I don't think he's been able to finish them all yet though. Considering the length it takes to actually beat some of them, that's what I'd expect anyways. Ironically there are few themes that would take longer to judge than "short story". Unless he has nothing going on in his life except judging this contest, he probably isn't finished yet.

A very clever 'I know you are but what am I' style response.

For the record, I think it makes more sense for new judges to be selected by the submitting mapmakers.

@Gidoza.. we had a system of how to do these things, and also, since we were the ones who've came up with the idea, I don't feel it'd be fair to be completely democratic... Moreover, wouldn't everyone just pick himself?

Tho, now that Cecil has stepped down, and Loveless is no where to be found... We DO need more judges...
I'll still be one of the judges.. and I'll personally finish judging the 2nd Mapping Contest...

However, I will be accepting FOUR other judges.
(this is to make sure that we won't get situations like this again)

Judges must meet these criterias, which I've arbitrarily set up .. but it's just to make sure we're all on the same page...
1. Judges will take turns "hosting" a tournament (I.e. making the post with the pretty banners, plus deciding on the theme)
2. Judges must communicate with each other before finalizing the theme (Either thru PM or MSN or w/e, we must reach a consensus)
3. Judges must follow the judging criteria unless it is changed (must be specified on the first post)

4. Judges must be as unbiased as they can!
5. Judges CAN Be absent for some of the tournaments. They MUST communicate this asap.
6. Judges CAN create a map for a tournament EXCEPT the ones they are "hosting" (Since you would've came up with the idea and started tinkering about it already, giving you an unfair advantage) ... They may not judge their own maps.

As Gidoza said, submitting mapmakers will get some say in this... I'll generally view this as a First come First serve thing.. but a description, and previous participation would get you some points.

You guys will also help judge the maps for the 3rd week long sen mapping contest.

Sounds good, where do I sign up to be a judge?

I wouldn't mind being a judge since I already play, and most of the time complete, the maps entered in contests. I would probably be able to produce reviews within a week. I'm also the least likely to be biased since none of you are my friends (or enemies, but I don't have any of those). On the other hand, it could play against me in the judges' selection since Unholy will probably favor his friends.

The only criterion that bugs me is the review outline; I think it could be optimized based on the theme.

Which is why I said the criterion can be changed... Cause I totally agree with this

Actually, I thought you'd make a great judge. I think you'd cover an area.. or a niche, that I and several other judges-to-be do not.

I figured it was reasonably obvious that voting or nominating oneself is out of the question.

My main intent in proposing this, or something like this, is that the current judging scheme is insufficiently interactive. A proper judgment simply cannot be rendered on a map without the use of inquiry. Minds cannot be read when something is triggered a certain way, banter is a necessity.

For example, my banter with Azrael was quite revealing for me. No, I'm not one of the judges, but nonetheless I sought to question him on what I perceived as a flaw in the map. After receiving an explanation and fire posts back and forth several times, I can see what he did and what he had in mind in a way that wouldn't have been possible for me to see had I not talked to him. What I formerly perceived as a flaw I no longer see as a flaw but rather a benefit of his map.

Judging requires trials. This is the only contest I've ever entered, but I've watched the SEN contests judged before, and I'd personally contend that no "judging" has ever occurred here. It's hardly a surprise that several people on the boards have been looking for a different type of judging system, where the mapmakers themselves get involved in their own judging. The "judge" would serve as an arbiter to see that everything runs smoothly. I think you quite underestimate the ability of the mapmakers to look after one another. While I am opposed to voting for oneself, even if I could do such in the current contest, I still wouldn't vote for my own map because I see the merit and uniqueness in Azrael's map and am willing to vouch for it over my own.

With that out of the way, there's the most obvious half of the issue in the question is that our objective should be to make good and fun maps, than to win contests. If mapmakers were more communicable and got more involved in helping one another with the projects, rather than just having a one-week race to see who wins, we might see far more complete, far more interesting maps - or have you noticed - that all the useful comments people make, all the feedback, all the criticism, tiny issues and bug fixes, and so on, come AFTER the due date is over and the contest has been judged? This is because the other mapmakers are getting involved and starting to help one another, and more generalized playing is aiding in the construction of map that simply cannot be balanced perfectly without the aid of devoted people, unless the objective of the map is quite simplistic.

As Chia said, he has no friends to be biased towards, no enemies to be biased against. However, there's no cause for everyone not to be a friend. If you are friends with all - coming from working and speaking together - there is nothing with which to be biased. The whole issue of bias derives not from who you communicate with frequently, but who you communicate with infrequently.

You have some great points, but I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

Are you trying to say that instead of having certain people grade different maps, we should have the mapmakers themselves vote for their favorite maps, and then tally the votes for a winner?
If this was an ideal forum, where at least 10 people would participate in these week-long contests, then you're right. It would be a lot better to have the mapmakers themselves be the judge, as it'd better reflect how the public would feel about the maps. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The 2nd one had 7-8 maps, and while that is a lot of maps, I don't think we'll get enough votes to conclusively decide on a winner since there aren't enough participants.
Also, I did not underestimate the abilities of mapmakers. If I did, I wouldn't have publicly ask for more judges. Also, remember that I'm also a mapmaker.

Yes, I agree that the objective is to make good and fun maps, not to win these contests. Having judges does not debunk this. The contest is supposed to create a friendly, competitive environment, to see who can push themselves, and challenge themselves to make better maps. Again, if we do have mapmakers vote, we would need a lot more participants.
The only thing I can take out from this is that we may try tinkering with the amount of time creators are given to make a map. Maybe extending this to two weeks would give them more time to help each other and make better maps? We could try this, but having week-long challenges also keeps people on their toes so they'd stop procrastinating (yeah I'm talking about you, lil).

Personally, it's the reverse for me, as I expect the people I communicate with to do better lols

I think the point is that you want these contests to be more of a social thing. The only real thing I can do is extend contests into two weeks, and make people submit a draft by the first week. Do you think this is a good idea, guys?

I think what he meant was, the current judging system involves judges playing a map, saying "oh that sucks" and making a decision without ever making any inquiries with the mapmaker. The judges never go, "hmm I wonder why this is done like this," and actually ask the mapmaker. They just play it through, make a decision on their own with no interaction with the mapmaker whatsoever, and give a result based on that.

Okay. But this is the situation that most people will go through.

If we want to, We can increase the feedback, again, by asking the creators to submit a draft for the first week, and then complete it by the 2nd week.
But personally, I think that first impressions are very important. While I do understand the angle you're coming from, I think it is really difficult for the judges to make an unbiased judgment if they had to ask the creator why something is done one way or another. Even with what I just proposed wouldn't be fair for some people.

What I should really be saying is that I'll try to convince my fellow judges () to provide more feedback.

I just wanted to say, I was online earlier and Unholy conversed with me about my map in a meaningful way where the exact kind of exchange being described here was going on. Thanks

Chia also went out of their way to involve me in the judging process for this contest Things are looking up for the future of these events.

I actually agree with this idea quite alot.

I would rather say, instead, that it be reformed as such: the current expectations we have for the maps now is what we should be seeing by the end of the first week. The second week should involve all the mapmakers more or less exclusively playing the map submissions to help with revision, balancing, commenting, and so on.


...As for your comment on procrastinating, I think it deserves mentioning that this is still a game in question, so the very act of mapmaking may itself be procrastination. Yes, it's good and healthy for everyone to take diversions from work - but if the diversion from work itself seems like work, at some point someone needs to go and just -play a game-. When I was making the map for this contest, I only worked on the map for about 20% of the time I had which was actually "free". There's just a point-of-no-return where you're like, "enough mapmaking for today", and have to move on to other things. Really, putting a time limit on the map isn't going to make me want to work on it any faster. When I'm making other projects that are, you might say, significant, I usually put a month of thought into it, maybe writing a few things down, before I even begin to design the terrain. It's probably true that a time limit is good because it helps encourage you to actually -finish- the project, but on the other hand, being able to relax while building the project will focus one's mind and help one to co-ordinate the project more betterly (yes, I know that's not a real word).

Two weeks for a contest probably would give people enough breadth to think about it, build it, edit it, without feeling rushed, and at least a week's break before the next contest would allow everyone to recover their energy and have a good chance to play all the projects before they move on.

It's been over a month. You guys should really just get it judged.

I believe we are almost done with the results, I know for certain me and Chia-Tyrant are complete. Results should be out soon if anything.

We're just waiting for Leeroy. We were nominated as judges yesterday. Just goes to show you that the old judges were incredibly slow .

Overall standings will be calculated as soon as Week #2's mapping contest is scored. Attached are the judge's notes with explanations of the scores given. Congrats Azrael.

Attachments:

Well I'm not at all displeased with the results. Congrats, Azrael! =)


As for Blind, with reference to the reviews, all the judges seemed to indicate that more could have been done with the idea (I mean, apart from the suggestions already given), and I'd agree with this. But my question is - what? =/ Any suggestions on how this idea could be integrated as a map in different ways?

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jun 27 2010, 1:44 am by Gidoza.

Congratz to you too Gidoza, it was a very close contest Glad this is judged! These are some very efficient judges.

Something I wanted to comment on quickly.

This is what Gidoza meant about communicating with the mapmakers, you should have asked me The idea was that because it's boiling oil, it's liquid, and should not "explode" when it hits a surface, but flow toward the opening if there is one. You'll notice if you open it partially, 99% of it will flow toward the open gap while another 1% excess "drips" through the gate.

Making it die when it hit the cannons would have been incredibly easy, I could have used preexisting locations and incorporated it into the trigger that kills them when it's closed. I ended up using 82 locations placed in areas ranging from where the oil is released down to the tower floor, most of which being near the gate, along with 68 triggers, in an attempt to make the oil behave more like liquid.

Anyways, congratulations to the other entrants, good contest Looking forward to the next one (and the previous one! xD)

Ah okay I get it now. Hehe, congrats to all the people who entered, you defintley deserved it.