able to update reporting.

 

30 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

Please, Governor, avoid replying to such important topics this early, as it seemingly doesn't do us all any favours.

While I agree it doesn't do us any favours, often it's the only opportunity I have to reply.  Otherwise, responses would need to wait until weekends and then things would move even slower.

 

[Danny_Boy4]

20 hours ago, MstrOfPppts said:

Though I've admitted before that personally I'm not too keen on looking at digital builds in detail, as I've said they lack some character. 

Do you realize all but one of the entries you voted in the main category were digital?

20 hours ago, MstrOfPppts said:

And to the second, how is that fair then that you compete with the amount of imaginary bricks no one could ever afford?

This can be solved by adding a size or part count limit, and most digital entries didn't have that much pieces.

20 hours ago, MstrOfPppts said:

Being an organizer I'd much rather give a set to a physical builder who I presume will most probably use it in the upcoming projects, rather than just having it on display or boxed.

I think if you give a prize to a digital entry the builer will have more bricks to start building physically, but physial builders already have enough brick to build MOC so they are the one more likely to display prizes 

20 hours ago, MstrOfPppts said:

Or maybe the digital builders would be satisfied with the Eldorado.lxf as a prize?

Do you also think video games, computer programs and cartoon makers don't need money for their work.

It is okey to not like digital MOCs, but some of what you said just doesn't make sence to me

Edited September 30, 2023 by Danny_Boy4

[MstrOfPppts]

6 hours ago, Danny_Boy4 said:

Do you realize all but one of the entries you voted in the main category were digital?

Yes, I do realize I voted for digital entries. I must admit I had a really hard time writing comments as objectively as possible regarding this matter. I applied for the creative critic and did not want my chances lowered by the fact that almost half of the builds were digital. I was really surprised by this amount. And when it comes to voting, I'm not a cheeky bastard, so I vote for the entries that are most visually appealing to me. As said, I put my digital problems aside for this contest and if the rules allow digital entries, I'm alright with it, just trying to suggest a change for this. Will have a second thought on commenting or participating next time though!

6 hours ago, Danny_Boy4 said:

This can be solved by adding a size or part count limit, and most digital entries didn't have that much pieces.

No, that does not solve the problem. Digitally you can still use all the expensive and retired parts in all the colors ever existing even in small quantities. And I'm not saying that this was the case in any of the builds, so let's put this aside. Sometimes it can come to a very small number. Let's say you have 5 palm leaves but for your design you need 7. Digitally 2 more clicks and it's done. Physically it comes to bricklink orders and if they arrive in time or maybe in the best case you borrow them from someone. Or you redesign the thing which might not look as cool. In other words, physically you usually design your creation in your head in regards to your collection and thus can maybe not achieve the full potential whereas building digitally you don't have this limitation.

6 hours ago, Danny_Boy4 said:

I think if you give a prize to a digital entry the builer will have more bricks to start building physically, but physial builders already have enough brick to build MOC so they are the one more likely to display prizes 

I disagree here. I have a ton of sets and none are built. All are parted out and sorted and waiting for a MOC opportunity. While physical builders might already have enough bricks for MOCs another set always enhances their collection and therewith their future builds. Even if it's jut for the minifigs, prints or the few special parts which go for ridiculous prices on bricklink. On the other hand if one relies on prizes to build up his collection without any investment, the wait for that person to start building is pointless.

6 hours ago, Danny_Boy4 said:

Do you also think video games, computer programs and cartoon makers don't need money for their work.

Ok, this was my more sarcastic argument. I see sarcasm is commonly misunderstood here so I'll avoid it in the future. Yet still firstly, this is a hobby, not work. And secondly we have a debate between physical vs digital building. And what do you want to compare the programmers and cartoon makers to in your argument? Unless you imply that I despise all digital work which is absolutely not the case. As said I'm not neglecting the effort of digital building, I just can't look at them in a same way as physical builds.

Now I see that all the arguments here can go either way and I agree that it depends on a particular case and individual what one will or won't do with the prize, how big ones collection is and so on. So I'd rather see the defenders of digital building focus on the aforementioned unfair advantage. If we take two builders with similar building skills I still think the person building digitally has an advantage!

[F1stzz]

9 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

However, I did not use the outdated calculations on August 21st to determine the winner, August 21st was the last opportunity I was able to update reporting.

Which ones have you used then if you've stated yourself that the last update you were able to report was the one posted on August 21st? That's kinda confusing, honestly, lots of things have happened in the following weeks, the August 21st report can't be considered the final one by any means, it's in fact an interim one. U mean there are some "unreported" updates? If that's the case — I assume they should've been finalized long ago & therefore provided, if they do exist. It's hard to imagine the situation when there's time to actually make calculations, announce the winner — but there's no time to post a detailed update on the final results publicly, for weeks at that. These processes normally go hand in hand.

9 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

This is the eight contest to be held in the LEGO pirate and contests are held in other Eurobricks forums regularly.  We've never offered final reports before winners are announced and this is the first time there has ever been an issue - that I'm aware of.

Well, newsflash — then it's all done fundamentally wrong. It's just a fact. One day this crucial problem would've been highlighted — guess today's the day finally. What's even more mind-blowing for me here is it turns out this is an eighth contest to be held on this forum. I wonder if there was any thorough post-contest critique whatsoever previously and if there was — was it even accounted for at all?? 

[Elephant Knight]

Added a piece limit for larger categories would put off a few builders. Speaking for myself, I don't have part counts on any of my MOCs (With the exception of this contest. Had to be under the piece limit of the small category, and was aiming for set like piece counts in my other entries) With any larger MOCs, it's difficult for builders using only physical bricks to have a part count.

Size limitations are much easier to follow when doing physical models. Digital I assume it's easy both way. I don't know, I don't build digital. 

EKnight

[Mister Phes]

9 hours ago, F1stzz said:

Well, newsflash — then it's all done fundamentally wrong. It's just a fact. One day this crucial problem would've been highlighted — guess today's the day finally.

Ok, thank you for bringing this revelation to us

So I can understand how this is done properly, could you please point me in the direction of reports from contests which other AFOL communities have hosted? Especially if they've hosted pirate themed contests.

Observations based on the pirate themed contests I'm aware of:

Brick Nerd's Pi-Rat contest winner announcement doesn't really provide much more elaboration than the Classic Pirates announcement and the LEGO Ideas 90th Anniversary Pirate Theme Celebration just says "Grand Prize" on the winning entry's page.  While the Bricklink Designer Program provides no voting analytics nor any reporting on its review process to explain why those particular submission were selected for crowdfunding.

Perhaps further information exists, I just haven't found it yet.

[F1stzz]

6 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Ok, thank you for bringing this revelation to us

You're welcome 

6 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Observations based on the pirate themed contests I'm aware of [...]

Let 'em do their own thing. If they're doing it wrong — it's their problem to solve or not. If we're doing something wrong & creating specific topics to point out what is it exactly (especially if something caused drama) — then we should be working towards solving these issues. So what I'd like to mention is the quote from your August 21st update (which was a reoccurring statement in pretty much all of the prior updates):

Quote

[...] Registrants who have not yet participated - but are still eligible to participate until August 26 to be included in the next update.

 As we know, the next update never came. Those contests you've mentioned may not provide any elaborations on the final results, but there's also no evaluation being regularly provided to the public by organisers to be responsible for. You've initiated such evaluation process publicly, kept providing evaluations to the public somewhat regularly, but never finished it publicly via posting the update with the final evaluations. You're responsible for ending what you've started & this inconsistency is glaring enough to point out and ask questions about. You've stated that final report is on its way — so let's finally bring it in, make the right conclusions out of the whole situation (I rly think it's not hard to summarize all this mess in a right way) & do our best for such troubles not to be repeated moving on  

[Mister Phes]

38 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

Let 'em do their own thing. If they're doing it wrong — it's their problem to solve or not. If we're doing something wrong & creating specific topics to point out what is it exactly

I'm not disputing that, but you've previously mentioned sporting organizations which generally have paid memberships, corporate sponsorship (beyond the prizes) and committees of people running them.

An online AFOL community managed by a few volunteers in their spare time is in a completely different league and can't typically match the output of the examples you've provided.

So pirates aside, please provide some general examples of AFOL contest reports so I understand exactly what is expected.

[durazno33]

On 9/29/2023 at 9:57 AM, Mister Phes said:

So despite what either of us has said, is it impossible for us to find common ground?

Sounds like we can find common ground. I was a bit too harsh in my statements. I had fun providing feedback for the builds in the competition. Thanks for running it.

Edited October 2, 2023 by durazno33

[F1stzz]

22 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

So pirates aside, please provide some general examples of AFOL contest reports so I understand exactly what is expected.

Sir, what's expected from you is to provide the final report in line with what you've been posting up to August 21st. With all the scoreboards, the detailed evaluation of each critic's work up to September 16th, you know, that sorta stuff you've started doing on August 9th & never actually finished despite some "next update" being teased. Would you like me to explain it for the fourth time or is everything finally clear at this point? ICYMI, it's October 2nd already, but you're yet to close the CC Leaderboard topic with the definitive update. Ideally, that should've been done over a week ago, but the time was wasted here instead in attempts to get the examples similar to your own summer posts from elsewhere, lol. 

[Mister Phes]

10 hours ago, durazno33 said:

Sounds like we can find common ground. I was a bit too harsh in my statements. I had fun providing feedback for the builds in the competition. Thanks for running it.

And thank you for participating in the Creative Critic - your contributions were quite strong towards the end!

Now, as a general statement to those who genuinely care; it appears the "I spread myself too finely across too many different fronts" descriptive failed to convey the monumental amount of time I spent managing this contest.
After spending around 10 hours providing commercial services to clients, I'd then be up until 3-5 in the morning overseeing the contest.  Every weekend I'd spend all day and evening, both Saturday and Sunday preparing everything for that weekend and the following week.

Subjecting yourself to these hours for a prolonged period is not healthy - the contest wrecked me and towards the end I was severely burnt out. Furthermore, due to the vast amount of time it consumed, I've had to postpone other important aspects of my life.

So when @F1stzz states"You've stated that final report is on its way — so let's finally bring it in, make the right conclusions out of the whole situation"; aside from mental exhaustion, I now must catch up on everything I've postponed because they have deadlines, and those deadlines are now looming. Not submitting your tax return by the due date time has unpleasant legal consequences for where I am!

But I'm still not finished finalising the administrative aspect of the contest. I'm currently in the process of compiling the analytics report the LEGO Group requires so they can be assured their sponsorship is justified.

I could go on, but I'm hoping that is sufficient supporting  information to provide greater context to the situation as I do not feel obliged to divulge into every detail of my personal situation.

Analyzing and reporting on the Creative Critic in further detail would make a fun blog post, but I can't think about that right now due to all the other things I must get done, lest I face those dire consequences!