Your thoughts on the best way to run a contest | The Coffeehouse

majewett

I'm starting this thread following the completion of the Made In Express Contest to collect your thoughts on how Microsoft can run the most fun, interesting, and fair developer contests. There are several areas that I would be curious to hear from you:

Are there other contests that you’ve seen run, what aspects did you particularly like?
How do we encourage the best use of code sharing? Every great developer knows how to do things quicker by using existing code. How do we do this, yet keep it fair? Are 3rd party libraries okay? How about sample code?
Should we differentiate in contests between beginner/intermediate/expert developers? Is it fair for more experienced developers to compete against less experienced ones? Are new developers discouraged from competing because they could “never win”? And what mechanism can we use to validate the experience level of a developer?
Is it a good idea to have blogging be a key ingredient of the contest? Are there other interesting ways to get more involvement and interaction from people that are not finalists in the contest?
Is cash the best award? Do you like the idea of a Community Choice Award?
Should Microsoft ask to own the Intellectual Property of the projects, or is it better to let the contestants own the code but to make the source available publicly?

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Best regards,
MJ

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

Have you read this thread? People are quite upset.

Ion Todirel
buuu

good idea

majewett wrote:

How do we encourage the best use of code sharing? Every great developer knows how to do things quicker by using existing code. How do we do this, yet keep it fair? Are 3rd party libraries okay? How about sample code?

Should we differentiate in contests between beginner/intermediate/expert developers? Is it fair for more experienced developers to compete against less experienced ones? Are new developers discouraged from competing because they could “never win”? And what mechanism can we use to validate the experience level of a developer?

Is it a good idea to have blogging be a key ingredient of the contest? Are there other interesting ways to get more involvement and interaction from people that are not finalists in the contest?

Is cash the best award? Do you like the idea of a Community Choice Award?

Should Microsoft ask to own the Intellectual Property of the projects, or is it better to let the contestants own the code but to make the source available publicly?

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Best regards,
MJ

no 3rd party libraries, or some restrictions; yes; null; why not both?; you kidding right? of course not!!!

CannotResolveSymbol
{insert caption here}

I'd just like to comment on this bit:

majewett wrote:
Should we differentiate in contests between beginner/intermediate/expert developers? Is it fair for more experienced developers to compete against less experienced ones? Are new developers discouraged from competing because they could “never win”? And what mechanism can we use to validate the experience level of a developer

Yes, you should differentiate between beginners and expert developers. Although the experts may have great ideas, they aren't the people you're trying to get to use your platform. You're trying to bring hobbyists into your platform, and having entrants making projects like elaborate self-guiding robots is certain to scare beginners off. A beginning developer can't even compete with that kind of thing, so why should they even bother?

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

How about making everybody sign one of these:

Judges Agreement

I ___________________ , have read the rules of the proposed contest and understand them to the best of my ability. If I ignore them, and select a winner whose project does not comply with our previously established requirements, I will be flogged 46 times with tattered tennishoes and busted beer-bottles.

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

I meant it with all due seriousness Smiley

jaylittle wrote:
Thats pretty funny stuff JSampson...

fdisk

Way to dodge the issues, majewitt. The problem here is that you and your crew seem to seriously underestimate the intelligence of the gathered audience here. By deftly avoiding the subject at hand (the judges not following the rules, not correcting the situation after the truth has emerged), you have apparently succeeded in mastering the fine art of argumentatively bulls*itting your way out of a sticky situation.

You'd make an excellent software lawyer.

How about I bring this thread up (or one like it) every month until you get the point? There are probably adults and kids who put a lot of work into their collective projects only to get their rearends handed to them by a seasoned set of veterans. The contest was clearly for individuals. You are bright enough to have discerned how unfair things must have looked during the judging process. Yet you did nothing about it. Then, when the issues were brought to your attention, you start up a "let's get it right next year!" thread. I suppose the only thing that motivates you, and many of your kind, is getting sued. Since that obviously is not a threat here, this is like a poorly called baseball game where you can argue with the umps all night, but all that ends up happening is that the player gets tossed.

The call never gets corrected.

Personally I hope you lose droves of budding developers over this. I hope they flock to your competitor's products, or other platforms.

AndyC

Third party libraries are fine. After all, isn't NET all about component reuse? Make it a condition that all third party libraries used must be freely available if you like, but don't say no outright.
I think there are better ways to differentiate, in terms of the way you arrange the competition, prizes offered etc. Small prizes or more restrictive goals (eg. "'Do something cool with RSS" rather than "Do something cool in C#") will be more likely to encourage less experienced developers.
Blogging sucks. It's an enormous barrier to entry because it requires a commitment to enter the contest from day 1. If you already blog, thats not so bad maybe, but if you don't then having to start one just because you might get around to finishing something you think is worth entering can be too much.
Cash is ok, but there is a certain point at which it will dissuade entry level applicants ("I'd never write something worth $10.000") and starts bringing in the pros. A $500 prize for Made In Express would have gone so much better with the Express mindset, IMO. Awards or prizes that can't be bought elsewhere are even better - I'm not sure what the coding equivalent of a signed baseball is but you get the point, right?
Microsoft don't need the IP. It just upsets people and, again, dissuades entry. Open source is cool and I'd say a fair condition, especially if you want people to look at the end results - sadly in this day and age I'd be way of running random executables from a contest.

majewett

hi fdisk,

I encourage you to give me a phone call as you'll find no more direct way to get your feedback heard. What would be really helpful is your feedback on the questions I ask above, as well as examples of other contests (Microsoft or otherwise) that have really "gotten it right".

What I discourage is personal attacks and inflammatory remarks. I honestly don't see how that can get us to a positive outcome, which I assume is still our collective goal here.

Regards, MJ

majewett

Hi AndyC,

Hey, this is really good feedback, thanks for providing it.

I think trying to come up with some categories in the contest, some with smaller scope and prizes, and others with larger scope and prizes, might be the right way to go. We'll have to think more about how to do this without making it just more confusing.

Interesting comments on blogging. I hadn't thought about it that way. One thing I'll say from the comments we collected from the finalists - they generally loved the blogging aspect.

MJ

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

MJ,

I apologize for the remarks made by fdisk. I am sure that you understand the overall cloud of unfairness which lingered over this previous contest with such a demanding presence. Surely the rules were overlooked, and this serves as a horrible example for a way of doing things - I don't doubt that the errors which surfaced in this instance will be worked out for future contests.

With that, I would agree with some of the previously suggested ideas. Categories would make the entire process all the more realistic, and hopeful to young-and-up programmers getting into the swing of things. Certainly when somebody qualifies an entire team of programmers developing an AT-Robot, that is a bit intimidating and you may not get the outcome you desire in following participations.

If I can think of anything original to contribute, I will be sure to do so. Sorry this previous engagement went awry, but I have full hopes that all further ones will work out much better.

Jonathan

fdisk

majewett wrote:

hi fdisk,

I encourage you to give me a phone call as you'll find no more direct way to get your feedback heard. What would be really helpful is your feedback on the questions I ask above, as well as examples of other contests (Microsoft or otherwise) that have really "gotten it right".

What I discourage is personal attacks and inflammatory remarks. I honestly don't see how that can get us to a positive outcome, which I assume is still our collective goal here.

Regards, MJ

No, I was very direct with you, and here again you are trying to twist and turn the issue back at me. You really are good at this aren't you? You are very skilled at this. But I'm sure that gets you promoted and if you have any employees under you, you probably run ripshod over them.

Like I said the first hundred times, what are you going to do about the current contest? From what you and others have written, it sounds like absolutely nothing. And your alternative is to try and shut me up because it's bad for PR? Where's your accountability? Or don't you believe in that concept? The next thing is, you'll be offering me a job, or maybe some swag!

I can write a very eloquent argument as to why you/your company should do something about this, apologize or do what is right. But from the recent track record here, apparently that is not an option under consideration. So I ask, what are you afraid of? There could be a lot of good to come from this. Or, was there some behind-the-scenes deal made with the grand prize winner? The pieces of your argument do not add up.

fdisk

jsampsonPC wrote:
I apologize for the remarks made by fdisk. I am sure that you understand the overall cloud of unfairness which lingered over this previous contest with such a demanding presence. Surely the rules were overlooked, and this serves as a horrible example for a way of doing things - I don't doubt that the errors which surfaced in this instance will be worked out for future contests.

Jonathan, you need to realize that MJ is not shooting straight with you. Please don't speak for me, thanks. I'm a lot more aware of things than you'll ever give me credit for.

The rules were not overlooked, and if they were, there is time now to correct the situation. If the grand prize winner throws a tantrum then he has other issues. Look, if there is a problem with the Olympics, they have an investigation, and medals may change hands. This isn't the Olympics, and you had volunteers for judges. But what bothers me is a complete lack of conscience here on the part of Microsoft. Sure, you are a corporation, but one with a complete lack of ethics?

AndyC

majewett wrote:

Interesting comments on blogging. I hadn't thought about it that way. One thing I'll say from the comments we collected from the finalists - they generally loved the blogging aspect.

Well they are, by definition, a self selected bunch of people not put off by blogging! Tongue Out

I'm not quite opinionated or arrogant enough to believe people would go out of there way to read my rants, so I vent through C9 instead. I'm sure you could use C9 to by into that mentality somehow and build a community around the competition, although its been a bit hit and miss in the past.

AndyC

fdisk wrote:
Jonathan, you need to realize that MJ is not shooting straight with you. Please don't speak for me, thanks. I'm a lot more aware of things than you'll ever give me credit for.

Can we keep that discussion to the other thread, and focus on how to improve things next time in this one?

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

I didn't mean to speak for you, I'm sorry. I am just calling it as I see it. Do you and MJ have any previous history outside of this thread? Because if you do, that would change things in my opinion. If this is the first time you've spoken with MJ on this subject, then I think you've gotten too heated, too fast. I don't mean to upset you with my comments, either. I am just trying to see that things remain civil, and advantageous to the community as a whole.

fdisk wrote:

jsampsonPC wrote: I apologize for the remarks made by fdisk. I am sure that you understand the overall cloud of unfairness which lingered over this previous contest with such a demanding presence. Surely the rules were overlooked, and this serves as a horrible example for a way of doing things - I don't doubt that the errors which surfaced in this instance will be worked out for future contests.
Jonathan, you need to realize that MJ is not shooting straight with you. Please don't speak for me, thanks. I'm a lot more aware of things than you'll ever give me credit for.

The rules were not overlooked, and if they were, there is time now to correct the situation. If the grand prize winner throws a tantrum then he has other issues. Look, if there is a problem with the Olympics, they have an investigation, and medals may change hands. This isn't the Olympics, and you had volunteers for judges. But what bothers me is a complete lack of conscience here on the part of Microsoft. Sure, you are a corporation, but one with a complete lack of ethics?

raymond

Make the contest rules very explicit and clear.

Test your rules.

Then follow them.

That said, I discovered the Coffeehouse as a direct result of a similiar problem with the MIX 06 contest rules. It was my very first post.

I got over it, but I was really PO at the time for I wanted to go MIX 06 and the only way I was going was to be one of the winners.

Learn from your mistakes or the mistakes of others, then do not repeat them.

Good luck.

Cool

fdisk

jsampsonPC wrote:
I didn't mean to speak for you, I'm sorry. I am just calling it as I see it. Do you and MJ have any previous history outside of this thread? Because if you do, that would change things in my opinion. If this is the first time you've spoken with MJ on this subject, then I think you've gotten too heated, too fast. I don't mean to upset you with my comments, either. I am just trying to see that things remain civil, and advantageous to the community as a whole.

No...no prior history. I just feel that this is exactly what is symptomatic of what is ailing this company as a whole. They steadfastly refuse to apologize for anything (or correct issues) unless they get sued or it's brought out in the blogosphere. So does that mean it's all about image and money? How hollow. How unfufilling in the end.

It apparently is not in their culture to "apologize" or make a wrong turn into a right. It appears to me that many people working here (at Microsoft) maybe don't even know how to do such a thing and so they default to dodging the issues altogether. But that behavior is usually learned, and often starts at the top. And the more you go along with this behavior, the longer it will continue.

Programous

With regard to more focused categories, how about “Best use of P2P networking with WCF.” Of course I’m not referring to your generic P2P file sharing program, but something that makes good use of a decentralized network to accomplish a task (for a good example see Microsoft Meeting Space on Vista)

Charles
Welcome Change

This is an opportunity to directly impact how future contests will be run. Why are many of you not providing useful feedback? Mark didn't have to post this thread....

Show some respect.

fdisk, you need to relax. Enough already. Your "point" has been made too many times. It's tired. Move along.

Please help us create contests that you'd want to take part in. Mark and team are listening.

C

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

[deleted] - Wrong thread, sorry.

Rossj

Charles wrote:
This is an opportunity to directly impact how future contests will be run. Why are many of you not providing useful feedback? Mark didn't have to post this thread....

Charles, it's simple. Set the rules and follow them, and then don't get all legal on people when they try to find out why the rules were ignored/broken. Can you really not see what has annoyed people so much?

'New Microsoft' gets waved in our faces, and when you screw up you don't say 'oops we screwed up' you get all 'Old Microsoft' on us. Why was Chris P left to fend off questions on how the contest was judged - he doesn't even work for you.

You're right though, the this point has been made to death, although I don't think anyone is happy with the answers ... isn't C9 supposed to be a conversation?

To answer the OP question, as a suggestion on what to do in new competitions - be fair, don't break the rules for marketing reasons.

sbc
GW R/Me

Having Professors and Postgraduate University students (in a computer science related field) entering may seem unfair to some. Unless degrees really are handed out

If you are to have them, maybe an 'advanced' level could be created - i.e. you need a degree or higher to enter that level. Those that are qualified to that level should have much higher expectations put on them.

Perhaps it would also be better if everything had to be done in the timeline - no working on previous developments (unless it is a free /open source library that can be used by anyone, rather than something the entrant has developed before and has not shared). For example, if something like a robot is to be used, then the development of that should be done alongside the coding.

Awards other than cash may be a good idea - like a free MSDN subscription, or entry (possible including books) into an Microsoft certification exam. So if you win the SQL Server Express contest you get free entrance into the MCTS: SQL Server 2005 exam.

Some people may not like it, but I think there should be a requirement for the source code to be under an open source license (as defined by OSI). After all, VS Express is for hobbiests. The IP should not be owned by Microsoft, but available for free use by anyone (otherwise people may see this as a means just to get IP).

If an application is of real commercial value, then that should be outside the scope of the contest (and Visual Studio Pro would be more appropriate).

littleguru
<3 Seattle

I find it very important that the given rules are followed as close as possible. If the contest is targeted for single persons, just single persons should be allowed to enter. If no team is allowed the judges should check if - in the given time - it is possible to do the work as a single person or if somebody else helped out to make the thing happen.

A contest who doesn't follow it's own rules has little credibility. That is the problem.

Smiley

fdisk

Charles wrote:
This is an opportunity to directly impact how future contests will be run. Why are many of you not providing useful feedback? Mark didn't have to post this thread....

Show some respect.

fdisk, you need to relax. Enough already. Your "point" has been made too many times. It's tired. Move along.

Please help us create contests that you'd want to take part in. Mark and team are listening.

Why, because I call you on the carpet on things? Right now, you aren't fixing what is wrong with the current contest so what good what it be to offer feedback on the next one? Then, you're trying to turn what are rightful complaints back at the community and then play "victim" (see Robert and Chris' victim replies on the other thread). What are you afraid of? Why can't you change the results (which are clearly unfair)? You squawk about building a more "human, friendlier" Microsoft but then you make no effort to do you when the issues get difficult and difficult choices need to be made.