m1j <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> If the deadline is moved officially I will put more time in to my image. I
> am glad to be able to do so. But, this is not the normal way to handle
> these problems in normal competition.

  That's where you are wrong. It's very usual for competitions (not only
computer graphics competitions, but also other similar ones) to extend
deadlines if the amount of entrants was too small for a reasonable
competition.

  I really don't understand why you are disappointed and why you are
suggesting this silly idea that the prices should be given now
regardless of the quality of the competition.

  Extending the deadline serves everyone, ending the competition now
serves no-one (except perhaps the winner).

  Extending the deadline serves the entrants and potential entrants:
Many people complained that they did not have the time to make an entry
even though they would have wanted. Some even complained that they started
making an entry but did not make it in time. Some entrants have expressed
that they did not have time to develop the image as much as they would
have wanted.
  And why should existing entrants complain? It's a fact that deadlines
make people work harder. That's the reason why there are deadlines (and
often even several ones) in school and work projects. Now, the entrants
have made a lot of work for their entry because of the deadline; now that
the deadline was extended they can work even more on their entries. The
total amount of work put into the entry can in many cases be even larger
than what it would have been if the deadline would have been set to January
in the first place. This means that (hopefully) many of the entries will
be better than they would have been, which is good for the entrant and
everyone.

  Extending the deadline serves the competition organizers: If the overall
quality and amount of entries increases, the goal which was set for the
competition will be reached more easily.

  Extending the deadline serves the sponsors: They get "more bang for
their buck", as one could say. The sponsors will be happier and might
be more willing to sponsor future competitions.

  Extending the deadline serves the public: If the overall quality of
the competition increases, the public will get more "wow!" experiences.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the entrants: Many were not
able to participate at all, and many of the ones who did participate did
so with hastily created entries which they themselves are not happy with.
The prices would go to the ones who were able to get something more or
less cool done fast, not necessarily the ones who are most talented.
  We are not measuring speed here; that's not the purpose of this
competition. We are measuring quality.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the organizers: The purpose
of the competition was to get a large amount of high-quality, well-worked
images for, among other things, to promote POV-Ray as a high-quality
program, not to see who gets something done fast.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the sponsors: If they get
disappointed, they might not be willing to sponsor any further competitions
in the future, which certainly does not serve the POV-Ray community or
anyone. Also if the reputation of POV-Ray, the pov-team and the POV-Ray
community gets a stain in the eyes of the "big guys", that can only be
negative.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the public: The public could
get disappointed and the reputation issues above would also have negative
consequences from the big public.

> Like I said before; there could be
> legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
> I would encourage some counseling.

  Ah, but I see now that you were just joking, so no harm done.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -