CookingBites Recipe Challenge Rules Revision

What limit would you think sensible?

  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .
Again, getting to the quality issue. If I have to limit my entries, it's going to make me ask, "Is this my best work?"

I think of a parallel in a photography competition. If there are no limits to entries, I could easily come up with a hundred or more photos to enter. Why not -- nothing to lose. Now, if I am limited to six entries, I'm going to get very self critical, and pick out the very best photos I have. The judges don't have to weed through the other 90-something photos to get to my best ones.

I don't think limiting entries limits creativity. Just the opposite, it requires one to focus their creativity on on six (or whatever) recipes, instead of "that one's done, on to the next one."

Any limit imposed is not going to effect me, since I don't think I have ever entered six recipes in one competition.

CD
 
medtran49 said:
Easy to remember.

Affect can be replaced with influence.

Effect can be replaced with result.

In alphabetical order as well.

I think limiting would be good as far as getting members to edit their creative efforts toward the best recipes. I'd favor 6 to 8 but would lean toward 6.
Click to expand...

I know the difference, I just wasn't thinking. Basic brain fart.

CD
 
I would venture to propose that the judge for a challenge be allowed to specify, not just the details of the ingredient, but also, how many entries a member may make. That solves all problems and concerns. Some judges will want to limit the number of entries, while others, will not.
 
flyinglentris said:
I would venture to propose that the judge for a challenge be allowed to specify, not just the details of the ingredient, but also, how many entries a member may make. That solves all problems and concerns. Some judges will want to limit the number of entries, while others, will not.
Click to expand...
That sounds reasonable. At the moment (I'm vane...), I feel that there seems no point in a cooking site to restrict cooking. "Cook, cook, cook - but don't cook too much!"

Flyinglentris's proposition would give the busiest judges the freedom to limit the entries to a jointly agreed minimum count per participant in the beginning of the challenge.

Nevertheless, the participation in recipe challenges is voluntary and includes a chance to win. A less common ingredient usually means less entries. It is ok to desist participation if one dislikes challenges/competitions or feels busy and/or worn out. Recipes - hundreds of them - can be posted without tagging them with the challenge mark. I hope everyone feels free to cook and post as much (viable) entries in acknowledged chains as they want and announce in advance if they're not ready or eager to take part in challenges.

One solution is for the judge to go through all recipes in a what did you cook today -thread manner and choose only the amount which suits personal conditions - and then scrutinize and evaluate them in more detail. Another option is not to choose a winner at all, but to choose a suitable bundle of honorable mentions and draw the winner as announced.

IMHO, the beef of the challenge is not the competition but the challenge. Contemplating, making up recipes, cooking and going through all kinds of entries is great fun. If all recipes were cultured; gone through a personal primary election, it might lead to more pretentious recipes, but also to less fun and less good or bad recipes and photos, which give the challenge flavor, variety and valuable contrast. There's a fine line between effort and error, pleasure and pain, elegance and ordinariness, liberty and control.
 
Last edited:
Hemulen said:
That sounds reasonable. At the moment (I'm vane...), I feel that there seems no point in a cooking site to restrict cooking. "Cook, cook, cook - but don't cook too much!".

Flyinglentris' proposition would give the busiest judges the freedom to limit the entries to a jointly agreed minimum count per participant in the beginning of the challenge.

Nevertheless, the participation in recipe challenges is voluntary and includes a chance to win. A less common ingredient usually means less entries. It is ok to desist participation if one dislikes challenges/competitions or feels busy and/or worn out. Recipes - hundreds of them - can be posted without tagging them with the challenge mark. I hope everyone feels free to cook and post as much (viable) entries in acknowledged chains as they want and announce in advance if they're not ready or eager to take part in challenges.

One solution is for the judge to go through all recipes in a what did you cook today -thread manner and choose only the amount which suits personal conditions from the recipes - and then scrutinize and evaluate just them in more detail. Another option is not to choose a winner all, but only a few honorable mentions - and draw the winner from them. After all, most good recipes are very hard to choose from. Thus, maybe more members would be able to choose a new, invigorating ingredient 🤔.

IMHO, the beef of the challenge is not the competition but the challenge. For me, contemplating, making up recipes, cooking and going through all kinds of entries is great fun. If all recipes were cultured; gone through a personal primary election, it might lead to finer and more pretentious recipes, but it might also lead to less fun and less good or bad recipes and photos, which give the challenge flavor, variety and valuable contrast. There's a fine line between effort and error, pleasure and pain, elegance and ordinariness, liberty and control.
Click to expand...

Hemulen

Thank you for seconding the motion to allow the judge to specify a limit on the number of entries. It is the best option, I believe, to allow members the enjoyment of exploring cooking with creativity and inventiveness. Rules and regulations can be far too restrictive and should not be unnecessarily applied when a more flexible solution is possible.
 
10 members have voted so far and I'd like to have these changes in place for the start of the next challenge so that we can trial them until the end of the year.

70548


Half of those 10 think that a limit of 6 entries per member is a sensible limit. So i'm going to make this change to the rules. I'm also going to take into account the discussion that followed and amend the "concept" slightly allowing the judge to decide if the limit of 6 apples or if they are happy with unlimited numbers of entries from an individual member.

New Rule:- The challenge will have a limit of 6 entries per member unless the judge decides they are happy with unlimited entries. So there are only 2 options for the judge : a max of 6 entries (default) or unlimited if they decide they are happy with more. There is nothing in-between. It's an either or choice.
Click to expand...

However, this doesn't mean you are restricted to only cooking 6 recipes with the challenge ingredient. It simply means that you are restricted to entering your favourite 6 into the challenge. if you enter more than 6, then only your first 6 entries will be judged unless you withdraw one of your earlier entries. So if you decide that your 7th recipe is better than your 2nd recipe, you can report (cIick report button associated with the recipe you want to withdraw) your 2nd recipe asking for the post to be deleted and we will delete it from the challenge (and remove the challenge tags). If you don't report it, the 7th entry will be invalid (unless the judge has decided they will accept unlimited numbers of entries).

There is also nothing stopping members from making more than 6 recipes with the challenge ingredient and simply not entering them into the challenge should they so wish to.

Why the change? Now that CB is fast approaching it's 9th birthday, I'd like to refocus the challenge away from getting as many new recipes onto CB and more towards getting as many higher quality recipes onto CB.
 
SatNavSaysStraightOn said:
10 members have voted so far and I'd like to have these changes in place for the start of the next challenge so that we can trial them until the end of the year.

View attachment 70548

Half of those 10 think that a limit of 6 entries per member is a sensible limit. So i'm going to make this change to the rules. I'm also going to take into account the discussion that followed and amend the "concept" slightly allowing the judge to decide if the limit of 6 apples or if they are happy with unlimited numbers of entries from an individual member.



However, this doesn't mean you are restricted to only cooking 6 recipes with the challenge ingredient. It simply means that you are restricted to entering your favourite 6 into the challenge. if you enter more than 6, then only your first 6 entries will be judged unless you withdraw one of your earlier entries. So if you decide that your 7th recipe is better than your 2nd recipe, you can report (cIick report button associated with the recipe you want to withdraw) your 2nd recipe asking for the post to be deleted and we will delete it from the challenge (and remove the challenge tags). If you don't report it, the 7th entry will be invalid (unless the judge has decided they will accept unlimited numbers of entries).

There is also nothing stopping members from making more than 6 recipes with the challenge ingredient and simply not entering them into the challenge should they so wish to.

Why the change? Now that CB is fast approaching it's 9th birthday, I'd like to refocus the challenge away from getting as many new recipes onto CB and more towards getting as many higher quality recipes onto CB.
Click to expand...

I think you made a good decision, and it allows judges to "opt out." I agree with the quality over quantity philosophy, as I've already said.

CD
 
caseydog said:
I think you made a good decision, and it allows judges to "opt out." I agree with the quality over quantity philosophy, as I've already said.

CD
Click to expand...
I'm in your camp. Quality over quantity. Although TastyReuben had a lot of really fabulous cocktails along with some other great stuff.
 
I think that 6 is about right. I´m new here, and one of the things I wondered about was: suppose there are 20 participants in the challenge and each posts 6 recipes? That´s 180 recipes the poor judge has to sift through! That might not be the case, of course, there were only 50 this time, but that´s a heck of a lot of work for one judge.
And here´s another thing. Obviously, this is not a "live" competition, because that would be impossible, but in a "live" event, the dishes would be tasted, of course. I don´t expect the poor judge to make all the recipes and try them, but I wonder whether it´s asking to much for the judge to add a brief description of WHY he/she decided on the winner. Just a line or two to talk about (possible) combination of ingredients, perceived colours, flavours, textures, etc.
 
karadekoolaid said:
I think that 6 is about right. I´m new here, and one of the things I wondered about was: suppose there are 20 participants in the challenge and each posts 6 recipes? That´s 180 recipes the poor judge has to sift through! That might not be the case, of course, there were only 50 this time, but that´s a heck of a lot of work for one judge.
And here´s another thing. Obviously, this is not a "live" competition, because that would be impossible, but in a "live" event, the dishes would be tasted, of course. I don´t expect the poor judge to make all the recipes and try them, but I wonder whether it´s asking to much for the judge to add a brief description of WHY he/she decided on the winner. Just a line or two to talk about (possible) combination of ingredients, perceived colours, flavours, textures, etc.
Click to expand...
120. But that's still a lot. Most people will only submit 3 or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom