> Cool! I will try and get this all written up and on the wiki by > tonight, but I may not have time tonight, in which case it would The page is ready and waiting, and feel free to use my initial Process (plus subsequent adjustments) for the Procedure section. As the Coordinator, I'll leave it up to you as to how to handle e-mail-based submissions and voting. I will be available to polish the Contest rules on the wiki, if you need help after the initial draft is posted. > My thought was to alternate between themed and open competitions. Whatever works; but let's get past this first one, first. ;-) An Open Contest would possibly require longer judging times, though, as the variety of games might make it hard for judges to, say, round up enough pyramids or players. That's just details, though. > Each game could be entered in at most one of each type of > competition I am more inclined to let any game that hasn't won be resubmitted, at this point. Maybe once there's been a few more contest cycles we could begin to restrict submissions. Right now, though, I'd rather keep submission count high. Besides, I imagine most folks won't resubmit too many times, if only because repeated losses likely implies a less than ideal game and, as such, judges will eventually just disregard repeats on their own. In short, I see this as being a largely self-correcting issue (by surrendering designers or dismissive judges). On that note, I am generally opposed to the "Most Improved" notion. It requires too much continuity between judges and there's no real "meat" to such an award, anyway, as long as folks can resubmit losing games with each contest. If the game is really improved, it will win (or at least place). The only real key to making such resubmission work for the designer is making sure that he or she points out the improvements to the judging populace, so that judges don't automatically dismiss the repeat entry. This could be as simple as (temporarily) highlighting the rule changes in bold or colored text or something.... I'm getting psyched! :-) David