dcro 10,210 Posted June 30, 2016 #21 Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) Question 1: C Question 2: A Although I agree that there should be a difference between annual contest and open contest, I don't think 5-year hole is a good solution. Why not simply have annual contest for new songs and open contest for all other songs? For example this year we had annual contest for songs published after 1st January 2015 while in open contest we have songs published before that date. Imagine that an user really likes one song from 2014, but he/she can't enter it because of this rule and they have to wait for 3 years to do that. Where are we going to be in 3 years... Anyway, seems fair that songs from every year should be allowed to enter in one TISC season. As for question 2, although I would like to host it I think winners should have priority. Edited June 30, 2016 by dcro OlympicIRL 1 #banbestmen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bestmen 2,817 Posted June 30, 2016 #22 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Just now, heywoodu said: How should TISC contests be organised in terms of hosting? (a) The previous winner should always have the first option to host the contest A No obligation but indeed the first option to choose. so you don't want to host if you vote "A" you will wait more than 20 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heywoodu 15,135 Posted June 30, 2016 #23 Share Posted June 30, 2016 3 minutes ago, bestmen said: so you don't want to host if you vote "A" you will wait more than 20 years Correct, I don't want to host . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hckošice 14,822 Posted June 30, 2016 #24 Share Posted June 30, 2016 1- A 2- B OlympicIRL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff88 1,952 Posted June 30, 2016 #25 Share Posted June 30, 2016 So.. here's my thoughts: 1 > B Since I'm quite new here. I don't know much about these.. Perhaps 10 years is much better than 5, so it can give more music variations. 2 > B(?) My idea is that if the winner doesn't want to host, we can make it to an open bid for others. OlympicIRL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlympicIRL 5,532 Posted June 30, 2016 Author #26 Share Posted June 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, Griff88 said: 2 > B(?) My idea is that if the winner doesn't want to host, we can make it to an open bid for others. That's how the process works currently under A.... the winner is given first choice and if they can't host it then we allow others to bid. Under option B the previous winner won't be given the first choice to host. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agger 1,662 Posted June 30, 2016 #27 Share Posted June 30, 2016 B and A OlympicIRL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff88 1,952 Posted June 30, 2016 #28 Share Posted June 30, 2016 1 minute ago, OlympicIRL said: That's how the process works currently under A.... the winner is given first choice and if they can't host it then we allow others to bid. Under option B the previous winner won't be given the first choice to host. Didn't read that properly then Guess I'm too tired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlympicIRL 5,532 Posted June 30, 2016 Author #29 Share Posted June 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, Griff88 said: Didn't read that properly then Guess I'm too tired No problem, so what option shall I put your vote in on question 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff88 1,952 Posted June 30, 2016 #30 Share Posted June 30, 2016 13 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said: No problem, so what option shall I put your vote in on question 2? A please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now