POV-Ray : Newsgroups : irtc.stills : TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008 Server Time
23 Sep 2021 20:31:31 EDT (-0400)
  TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008 (Message 4 to 13 of 13)  
<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 05:40:39
Message: <495c9da7$1@news.povray.org>
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)

       Nah, he's valuable.  :)

        I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do 
with the extra leap second?

        ~Steve~



> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 05:40:40
Message: <495c9da8@news.povray.org>
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.495c90c772c9212c30acaf600@news.povray.org...


> .... and the Forum provider, too...

    Yeah, that's the thing with free forums, you have no control. 
Apparently, it's only the .co.uk domain that's down, and they just say 
basically: "Hope it's back soon, sorry for the inconvenience."  :o/

   ~Steve~


Post a reply to this message

From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 05:42:30
Message: <495c9e16$1@news.povray.org>
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:tp6pl4laaka2h1hv3jfcpqba99f76f39jf@4ax.com...

> I bet Steve's having kittens :)

   LOL! :)

    "DON'T PANIC CAP'N MAINWARING!!"

        ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 05:59:26
Message: <of8pl4defnvgj7c0m9t55rvrc0cdtak0l8@4ax.com>
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:36:38 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
>news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>
>       Nah, he's valuable.  :)
>
>        I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do 
>with the extra leap second?
>

The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)

And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
20-20-20 was added to both entries.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 06:16:57
Message: <495ca629$1@news.povray.org>
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:of8pl4defnvgj7c0m9t55rvrc0cdtak0l8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:36:38 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
>>news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>>
>>       Nah, he's valuable.  :)
>>
>>        I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do
>>with the extra leap second?
>>
>
> The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)

    Could be! :)  No, I'm not sure about that extra second because I guess 
our computers also took the extra second into account? If so, then surely 
the web code would still work as intended?

>
> And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
> 20-20-20 was added to both entries.

  No, don't forget that the same rule applies to both challenges where you 
have to rate all other entries, and you both did.

     ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 07:02:25
Message: <tbbpl49h56lrvj703si5vgkpnf0flm2km7@4ax.com>
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:16:48 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>> The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)
>
>    Could be! :)  No, I'm not sure about that extra second because I guess 
>our computers also took the extra second into account? 

I doubt it unless your computer is set up to download the correct time from an
online site. (Computers are the most expensive, inaccurate clocks that I know
of.)

>If so, then surely 
>the web code would still work as intended?
>

I was joking :)

>>
>> And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
>> 20-20-20 was added to both entries.
>
>  No, don't forget that the same rule applies to both challenges where you 
>have to rate all other entries, and you both did.

I think that there is a little bit of logic missing from Colin's code.

If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO. 
I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.

BTW Thanks for sending the reminder to vote for the animations, out.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 18:00:17
Message: <495d4b01$1@news.povray.org>
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.495c90c772c9212c30acaf600@news.povray.org...

> .... and the Forum provider, too...

      Ok, the forum is up again now.

         ~Steve~


Post a reply to this message

From: St 
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 18:03:11
Message: <495d4baf@news.povray.org>
"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:495c9da7$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
> news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>
>       Nah, he's valuable.  :)
>
>        I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do 
> with the extra leap second?

     Ok, it was nothing to do with that leap second, it was the test image 
that Colin uploaded on Clipka's account to check that the upload was working 
for him. He's fixed it so that it can't happen again. :)

      ~Steve~


Post a reply to this message

From: clipka
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 1 Jan 2009 23:25:00
Message: <web.495d96af72c9212c5510c690@news.povray.org>
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
> then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO.
> I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.

Wouldn't be to fair, because then you can boost your competition standing by
simply not voting. Say for simplicity's sake that every vote would be 10-10-10,
and we had three contestants A, B and C. Both B and C vote, A doesn't (or his
vote is incomplete and therefore discounted). Makes:

A:  30 + 30 = 60   (from B and C)
B:  30      = 30   (from C)
C:  30      = 30   (from B)

Fair? Not really, I think (at least as long as the ranking is according to total
points instead of points per vote). So to discourage *not* voting, *voters* get
the advantage. Everyone can get it, by becoming active himself, instead of
relying on others to get active.

(OTOH, placing all "1-1-1" votes has quite a similar effect as not voting at
all...)


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: TC-RTC Stills Competition November 2008
Date: 2 Jan 2009 09:02:34
Message: <3j7sl4p6819hcbj4uvsqc4356ampmnv9iq@4ax.com>
On Thu,  1 Jan 2009 23:23:11 EST, "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>> If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
>> then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO.
>> I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.
>
>Wouldn't be to fair, because then you can boost your competition standing by
>simply not voting. 

True, I was thinking more along the lines of I would like to see the actual
highest score. Now that I think of it I would like to see all of the scores with
comments, if any. I also don't think that it needs to be a secret vote, either.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2021 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.