GB's - The Way Ahead

[NARSES2]

Right, back in the autumn of last year there was some discussion on the current GB rules and I said that I'd sit down and have a look at the various points raised and set some ideas out at some time in the future.

Well having got the 2023/2024 season sorted (and my other UK SIG tasks) I've now had a chance to sort through the various PM's I was sent and to also have a trawl through the posts on the subject from that time, and I've come up with the following ideas/suggestions for discussion.

In all honesty apart from the 1 Week GB where we need to decide whether or not to continue with it post 2023 any changes are likely to be fairly minor and it's really a case of codifying what we do now, rather than anything more drastic.  This still leaves the major decisions about any GB, that of what we actually mean by and intend to include in the subject up to the participants and the GB Moderators, but at least we will have a stable structure and won't have to re-invent the wheel 3 times a year.

So here they are :-

A) Specifically for the One Week Build

1 - Do we want to carry on with the Annual One Week Build ?

2 - If so then currently it actually runs for 9 days so as to encompass 2 full weekends. Are we happy with this ? Would we rather it in fact runs for two weeks ?

3 - Should it start on a fixed date every year ? To all intents and purposes it does, and the flexible starting date enables us to include 2 weekends.

4 - From a personal point of view if we decide to continue with it then I'm more than comfortable with its current structure.

B) General Group Build Rules.

5 - At the moment the number of votes per member when it comes to the GB poll is fairly arbitrary. Should it be fixed at a set ratio to the number of entries in the GB ? If so what should that ratio be ? (a suggestion I've received is a 3 entries/1 vote ratio rounded up/down to the nearest whole number)

6 – When it comes to voting for the winner what do we do in the event of a tie ? Have a run off ? If so what do we do if that ends up as a tie ? Or do we simply accept the tie as the final result ?

Whilst we do need to make a decision regarding the points above, on the whole the existing rules are reasonably robust and I would suggest that we adopt the basic framework I've listed below. It's served us well over the last few years and with a couple of tweaks I've made should continue to do so for the next few.

Draft GB rules:

1.  The (insert name of GB) begins 00:01 xx/xx/xxxx  and ends 23:59 xx/xx/xxxx (all times local).  An extension may/may not be considered/granted according to demand,

2.  Physical models of any scale, profiles, and/or stories are eligible, but they must be whiffery.  Entries can be as simple or as complex as you wish. If in doubt as to what is included in the GB then please PM the Moderators. (This is the rule which will include the definition of what is covered by the specific GB)

3.  You may build, draw or write as many entries as you like (good luck!).  The posting of in-progress pictures is encouraged as always. When posting your finished models in the Finished Builds Thread can you restrict the images to a maximum of 3. Further images can be viewed in the construction thread by the means of a link. Back stories - however long or short - supporting physical models and profiles are always welcome and can be included in the finished entry thread. Can any comments about builds be posted in the construction thread rather than in Finished Builds thread as this helps the moderators when they come to sort the vote out.

4.  Preparation work is allowed prior to the start of the GB but is limited to removal and cleaning up of parts from sprues, casting blocks or cutting out vacform parts from their backing sheet, even designing and printing your own decals.  Anything involving modification of parts, test fitting, pre-painting and actual assembly is not allowed prior to the start of the GB.

5.  Part-started models are not allowed - we are relying on the honour of our membership to uphold this rule - however scrapped models that have been reduced to component parts or sections may be allowed by the Moderators. If you feel that whilst technically you may have indeed started a model, but have made almost zero progress with it then you may take it up with the Moderators and they will decide on its eligibility, their decision being final. You should send a PM to them, explaining what you have done (pictures are a great help if you can include them) and they will decide, their decision being final. Scrapped models that have been reduced to component parts or sections may be allowed by the Moderators.

6.  No rule 6 - is there ever a rule 6? It's one rule or another so from now on it's 6.

7.  Moderators are X and Y. Thank you, gentlemen.

8.  The completed entries thread will be locked at the end of the GB and shortly afterwards the poll will be set up.  The number of votes per forum member will depend upon the number of entries (please see discussion point 5 above).  Keep your eyes out for updates!

9.  As decided previously by the Membership the first three placed entries in the Group Build will automatically be nominated for a Whiffy in a new, specific Group Build Class.

Thank you gentlemen

Chris

[Old Wombat]

As I can't build a model in a week, not even a 9-day week, I've never even been tempted to participate in the 1 Week GB - However, I'm in awe of those who can (Dizzy) & would like to continue to view their speed building, if enough of them wish to continue doing so.

On the general GB's:
a) I have come to the conclusion that I am a person of inspiration, meaning that while I'm inspired to do something that is what I should be doing, therefore unless a GB gels with my current muse I will not enter it. However, again, if it does gel then, as someone who has moderated several GBs now, I have tended to allot the number of votes by how difficult I think the voting will be, giving more where I think the challenge is greatest, but a set votes:entries ratio (as per Point 5) is sensible whether it be 1:2, 1:3, 1:4, 1:5 is something I'll let others debate (there have been times I've wished it was 1:1).
b) Point 6 has a relatively simple response from me; If 2, 3 or 4 people tie for first place, then they should all be rewarded/applauded for that achievement, ditto for second & third, they have all achieved that position through a vote of their peers & this is not a ballot for governance or leadership, so they can all be given their dues. Of course that does make Rule 9 rather flexible on the numbers moving into the Whiffy polling.
c) Regarding Rule 5; Personally, I have tended to be quite lenient with regards to allowing part-built/re-purposed builds to be entered, however, I have a problem when it comes to digital creations as I'm completely clueless about what it takes to create a CG entry (whether 2D or 3D), so I don't know if I'm being lenient, hard or walked over, so a blanket "No, part-started models are not allowed!" would be fairer across the board but may limit the number of entries received. So, I was wondering if a Theme Build couldn't be run in parallel to the GB for those part-started builds, to encourage members to finish those stalled builds & display them. These could be either new Theme Build threads or pre-existing Theme Builds could be moved into the GB framework, too, to allow consistency & reduce the number of repeated TB threads; for example Theme Build threads already exist for subjects such as The Zombie Apocalypse, The Really Bad Idea, Captured Enemy Equipment & Canberra-and-Hunter, etc. Many of these were GB ideas that didn't pan out at the time of their suggestion & were moved into the Theme Build forum (there are even double-ups within the Theme Builds forum because searches weren't carried out to determine if a TB already existed), so these could all be consolidated & brought out as necessary.

[AeroplaneDriver]

I'll chime in on the other points as I get time to think on them, but my immediate reaction is that I would be VERY disappointed if the One Week GB went away.  It is the highlight of my Whiffing year and I look forward to it a lot. 

It seems to get enough participation to keep going (7 and 11 entries in 2022/21 respectively) and I have no problems at all with the scheduling status quo. 

Even for members who don't finish in the timeframe it is often the impetus for a great build that is finished later. 

[Gondor]

It all looks good to me Chris   

Gondor

[Rheged]

As  a backstory producer and not really a modeller, I'm totally happy with the plan Chris has produced.

[AeroplaneDriver]

Looking at the list in more detail I think the idea of a 3:1 entry:vote ratio sounds good.  Builds seem to typically get 8-12 entries it seems which would be 3-4 votes.  The ratio idea is a good one and of not 3:1 I'd say 4:1 would be the next best bet.


Building on Womby's ideas regarding Themed Builds, how about an annual Themed Build with a "Clear The Bench" theme aimed at finishing up a started project?  Maybe have it run the last few months of the GB season?   Just a thought.

Also, regarding Rule 6...I think I was first to include Rule 6 in its current form many moons ago. It should ALWAYS be Rule 6, but does anyone know why and where I got that?

[killnoizer]

It all looks good to me Chris   

Gondor

For me too , as a veteran of my first still running group build I agree with Chris. 
Thank you for your work !

Gerrit

[Pellson]

As has been raised elsewhere, I would really like to be able to enter projects from the Shelf of Doom^TM. That is a glaring breach towards todays rules, but as I build slowly and tend to have several projects ongoing simultaneously, rather increasing the SoD inventory than completing something, getting that extra incentive to actually get things done would be invaluable.

As I strongly suspect I'm not alone with this problem, I actually would guess that such a change would increase the participation substantially, thereby improving the experience for us all.

As a compromise, one could imagine two parallel classes in each GB, one following the existing rules and a second one for started projects.

Finally, I still need to be very clear that GB's as such is a very minor issue to me. It was lovely to participate with the Shack last year, but I'm rather content in not doing it as well, just building in my own pace and after my own desire. So if this idea isn't taken up, I'll happily continue as before.

[kitbasher]

More from me tomorrow(ish), but for now an annual 'themed build' (sort of but maybe not quite a GB) is stirring up the grey matter already, so I may comment more on that separately.

[sandiego89]

Thanks for putting this together Chris.

The tradition of the one one-week build and three 90 day GB's is about perfect.  Never any overlap. Propose we codify this format.   

I think the two main cornerstones of this forum are providing folks a place to build whatever they want on their own time, and the three GBs.  The GB's generate much excitement, banter and occasionally tears.  The three GB's give enough time for us slower builders, and you can always sit one out if it is not of interest or life gets busy, but your have something to look forward to just a few months ahead. 
 
My thoughts on your questions:

One week build:
-Yes, keep it.  Sometimes I participate sometimes I cant.
-Happy with the 2 weekends, 9 days
-Yes have a set date.  Don't adjust around those that have conflicts. There is no such thing as a perfect week for everyone. 

GB's
-3 to 1 sounds fine, 4 to 1 might be better for a large number of entries. 
-A tie is a tie, no revotes.  Co-winners or runners up are declared.  I worry tie breakers might come down to a popularity contest, or arbitrary factors. 

Concur with the rules.

For your finished build comments on number 3, I recommend being even more specific, and I think a BRIEF backstory is OK, with perhaps something like;
- All finished entries must be posted to the finished build thread by the end of the GB time where you are.  The format for finished entries shall be:
Title, by: entrants user name, no more than a 2 sentence (80 character) backstory/explanation, a maximum of three pictures and a link to the build/progress thread. 
Example: "Harrier GR1 in Rhodesian Service" by Sandiego89.  The RhAF was looking for a robust counter insurgency aircraft that could operate from austere air fields. Matchbox 1/72, (three pictures), (clickable link to build thread). Please do not comment within the finished builds thread.  All comments should be in the respective build thread or GB discussion thread. 

As for themed builds I am ambivalent.  One per year might be OK, but I caution about having too many or certain folks proposing themes that are way too obscure for broad interest.  Again, I think the 3 GB's are a key cornerstone of this site and we should not diminish them in any way.       
 

 

[PR19_Kit]

The man from Virginia speaks my thoughts too.   

[Weaver]

On the One Week Group Build: I like it the way it is, whether I can participate or not (I usually do). Keep the 'fixed' date but adjust to make it the nearest Sat-Sun.

I also like the three GB's year, and I have no complaints about the current voting procedures.


Some random thoughts on unfinished builds:

One unintended consequence of the standard GB rule banning part-started builds is that it disincentivises you from ever finishing something that didn't make it in time for it's original deadline, because it will never be eligible for further GBs. If your build schedule is strongly influenced by the GBs, then this results in an ever-increasing "shelf of shame" with a perverse incentive to keep starting new builds rather than finishing old ones. I'm not saying the part-build ban is wrong, by the way: I''m just reflecting on it's consequences.

It'd be nice in theory to fit in an annual Unfinished Projects GB ("UPGB"? ) or 1 to 2 week build, but that would either mean shortening the three GBs again or running it concurrently with them, so I'm not sure about the trade-offs. One possible solution would be to run it concurrently with the 1 Week GB, effectively creating two classes ("From Scratch" and "Part Started") within the same competition.

One way of judging a GB that's allows, or is about, unfinished projects would be to make it mandatory to post before and after pics in the finished build thread, so that voters can see how much work the competitor has done within the scope of the GB. That way they can weigh, for example, something which is beautiful, but which has only had aerials and decals done in the UPGB, against something which is less pretty, but that only had a few bits glued together beforehand and has been 85% built and painted during the UPGB.

[NARSES2]

Thanks for these gents, I will go through them and any others in detail once it appears that everyone who wishes to has commented.

On the subject of allowing part started builds into GB's ? Personally I'm quite uncomfortable with this as it somehow seems to run against the whole ethos of what the GB's are intended to be ? What's to stop people entering a model that they finished 2 years ago into it, because I can't for the life of me see how you can say no to that if you are allowing builds that are 3/4 finished (or even farther down the line) to take part in a GB ? Splitting a GB into 2 sections - from scratch and part started - just increases the bureaucracy and adds to the Moderators workload.

By all means we could have a separate year long build that is specifically for part started/finished models as an incentive to finish them ? That could be run over a 12 month period and maybe, just maybe have its own category in the annual Wiffy awards as long as Tom is happy with that ?

That's my tuppence worth anyway.

Chris

[zenrat]

Rule 8.  Add something along the lines of "only those items posted on the finished builds thread before it is locked will be eligible for the poll".

I believe in one man one vote.  And that man is me.  So you only get one vote in the poll no matter how many entries there are.  You can only pick your favourite and that's it.

As far as there being a draw in the poll is concerned I don't see the problem.  It's not like there is a prize.

[Old Wombat]

OK, I think I need to clarify my intent with this idea;

c) Regarding Rule 5; .......... So, I was wondering if a Theme Build couldn't be run in parallel to the GB for those part-started builds, to encourage members to finish those stalled builds & display them. These could be either new Theme Build threads or pre-existing Theme Builds could be moved into the GB framework, too, to allow consistency & reduce the number of repeated TB threads; for example Theme Build threads already exist for subjects such as The Zombie Apocalypse, The Really Bad Idea, Captured Enemy Equipment & Canberra-and-Hunter, etc. Many of these were GB ideas that didn't pan out at the time of their suggestion & were moved into the Theme Build forum (there are even double-ups within the Theme Builds forum because searches weren't carried out to determine if a TB already existed), so these could all be consolidated & brought out as necessary.

Some people seem to think that I was proposing a special category within the Group Build (GB) to be voted on.

No, that was not the intent, which is why I specified a parallel Theme Build (TB).

We know that a GB can inspire people to pull out old builds & re-assess them, or re-ignite the desire to complete the builds in the light of the theme of the GB. However, having started these builds they are usually too far along to be entered into the GB; especially if we go for a rigid zero-built start point.

Theme Builds are a non-voting format. My idea was to run the TB in parallel to the GB to give those who have a commenced build, & who have been inspired to continue their build, a forum in which to display their further work for the duration of the Group Build.

While thinking on this, I had a look through the existing Theme Build forum & found a fair number of repeated ideas within that forum & several ideas that had close links to Group Builds that had been run over the last few years. This got me thinking that these repeated TB's (often listed as GB's, as they were failed GB ideas at the time of their move to the Theme Build forum) could be consolidated & any junk threads be deleted. Then, in the future, when a Group Build is started the Moderators can do a Title Search for any Theme Builds that are, essentially, the same as the GB they are running & bring it across into the GB forum for the duration of the GB & return it to the Theme Build forum at the end of the GB. If there are no existing TB's similar to the GB, then a new Theme Build can be started & moved to the Theme Build forum at the end of the GB.

A small increase in workload for the Moderators at the beginning and end of the GB but no voting, no having to decide if a build is too far along to be suitable for entry into the GB, & somewhere for members to continue work on & display previously stalled builds in the framework of the GB that inspired it.

Honestly, the biggest workload will be in cleaning up the shambles that is the current Theme Build forum & I'll volunteer to do that if no-one else wants to.