TAFI Town Hall

[jdmdisney99]

If one does not successfully complete a Tier 1 Competition or Tier 2 Competition, they must successfully compete in a Tier 3 Competition before they can return to a higher tier competition.

If one does not successfully compete in a Tier 3 Competition, they most successfully compete in a Tier 4 Competition before they can return to a higher tier competition.​

​

To clarify, when we say "complete" we mean remain present for the duration of their time in the comp.

"Not successfully complete"=Being eliminated due to inactivity

 

[spacemt354]

Well, for starters, I would abolish the restrictions on people being allowed to join a competition. I feel like that is taking things a bit too far. I agree that you should be required to have some experience in comps before hosting one, but competing, I just don't think we should be able to tell people that they can't participate because they are new.

Also, the whole months long process to create a comp seems a bit extreme. If I were in charge, I would just set a 2 week period in a December where you give this information to the Selection Committee, whether the comps has happened in the past before:
-Name
-Logo
-Brief Rundown/Rules
-Example Challenge
-How long you would ideally see it last

Then, using that information, they read over them all, and then choose which ones they would like to see and working them into a schedule. If they like one comp that the creator wanted to last 2 months, but there is only room for a 1 month comp, they should ask the creator whether they would accept that time slot, and if not, they will choose someone else.

I like the idea of tiers, and I think they are good the way they are now. But I still have one question, what tier would my comp this fall be? It was supposed to be just October I believe, but @jdmdisney99 should know all of that since I submitted it to him earlier this year. So, to recap:

-2 week submission period
-Committee creates schedule, asks comp runners if ok
-No "discrimination" on whether someone can compete

If the conversationalists are interested in revising this, I would gladly help you guys if wanted

I was going to actually suggest something like this. I completely agree on mostly all points.

The only thing that I think is more confusing than intended is the Tier system. More specifically the timing of competitions. One of the issues we have run into this Season is a shortened schedule compared to the other two competitions. Perhaps a maximum length to competitions could be something to consider, because we could have definitely benefited from an extra week or two in the Creator Games.

So how will it work now if someone comes up with an idea, like myself, who hasn't competed in a Tier 4 comp yet, but has an idea for a competition next year? If I proposed a competition now, in order to get the proposal in and potentially approved, would a provision be that I would have to agree to compete in either the SA or TSI later on?

I definitely appreciate the effort put into this proposal, but I feel some discussion in this thread could help stimulate it into a more cohesive unit.

 

[englanddg]

To clarify, when we say "complete" we mean remain present for the duration of their time in the comp.

"Not successfully complete"=Being eliminated due to inactivity

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[englanddg]

I was going to actually suggest something like this. I completely agree on mostly all points.

The only thing that I think is more confusing than intended is the Tier system. More specifically the timing of competitions. One of the issues we have run into this Season is a shortened schedule compared to the other two competitions. Perhaps a maximum length to competitions could be something to consider, because we could have definitely benefited from an extra week or two in the Creator Games.

So how will it work now if someone comes up with an idea, like myself, who hasn't competed in a Tier 4 comp yet, but has an idea for a competition next year? If I proposed a competition now, in order to get the proposal in and potentially approved, would a provision be that I would have to compete in either the SA or TSI?

I definitely appreciate the effort put into this proposal, but I feel some discussion in this thread could help stimulate it into a more cohesive unit.

You were sponsored by someone who has completed not 1 but more than 1 Tier 4 (IDI).

And, in our discussions coming up with this before presenting it for general discussion, that exact situation came up.

With a sponsor, you are ok. It's IDI's comp, not yours, if you decide to disappear tomorrow. If that makes sense.

(view it from a systematic standpoint, not your situation specifically).

Also, if the tiers were applied to this year, your comp IS a Tier 4 comp.

 

[englanddg]

I was going to actually suggest something like this. I completely agree on mostly all points.

The only thing that I think is more confusing than intended is the Tier system. More specifically the timing of competitions. One of the issues we have run into this Season is a shortened schedule compared to the other two competitions. Perhaps a maximum length to competitions could be something to consider, because we could have definitely benefited from an extra week or two in the Creator Games.

So how will it work now if someone comes up with an idea, like myself, who hasn't competed in a Tier 4 comp yet, but has an idea for a competition next year? If I proposed a competition now, in order to get the proposal in and potentially approved, would a provision be that I would have to agree to compete in either the SA or TSI later on?

I definitely appreciate the effort put into this proposal, but I feel some discussion in this thread could help stimulate it into a more cohesive unit.

In addition, timing is EXACTLY why we are bringing this up to the community NOW (in 2015) instead of next year.

That way we can all agree on how 2016 is gonna look well before it actually happens, rather than make it up on the fly and risk conflicts.

 

[Matt7187]

I like the idea of a shorter submission period, and it being towards the end of the year...

Though, I'll say, I think there should be 2 of them. One in Dec for the first 6 months, and one in May for the last 6 months.

Or something like that.

That way, a new person can have a chance to get their comp into the schedule if they have a great idea and the will to make it happen.

As far as the limitations, there's a reason for that, and you and I have both run into it. People who sign up, but then never compete with any seriousness. This is specifically for the Tier 1 comps.

If there were unlimited slots in every comp, it wouldn't be an issue, but there are not. So, it's an attempt (though maybe a poor concept?) to try and reign that in a bit.

I guess I see where you are coming from about the limiting members. I guess I'm not worried about that. Thanks for clarifying!

As long as the process doesn't take 2 months to start a comp, I would be fine with there being 2 of them.

 

[spacemt354]

In addition, timing is EXACTLY why we are bringing this up to the community NOW (in 2015) instead of next year.

That way we can all agree on how 2016 is gonna look well before it actually happens, rather than make it up on the fly and risk conflicts.

I agree that its a great idea to do the schedule now. I would be wary about having too many comps going on at once. I think that may split attention away from both comps running, it was part of the reason why I went to IDI back in February. Because I had an idea for a comp, but I had no idea this ICS existed, so I didn't want to step on anyone's toes or detract attention. It was better to morph it into one big comp for everyone than have two running side-by-side. (At least that was my thought process back then)

 

[englanddg]

I guess I see where you are coming from about the limiting members. I guess I'm not worried about that. Thanks for clarifying!

As long as the process doesn't take 2 months to start a comp, I would be fine with there being 2 of them.

2 months and a huge adminstrative process for new comps is a bad idea, but by the same right, we don't want someone doing a 3 month slot who has only a "great idea" and hasn't mapped out things like...what are the challenges going to be?

There is a certain amount of pre-planning that goes into longer comps, so you well know.

It doesn't need to be completely scripted and fleshed out, but it should be run a bit better than someone who just joined a few weeks ago, if that makes sense.

As far as participation, there's a difference between someone who gets busy or distracted with real life (like Jose did in TSI) and someone who signs up and then never posts anything...ever...(I won't name names).

Hence why I think that an "override" should be allowed for hosts, so if Jose came back, he could make a plea to a host and say "I'm really in for this" vs someone who just found wdwmagic at random and never returns.

 

[englanddg]

I agree that its a great idea to do the schedule now. I would be wary about having too many comps going on at once. I think that may split attention away from both comps running, it was part of the reason why I went to IDI back in February. Because I had an idea for a comp, but I had no idea this ICS existed, so I didn't want to step on anyone's toes or detract attention. It was better to morph it into one big comp for everyone than have two running side-by-side. (At least that was my thought process back then)

It's part of what we're trying to work out, and where the "tiers" came from.

There are lots of people who really want to host their own comps, but how do you schedule them? That said, considering our overarching main comp schedule really limits to 4-5 comps a year...it gets even more complex.

Mind you, ANYONE can start a comp anytime they like (and this concept does not limit that). It's just, it works so much better (as you indicated you get) if the community as a whole is one the same page for the scheduling.

That said...the idea for Tiers...It's merely to create slots for people who are new who like the concept of hosting their own comp to have a slot.

Otherwise, the easy way out, is to say there are 5 in 2016. RM with TSI for first quarter, IDI second quarter, JDM for third quarter, Tiki for 4th quarter, Elite Eight in December.

The schedule is intended to give slots where the "heavy hitters" may still be distracted with other comps, but others can compete and continue to flex their Imagineering muscles.

And, by "heavy hitters", I mean people who advance in the major comp. Not skill level.

A classic example is myself and JDM, who left early for TSI...a smaller comp would have been fun for both of us (at least that's my opine, I won't speak for @jdmdisney99 )

It may be a faulty idea, but it's the best we could come up with (and we've been chatting about it for months)...

What would you suggest?

 

[Matt7187]

2 months and a huge adminstrative process for new comps is a bad idea, but by the same right, we don't want someone doing a 3 month slot who has only a "great idea" and hasn't mapped out things like...what are the challenges going to be?

There is a certain amount of pre-planning that goes into longer comps, so you well know.

It doesn't need to be completely scripted and fleshed out, but it should be run a bit better than someone who just joined a few weeks ago, if that makes sense.

As far as participation, there's a difference between someone who gets busy or distracted with real life (like Jose did in TSI) and someone who signs up and then never posts anything...ever...(I won't name names).

Hence why I think that an "override" should be allowed for hosts, so if Jose came back, he could make a plea to a host and say "I'm really in for this" vs someone who just found wdwmagic at random and never returns.

Yeah, that all sounds good for me. And trust me, I remember WEDcar . But I will put this out there, The Choice will be one of the funnest competitions on the boards, the challenges will almost all be new, never before seen in other comps. Honestly, I think I could fill a lot longer of a time than the month I have.

 

[englanddg]

Yeah, that all sounds good for me. And trust me, I remember WEDcar . But I will put this out there, The Choice will be one of the funnest competitions on the boards, the challenges will almost all be new, never before seen in other comps. Honestly, I think I could fill a lot longer of a time than the month I have.

The month thing isn't set in stone, we (the convos) just ran into a wall when we were trying to plan things out.

Also, we are trying to fit in SYWTBAI next year as a main comp, as that community deserves their headliner comp to have proper representation.

Hence why we decided, as a group, to toss it out for general discussion.

Also, I'm looking forward to your comp!

 

[spacemt354]

It's part of what we're trying to work out, and where the "tiers" came from.

There are lots of people who really want to host their own comps, but how do you schedule them? That said, considering our overarching main comp schedule really limits to 4-5 comps a year...it gets even more complex.

Mind you, ANYONE can start a comp anytime they like (and this concept does not limit that). It's just, it works so much better (as you indicated you get) if the community as a whole is one the same page for the scheduling.

That said...the idea for Tiers...is actually mine. It's merely to create slots for people who are new who like the concept of hosting their own comp to have a slot.

Otherwise, the easy way out, is to say there are 5 in 2016. RM with TSI for first quarter, IDI second quarter, JDM for third quarter, Tiki for 4th quarter, Elite Eight in December.

The schedule is intended to give slots where the "heavy hitters" may still be distracted with other comps, but others can compete and continue to flex their Imagineering muscles.

And, by "heavy hitters", I mean people who advance in the major comp. Not skill level.

A classic example is myself and JDM, who left early for TSI...a smaller comp would have been fun for both of us (at least that's my opine, I won't speak for @jdmdisney99 )

It may be a faulty idea, but it's the best we could come up with (and we've been chatting about it for months)...

What would you suggest?

So for all the people who want to host comps, I would just team up ideas.

Let's take 2016 for example (and these are all just for example, I don't know if this will actually happen.)

We got TSI Season 2, TCG Season 2 , TSA Season 4, Matt's Comp Season 2, and then the ICS tournament.

So that's 5 right there...(with basically the ICS being steadfast...so really 4)

First we have to figure out timing: If the ICs always runs Dec 1-31st (or something like that, that leaves 11 months for the other 4 comps)

Jan 1st - March 15th (Competition 1)
March 16th - June 1st (Competition 2)
June 2nd - August 20th (Competition 3)
August 20th - November 10th (Competition 4)

Editor's note - these are all rough estimates, and there's a few weeks of wiggle room in Nov as you can see if a comp needs more time.

Now let's say over the course of this summer we have 10 people (those ideas above included) who want to host competitions. I think a two week process to propose your idea, what the challenges are, etc - will work very nicely. And then from there you select the four competitions who will hold those 4 main slots above for the upcoming year (and this process can happen every summer so you can have a rotating roster of competitions)

If you haven't checked it out, we came up for an elimination challenge (kinda like you were suggesting for yourself who left TSI early) for the Creator Games. For the competitions that don't get selected for those 4 main slots...I would suggest an offer be made so that they can run their comp ideas as an elimination comp tied to each of the 4 main competitions.

So for the people who have been eliminated from TSI for example, here's Competition B for you to do in the meantime.

If 4 out of the 6 people in this example choose this option, that leaves 2 people out. These people could be offered an opportunity to possibly join the hosts (if they are willing) and give them some ideas of their own. Kinda like what IDI and myself did for TCG. If they don't want to do that, then perhaps a guest judge position or simply wait it out till next year and compete instead.

I think this would fit the notion of a "community" on this site and have everyone included together.

 

[jdmdisney99]

So for all the people who want to host comps, I would just team up ideas.

Let's take 2016 for example (and these are all just for example, I don't know if this will actually happen.)

We got TSI Season 2, TCG Season 2 , TSA Season 4, Matt's Comp Season 2, and then the ICS tournament.

So that's 5 right there...(with basically the ICS being steadfast...so really 4)

First we have to figure out timing: If the ICs always runs Dec 1-31st (or something like that, that leaves 11 months for the other 4 comps)

Jan 1st - March 15th (Competition 1)
March 16th - June 1st (Competition 2)
June 2nd - August 20th (Competition 3)
August 20th - November 10th (Competition 4)

Editor's note - these are all rough estimates, and there's a few weeks of wiggle room in Nov as you can see if a comp needs more time.

Now let's say over the course of this summer we have 10 people (those ideas above included) who want to host competitions. I think a two week process to propose your idea, what the challenges are, etc - will work very nicely. And then from there you select the four competitions who will hold those 4 main slots above for the upcoming year (and this process can happen every summer so you can have a rotating roster of competitions)

If you haven't checked it out, we came up for an elimination challenge (kinda like you were suggesting for yourself who left TSI early) for the Creator Games. For the competitions that don't get selected for those 4 main slots...I would suggest an offer be made so that they can run their comp ideas as an elimination comp tied to each of the 4 main competitions.

So for the people who have been eliminated from TSI for example, here's Competition B for you to do in the meantime.

If 4 out of the 6 people in this example choose this option, that leaves 2 people out. These people could be offered an opportunity to possibly join the hosts (if they are willing) and give them some ideas of their own. Kinda like what IDI and myself did for TCG. If they don't want to do that, then perhaps a guest judge position or simply wait it out till next year and compete instead.

I think this would fit the notion of a "community" on this site and have everyone included together.

Interesting points... sounds kind of complicated though, with the member tie-ins from here to there and this to that.

We tried to create that opportunity for eliminated players with the overlapping smaller comps.

FYI, we were informed that TCG would be about a Tier 2 level next year. Just so you know where we stood when we were writing that proposal up.

 

[englanddg]

Not bad suggestions. I'll take them one by one.

So for all the people who want to host comps, I would just team up ideas.

Let's take 2016 for example (and these are all just for example, I don't know if this will actually happen.)

We got TSI Season 2, TCG Season 2 , TSA Season 4, Matt's Comp Season 2, and then the ICS tournament.

You left out SYWTBAI.

So that's 5 right there...(with basically the ICS being steadfast...so really 4)

What is the "ICS being steadfast"? Do you mean the Elite Eight year ender and the ICS Awards? I'm confused...

First we have to figure out timing: If the ICs always runs Dec 1-31st (or something like that, that leaves 11 months for the other 4 comps)

Jan 1st - March 15th (Competition 1)
March 16th - June 1st (Competition 2)
June 2nd - August 20th (Competition 3)
August 20th - November 10th (Competition 4)

There are things that complicate that of which you are not aware.

Editor's note - these are all rough estimates, and there's a few weeks of wiggle room in Nov as you can see if a comp needs more time.

Always wiggle room. Agreed! <grin>

Now let's say over the course of this summer we have 10 people (those ideas above included) who want to host competitions. I think a two week process to propose your idea, what the challenges are, etc - will work very nicely. And then from there you select the four competitions who will hold those 4 main slots above for the upcoming year (and this process can happen every summer so you can have a rotating roster of competitions)

Summer is a terrible time to hold public votes for things like this for one reason...it's when the community has the most transient members. Meaning, people who sign up, play along for a bit, and then never come back.

A lot of this is due to the forum attracting people who are in jr. high / high school / early college who have summers off.

The backbone of the community are the regulars who come year round and participate year round. And, their voices should be paramount. As well as their competitions should they choose to host.

Also, the two week process wasn't my idea, it was @Matt7187 's, but I agree, it is a good one.

If you haven't checked it out, we came up for an elimination challenge (kinda like you were suggesting for yourself who left TSI early) for the Creator Games. For the competitions that don't get selected for those 4 main slots...I would suggest an offer be made so that they can run their comp ideas as an elimination comp tied to each of the 4 main competitions.

So for the people who have been eliminated from TSI for example, here's Competition B for you to do in the meantime.

I have checked it out (thought you just posted it), and I think it's a very neat idea. It's similar to what JDM does when you can "bring people back" towards the end of SA. That said, not everyone will come back for scraps at the table, and I think that to be fair to those who WANT to host their own comp, slots should be set aside to allow them to do so.

The main comps hold the forum's main attention by default, and always will. That said, that doesn't mean there isn't room for easier comps to be posted (like Turtle did during SA 1, or @MonorailRed's 30 day's comp), and no reason why they couldn't overlap. This also grants the community at large more chances to compete, rather than waiting 1/4 of a year.

Take me...I can't participate in your "revolutionary" new Competition B, by your own rules. But, I'd love to be able to hone my skills before SA...instead, I'm doing other things.

If 4 out of the 6 people in this example choose this option, that leaves 2 people out. These people could be offered an opportunity to possibly join the hosts (if they are willing) and give them some ideas of their own. Kinda like what IDI and myself did for TCG. If they don't want to do that, then perhaps a guest judge position or simply wait it out till next year and compete instead.

I think this would fit the notion of a "community" on this site and have everyone included together.

You grossly oversimplify the reality of the situation. Though, I do applaud (sincerely) your input!

 

[jdmdisney99]

Interesting points... sounds kind of complicated though, with the member tie-ins from here to there and this to that.

We tried to create that opportunity for eliminated players with the overlapping smaller comps.

FYI, we were informed that TCG would be about a Tier 2 level next year. Just so you know where we stood when we were writing that proposal up.

Not bad suggestions. I'll take them one by one.



You left out SYWTBAI.



What is the "ICS being steadfast"? Do you mean the Elite Eight year ender and the ICS Awards? I'm confused...



There are things that complicate that of which you are not aware.



Always wiggle room. Agreed! <grin>



Summer is a terrible time to hold public votes for things like this for one reason...it's when the community has the most transient members. Meaning, people who sign up, play along for a bit, and then never come back.

A lot of this is due to the forum attracting people who are in jr. high / high school / early college who have summers off.

The backbone of the community are the regulars who come year round and participate year round. And, their voices should be paramount. As well as their competitions should they choose to host.

Also, the two week process wasn't my idea, it was @Matt7187 's, but I agree, it is a good one.



I have checked it out (thought you just posted it), and I think it's a very neat idea. It's similar to what JDM does when you can "bring people back" towards the end of SA. That said, not everyone will come back for scraps at the table, and I think that to be fair to those who WANT to host their own comp, slots should be set aside to allow them to do so.

The main comps hold the forum's main attention by default, and always will. That said, that doesn't mean there isn't room for easier comps to be posted (like Turtle did during SA 1, or @MonorailRed's 30 day's comp), and no reason why they couldn't overlap. This also grants the community as a large more chances to compete, rather than waiting 1/4 of a year.

Take me...I can't participate in your "revolutionary" new Competition B, by your own rules. But, I'd love to be able to hone my skills before SA...instead, I'm doing other things.



You grossly oversimplify the reality of the situation. Though, I do applaud (sincerely) your input!

I find when I struggle to dictate things, englanddg nails it on the head.

 

[spacemt354]

Thanks!

Not bad suggestions. I'll take them one by one.

You left out SYWTBAI.

Whoops...

What is the "ICS being steadfast"? Do you mean the Elite Eight year ender and the ICS Awards? I'm confused...

Oh I meant the ICS Elite Eight - the bracket "playoffs - I assumed that just will always happen at the end of the year.

There are things that complicate that of which you are not aware.

Summer is a terrible time to hold public votes for things like this for one reason...it's when the community has the most transient members. Meaning, people who sign up, play along for a bit, and then never come back.

A lot of this is due to the forum attracting people who are in jr. high / high school / early college who have summers off.

The backbone of the community are the regulars who come year round and participate year round. And, their voices should be paramount. As well as their competitions should they choose to host.

Also, the two week process wasn't my idea, it was @Matt7187 's, but I agree, it is a good one.

That's actually a good point. I was just saying the summer because it seemed like with this new proposal, you guys wanted to get started on next year's proposals now (aka basically summer)

I have checked it out (thought you just posted it), and I think it's a very neat idea. It's similar to what JDM does when you can "bring people back" towards the end of SA. That said, not everyone will come back for scraps at the table, and I think that to be fair to those who WANT to host their own comp, slots should be set aside to allow them to do so.

The main comps hold the forum's main attention by default, and always will. That said, that doesn't mean there isn't room for easier comps to be posted (like Turtle did during SA 1, or @MonorailRed's 30 day's comp), and no reason why they couldn't overlap. This also grants the community as a large more chances to compete, rather than waiting 1/4 of a year.

Take me...I can't participate in your "revolutionary" new Competition B, by your own rules. But, I'd love to be able to hone my skills before SA...instead, I'm doing other things.

Sure you could participate in the "Competition B" - there's no rule against that. It's open to everyone.

For people running their own comps, I think on second read of the new proposal, my idea is actually pretty similar for these overlapping competitions. It was just confusing at first when i read the original with the tiers.

With that said, I think the only place I differed was that I thought those smaller comps running side by side with the bigger comps, would benefit more from the "pull" of the main comp, rather than trying to gain traction on their own when everyone is focused on the "main" comp during that time-span.

Perhaps a plug or something in the larger comp for the smaller overlapping comp, so that people are aware of it.

Also edit: I still think for anyone who doesn't make the cut for their competition idea, that there be some stipulation that if another host wants some input, they could be allowed to co-host and utilize their ideas in that comp.

 

[jdmdisney99]

With that said, I think the only place I differed was that I thought those smaller comps running side by side with the bigger comps, would benefit more from the "pull" of the main comp, rather than trying to gain traction on their own when everyone is focused on the "main" comp during that time-span.

Perhaps a plug or something in the larger comp for the smaller overlapping comp, so that people are aware of it.

Agreed

 

[englanddg]

Thanks!

You're welcome, and thanks for your input! This is EXACTLY why we created the Town Hall!

Whoops...

It's a rather big Whoops, because it's important to note that a good portion of our current community came from their own community. Tiki, Joker, Roxas and the like have been very gracious in allowing us to keep with our current comp schedule this year rather than trying to override it with their (far older than even SA or Master of the Parks) comp.

We should extend them the same respect and make sure, hell or high water, that SYWTBAI is given it's own headliner position next year.

It's about respect.

Oh I meant the ICS Elite Eight - the bracket "playoffs - I assumed that just will always happen at the end of the year.

Right, well, it first happened last year. It could change formats, it could change hosts (@Zweiland has been pretty silent as of late). It could even change schedules. But, it was first done last year.

No need for the shifty eyes...there are things you are not aware of. It's not some conspiratorial thing. For example, @jdmdisney99 has a very specific schedule for SA. It's not as simple as examine the calendar and break it up (trust me, we've been talking about this for a long time). We need to take that into account. Another example is that we want to have a year ender with a vote for new conversationalists, which ties up 3-4 weeks. But, exactly how that will look, we don't know...

That's actually a good point. I was just saying the summer because it seemed like with this new proposal, you guys wanted to get started on next year's proposals now (aka basically summer)

No, that's not the point at all. What we want is for the community to weigh in NOW so that in 6 months we aren't having this mass debate about who is going to do what in 2016.

Sure you could participate in the "Competition B" - there's no rule against that. It's open to everyone.

Then it's a separate comp. Sorry.

And, I'll quote.

"Welcome one and all to a very unique challenge. A challenge that will be fun and interactive, help participants hone their imagineering skills, and offer new life for the WDWMagic Imagineering community...

First of all, we would like to cordially invite all prior participates in The Creator Games. For your hard work and dedication, we wanted to give everyone another opportunity to be involved and compete together. Because, in the end, this all is just for fun
@2001DISNEYLIFE, @ScorpionX, @Vipraa, @Brer Panther,@InfiniteRightEar97, @Darth_Disney"

For people running their own comps, I think actually on second read of the new proposal, my idea is actually pretty similar for these overlapping competitions. It was just confusing at first when i read the original with the tiers.

With that said, I think the only place I differed was that I thought those smaller comps running side by side with the bigger comps, would benefit more from the "pull" of the main comp, rather than trying to gain traction on their own when everyone is focused on the "main" comp during that time-span.

Perhaps a plug or something in the larger comp for the smaller overlapping comp, so that people are aware of it.

The plugs are the weekly newsletters, but tying it into a major comp isn't a bad idea at all. Nice thought!

 

[spacemt354]

You're welcome, and thanks for your input! This is EXACTLY why we created the Town Hall!

Yep! Great discussion is always good.

It's a rather big Whoops, because it's important to note that a good portion of our current community came from their own community. Tiki, Joker, Roxas and the like have been very gracious in allowing us to keep with our current comp schedule this year rather than trying to override it with their (far older than even SA or Master of the Parks) comp.

We should extend them the same respect and make sure, hell or high water, that SYWTBAI is given it's own headliner position next year.

It's about respect.

I know SYWTBAI came over. In fact a lot of them were participating in TCG. The reason I didn't include that competition was because the last I heard from Tiki on one of his recent podcasts, he didn't know if it was happening.

And again, it was also just theoretical for the sake of an example - which I even explicitly stated before.

No need for the shifty eyes...there are things you are not aware of. It's not some conspiratorial thing. For example, @jdmdisney99 has a very specific schedule for SA. It's not as simple as examine the calendar and break it up (trust me, we've been talking about this for a long time). We need to take that into account. Another example is that we want to have a year ender with a vote for new conversationalists, which ties up 3-4 weeks. But, exactly how that will look, we don't know...

That was just a joke...I'm not being serious. Nothing is ever straightforward, I get that.

No, that's not the point at all. What we want is for the community to weigh in NOW so that in 6 months we aren't having this mass debate about who is going to do what in 2016.

Right, my thought was then if people are leaving for the summer and you don't want project proposals because people's online time may be cursory, then why not continue this discussion in September, when everyone returns?

I thought you were doing proposal selections throughout this time..if not then oh well.

Then it's a separate comp. Sorry.

And, I'll quote.

"Welcome one and all to a very unique challenge. A challenge that will be fun and interactive, help participants hone their imagineering skills, and offer new life for the WDWMagic Imagineering community...

First of all, we would like to cordially invite all prior participates in The Creator Games. For your hard work and dedication, we wanted to give everyone another opportunity to be involved and compete together. Because, in the end, this all is just for fun
@2001DISNEYLIFE, @ScorpionX, @Vipraa, @Brer Panther,@InfiniteRightEar97, @Darth_Disney"

So in the new system that is being proposed... this would be a separate comp? Even though it's under the umbrella title of TCG?

Interesting. So for next year, the comp above for example would just be named something separate completely.

The plugs are the weekly newsletters, but tying it into a major comp isn't a bad idea at all. Nice thought!

Thanks again!

 

[englanddg]

Yep! Great discussion is always good.

Agreed

I know SYWTBAI came over. In fact a lot of them were participating in TCG. The reason I didn't include that competition was because the last I heard from Tiki on one of his recent podcasts, he didn't know if it was happening.

Again, this shows what you do NOT know. Tiki has been very gracious this year, because he is a CONVERSATIONALIST. He knows we want to make a headline for him next year. His comments have to do with how SYWTBAI will fit into this years schedule (because we are struggling to find a spot, because, again, respect).

Not that he's giving up on hosting it.

And also again, it was also just theoretical for the sake of an example - which I even explicitly stated before.

Yeap. Theories are great. Toss them out all day (I mean that sincerely). That is the EXACT purpose of this thread. And, while I am dissecting your posts, please do not take that in any way to mean that I am attacking you or your ideas. Keep them coming!

That was just a joke...I'm not being serious. Nothing is every straightforward, I get that.

Right, my thought was then if people are leaving for the summer and you don't want project proposals because people's online time may be cursory, then why not continue this discussion in September, when everyone returns?

Because the core of the community doesn't "leave for the summer", nor do they "take summer break" to participate. The time frame is not the context, but the public input is. You, yourself, are the sort who would drop out, based on that comment, because of "external matters". And, while it happens to everyone (see my Elite Eight final post that never happened) that isn't the same as someone who hasn't even done a simple comp dictating what the community is and isn't.

I thought you were doing proposal selections throughout this time..if not then oh well.

Nope, I've actually spent very little time in the Imagineering threads compared to other stuff.

So in the new system that is being proposed... this would be a separate comp? Even though it's under the umbrella title of TCG?

Interesting. So for next year, the comp above for example would just be named something separate completely.

Thanks again!

Yes, it would be a separate comp. It is, by definition, if you allow ANYONE to join.