David Artman writes: > OK, there's one day left for judging the Winter 2008 IGDC and, after a > two-week extension, I have only 11 rankings. The thing about deadlines is that most people wait until the last minute (or the day after). Don't hatchet your counts before they chicken. > If we do not get "enough" ballots, the competition would have to be > deemed null (like, I presume, the Autumn 2005 competition was). I would be very surprised if that was the reason that the results were never announced. It seems much more likely that Jonathan Leistiko just flaked (or was abducted by aliens). Otherwise he would have at least offered an explanation, or maybe released the existing ballots. > 4c) The return after a two-year hiatus seemed to drive a LOT of new > participation (although nearly half of those ballots came from one > source: a school class). The last competition was an aberration because of that class. Historically speaking, just getting into double digits is an accomplishment. > So.... > Q4) Should I begin to run the IGDC annually ONLY? > Q4a) If so, what would be the best time of year to run it? > Q4b) If not, should I shift the twice-annual schedule around somehow? I think you should stick with the current biannual schedule for at least another year. Two datapoints is not enough of a sample to draw any real conclusions from. --dougorleans@xxxxxxxxx