Mix Challenge - Gossip and Discussion

[mementus]

Guys I am coming ASAP and I am going to win every contests! You know it now!

Jokes aside, I will jump again in the next contest, keep the good work up!

One thing, please. Are Metric Halo products for metric halo users only? Thank you.

[Compyfox]

Nope, no prior accounts for any products needed if you win/select them as one of the "Winners Podium".

Thanks for the bump of the Song Pool Campaign thread, btw.



Also... as of this moment, I can't tell if we start Mix Challenge 28 on 15th December and run it through the Christmas Holidays, or kick off at 1st December and postpone Round 2 until AFTER the holiday weeks. Feedback on that would be welcome.

Additional to that... if we don't get new tracks "checked and finalized" by the end of MC28 - it's game over for the Mix Challenge. I'm working as fast as I can BTS, but I'd feel more comfortable if we would just get more content offered.

[Jorgeelalto]

I think if MC28 started on 15th December, people who has a bit more free time on holidays could participate. I don't know about the second option...

[Compyfox]

I kind of feel the same way. This way we have a Mix Challenge over the holidays, and most of January as "vacation" to continue in February again (if we have suitable material that is).


Any more opinions?

[Compyfox]

Little bump with a question:
Should we mention on Twitter, that the current running challenge ends in XYZ hours?

It's IMO an important discussion as the last challenges had a lot of "sneaky entries" post the deadlines.

[davemcisaac]

Personally, I think if you want a definite cutoff to the MC Challenge, then you should simply cut it off at the prescribed time - no "if's, and's or but's". You've got the end time countdown plainly visible on the Official Homepage. It's like anything else - if you give them an inch, they'll take a foot. (I don't know if there's a similar saying in the metric system... )

If it's stated that there is a deadline - then let there be a deadline! That's what absolutely any other competition would do. Then you won't ever have to worry about this topic again. You put in enough effort to provide us this competition as it is.

[3ee]

about deadlines:
I found it a good practice to pencil in deadlines a whole day before it happens... in some cases, a day can be a" life-saver"

[Trannin]

Personally, I think if you want a definite cutoff to the MC Challenge, then you should simply cut it off at the prescribed time - no "if's, and's or but's". You've got the end time countdown plainly visible on the Official Homepage. It's like anything else - if you give them an inch, they'll take a foot. (I don't know if there's a similar saying in the metric system... )

If it's stated that there is a deadline - then let there be a deadline! That's what absolutely any other competition would do. Then you won't ever have to worry about this topic again. You put in enough effort to provide us this competition as it is.

I couldn't agree more.

[Compyfox]

Well my main problem is, that I can't be there all the time around the deadline and instantly post "folks, time is up" and close out the round. This is why there is now a timer on the official page (linked to GMT+1 - which is a good middle way between the US and Australia timezones - before the timezone switch from LA time to German time, Australian members had one day less), but also the "friendly reminders" throughout the weeks. On Twitter, that is pretty much scheduled/automated as well.


I see this as a fault on my/our end. Since the incarnation of the Challenge, we have been lenient in favor for the fun of the Challenge. We didn't want to boot anyone out. I also closed eyes on newcomers that resubmitted their mix several times.

My biggest concern at this point is, that we let too many things slide and being more strict rule wise, we'll loose out on participants. And they're rare throughout the years already (see statistics on the official page), even though we're in our third year at this point.


So... what is the right thing to do?
Being more strict, but introduce even more announcements? Can we even improve on that?

[3ee]

I like countdown timers!

[mementus]

I see this as a fault on my/our end. Since the incarnation of the Challenge, we have been lenient in favor for the fun of the Challenge. We didn't want to boot anyone out. I also closed eyes on newcomers that resubmitted their mix several times.

My biggest concern at this point is, that we let too many things slide and being more strict rule wise, we'll loose out on participants. And they're rare throughout the years already (see statistics on the official page), even though we're in our third year at this point.


So... what is the right thing to do?
Being more strict, but introduce even more announcements? Can we even improve on that?

You are managing the contests well.
+1 for the flexible approach, at this moment.

[Compyfox]

Flexible meaning?

[mementus]

The less strict way which is, realistically speaking, more inclusive.

my 0.2

[Compyfox]

But we are already fairly lenient in terms of rules (sometimes I even add an extra day for Round 2 without people noticing it).

A shift needs to happen at some point, no? Else it wouldn't be fair to all other participants who stick to the existing rules.

[mementus]

But we are already fairly lenient in terms of rules (sometimes I even add an extra day for Round 2 without people noticing it).

A shift needs to happen at some point, no? Else it wouldn't be fair to all other participants who stick to the existing rules.

Just to be clear, strict or not doesn't change nothing to me personally but if the goal, now, is to reach more audience, just keep managing the challenges as you usually do. It's a good balance imo.

I don't think that changing the moderation approach would guarantee an increase of partecipants.
Rather, it could determine a decreasing in submissions.


Bump for the Starter!