On Nov 8, 2007, at 10:54 AM, David Artman wrote:
I suppose that is a better tack, though I'd still want to "vet"
submissions, so that we don't end up with a game that only slightly
acknowledge the restriction (if at all) and thereby waste judge's time
reading it only to discover that it's a red herring, vis a vis the
purpose of the competition restriction (product sales promotion). It's
tantamount to spamming the competition, if one ignores a requirement
just to get one's game noticed or read; I'd treat it as such (i.e.
not
pass it along to judges).
Do we have any problems with people spamming the competition? I don't
believe so. Why not take the approach of letting people submit what
they want, and if it becomes a problem (the judges don't take into
account the design restriction, or someone spams the competition, or
whatever), then we can make a rule that the organizer has to "vet" the
submissions.
Remember, we're all cool with each other here. It's a community, and
people want to support the community. Don't assume that people will
try to cheat unless you have a good reason to.