The Song Fight Bulletin Board

My suggestions is that maybe 3-4 times a year there is are longer fights whose deadlines are farther out, I think 3 weeks would be about right. There are a number of benefits of such an idea:

• * Gives people for whom the one week deadline is an insurmountable hurdle, such as hobby bands who meet infrequently (usually due to the members' busy schedules) a chance to participate
  * Gives 'fighters a chance to work on something they can put more time into
  * Gives people with unpredictable schedules a chance to finish something they started when their unpredictable schedules get in the way unexpectedly
  * Gives the fightmasters a chance for a little vacation

Imprtantly, these long fights should be pre-announced, (like on the main page, there is an announcement that an extra long fight is scheduled for early January, for example) so people could plan for them and/or anticipate them, and arrange their schedules accordingly. For me, that would mean I could know that I would be able to enter that fight then and look forward to it and plan around it. As it is, I can so rarely fight just because I usually can't carve out enough time in a week to do anything. If I knew in advance I could sort of not plan any other big projects that time.

I evangelize songfight all the time, whenever the subject of songwriting comes up. So I'm pretty used to the conversation. I notice a lot of time people who are considering participating are frequently turned off by the one-week timeline, coming back with things like "Oh, well our band doesn't meet often enough to enable us to really put anything together in a week, but sounds fun. Oh well." And I always have to nod my head because I know the problem.

Anyone else think this is a good idea, like once every 3-4 months?

Or maybe have an ongoing "longfight" running in parallel with the usual goings-on, to replace the dearly-departed green fight.

Yeah, that would work too, of course that would create even MORE work for the fightmasters...

Another benefit of the long fight would be to foster new online collaborations, which take more time. I think most of us have these maybe-someday collabs in our back pocket which we'd love to do actually get a chance to do other than in side projects.

Would it really be much more work to have three fights but to only update one of them every three weeks?

This is in no way knocking the idea of long fights, which is intriguing, but practically, do you not think you're going to get a large proportion of people who just knock it out with a week to go? Or finish it in a week and sit on it for three weeks? Remixfight runs a month long deadline across two remixes, and generally speaking most people are 'finished' early or racing for the deadline.

Even if you have a sign-up, that's no guarantee that people won't do that - which possibly negate sthe purpose. Also, the longer the fight, i think, the more likely that people will drop out at the last minute. Especially as more pressing demands (like SF) take up their time.

Like I said, not knocking the idea - I just wonder what the demand would be? I guess we'll find out ....

j$

fluffy wrote:Would it really be much more work to have three fights but to only update one of them every three weeks?

YES

J$, the point of the long fight, at least as I see it, is more to allow people who otherwise find it hard to participate the time they need, rather than to induce people the people who can whip them out anyway to spend more time on their songs.

Another way to implement this idea, with overall less impact on the regular fight flow, would be to announce one title 2 weeks early. It would be announced as a "long fight". 2 weeks later, that long fight title would be listed in its proper place (red, green, or blue), the only difference is that it would have been known 2 weeks earlier. That method requires almost no extra FM work, other than the early title announcement (in the News section, perhaps), and also wouldn't upset anyone married to the week-long fight format.

Jim of Seattle wrote:Anyone else think this is a good idea, like once every 3-4 months?

Wait, aren't you the pollmaster? A brilliant chance to make a poll is lost.

I don't see any need to implement this idea.

Another way to implement this idea, with overall less impact on the regular fight flow, would be to announce one title 2 weeks early. It would be announced as a "long fight". 2 weeks later, that long fight title would be listed in its proper place (red, green, or blue), the only difference is that it would have been known 2 weeks earlier. That method requires almost no extra FM work, other than the early title announcement (in the News section, perhaps), and also wouldn't upset anyone married to the week-long fight format.

i think somebody already suggested that...

HOLY CRAP I THINK IM IN THE MATRIX

GET ME TO A LANDLINE

Jimmy two-two and the posted tang.

15-16 puzzle wrote:
I don't see any need to implement this idea.

That's awfully dismissive of you. Why not? I think I've made a pretty compelling case for it adding a lot of value and with an extremely low impact to the regular fight process.

I remember that fights were mostly two weeks when I first started songfight. I would write the song the first week, and work on the arrangement the second. It was a nice pace.

Be well,
Ken

Yeah, and when I first got here it was usually 2-3 weeks for the recording/submitting, and there wouldn't be a pending title during the song vote.

Jim of Seattle wrote:

15-16 puzzle wrote:
I don't see any need to implement this idea.

That's awfully dismissive of you. Why not? I think I've made a pretty compelling case for it adding a lot of value and with an extremely low impact to the regular fight process.

Because I can't come up with a good way to complete this sentence:

If a quarterly, three-week-long fight is not added to the format, then _________________ would happen, and that would be a bad for Songfight.

15-16 puzzle wrote:I don't see any need to implement this idea.

Jim of Seattle wrote:Why not? I think I've made a pretty compelling case for it adding a lot of value...

there are a great number of things that could be done to improve the songfight! experience for certain people, or even for the community as a whole. spud has been hard at work for months with things like the sortable archive and the individual band pages and the art archive and etc. ... but in the time i've been here (nearly a year now) i've seen countless suggestions about re-structuring the way the competition itself works, or the voting, or whatever, and they have consistently been ignored. it seems the policy is, if it ain't baroque, don't fix it.

15-16, is that your litmus test which qualifies any potential change in your world? Only if the change in question fixes something? How exceptionally status quo.... where is your sense of adventure?

I think the case for fostering more collab's with a bit more time is a great one.

This in no way implies that there is anything WRONG with how things are here now...to be clear.



Cheers,
PinV

Peaks In Valleys wrote:15-16, is that your litmus test which qualifies any potential change in your world? Only if the change in question fixes something? How exceptionally status quo.... where is your sense of adventure? :)

I think the case for fostering more collab's with a bit more time is a great one.

This in no way implies that there is anything WRONG with how things are here now...to be clear.



Cheers,
PinV :!:

You are imagining me saying things that I have never said.

Well, back when we were getting 40+ entries in a single fight, I think a bunch of people suggested various options for having multiple fights each week, and that was implemented.

If a quarterly, three-week-long fight is not added to the format, then people who are considering participating will continue to be turned off by the one-week timeline, coming back with things like "Oh, well our band doesn't meet often enough to enable us to really put anything together in a week, but sounds fun. Oh well." This would happen, and that would be a bad for Songfight. Look at it this way: the one-week deadline favors those who take shortcuts, like drum machines, MIDI horns and other unspeakable musical travesties...

Charles

15-16 puzzle wrote: You are imagining me saying things that I have never said.

That's cause you typed them you sneaky man.


Sorry. Couldn't resist that.


I should probably go home rather than sit here at my desk making lame ass jokes on the internet....


but I need the hours, and no ones watching.


Oh. Here's a good one:

I've been "promoted" to "assistant IT manager". Along with being the HR manager, the back up operations manager and the what ever else we can find for you to do that is completely unrelated to your daily tasks manager.


... when does the pay raise kick in?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
...you obviously don't know the fish business.


... this is a complaint of sorts... but probably the wrong kind for this thread... doot di do.