Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Require all competitors to sign every attempt? #63

Closed
lgarron opened this issue Aug 5, 2013 · 5 comments
Closed

Require all competitors to sign every attempt? #63

lgarron opened this issue Aug 5, 2013 · 5 comments

Comments

@lgarron
Copy link
Member

lgarron commented Aug 5, 2013

I sign every attempt, but sometimes competitors will sign once and draw an arrow over the entire column to avoid having to sign again. This defeats the point of an official acknowledgment, even if it technically prevents them from disputing it.

(If they're being lazy and come back with video evidence when it was recorded wrong, that's just inconsiderate.)

I'm not saying I support changing this, but I think it should be discussed.


Email to Delegate list, December 08, 2013

@pedrosino
Copy link
Contributor

A7c requires that the competitor signs after the solve and after the judge has verified the puzzle.

I know some people just sign everything in advance, and that is bad. I'll make sure to tell them the purpose of the signing, and that if they signed, they can't really complain later if something is wrong.

@sarahstrong314
Copy link
Contributor

I support changing this, or at least making this more clear. Often when a competitor does the line/arrow thing, he doesn't realize that by doing so he has acknowledged in advance anything the judges write. At Worlds when I judged people who did this to their scorecards, I would say something along the lines of "Hypothetically, if I were to write 'DNF' by mistake, and you realize after the timer was reset, you wouldn't be able to do much about it since you've already signed it" then I suggested to them to cross off the arrow and sign each of their individual completed attempts.

lgarron pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 10, 2013
@lgarron lgarron closed this as completed Dec 10, 2013
lgarron pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 10, 2013
lgarron pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 10, 2013
@lgarron lgarron mentioned this issue Dec 11, 2013
lgarron pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2013
@KitClement
Copy link
Contributor

I don't like the term "final result," this could be easily confused with the 5th (or 3rd) solve in the average. I think that the term "result" suffices.

@lgarron
Copy link
Member Author

lgarron commented Dec 12, 2013

I had the same concern. However, I want it to be completely ambiguous that
everything (in particular, including the final time after penalties) has
the be written down. We use the term "final result" elsewhere, and I
haven't thought of anything better. "Completed result" comes close, though.

@KitClement
Copy link
Contributor

I think substituting the active for the passive voice makes it seem
less ambiguous, it also makes inserting "for that attempt" less
clunky.

A7c2) The competitor must not sign an attempt on the score sheet
before the judge records the final result for that attempt. If a
competitor signs (or otherwise marks) an attempt before he has begun
it, or before the judge has finished recording the result, he forfeits
the attempt and the result for the attempt will be considered as DNS.

Christopher Clement
University of Michigan Rackham | Applied Statistics MA

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Lucas Garron notifications@github.comwrote:

I had the same concern. However, I want it to be completely ambiguous that
everything (in particular, including the final time after penalties) has
the be written down. We use the term "final result" elsewhere, and I
haven't thought of anything better. "Completed result" comes close,
though.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/63#issuecomment-30474425
.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants