Free TON House submitted 188 articles that meet the contest criteria (unique articles, more than 1000 characters in English), 165 (more than 2/3) of them describe the Free TON project. Of the submitted articles, 166 passed the criterion of complete uniqueness, 9 articles partially satisfy this assessment. Only these articles should be considered within the framework of the contest criteria.
Since proposal #167 has changed the approach to evaluating contest publications, we explain the figures indicated in our proposal.
The FTH journal translates its articles into 4 languages, so the application reported a total number of 785 publications, including both articles created and translated by the journal’s team. This figure characterizes the work done by the Free TON House team over a six-month period, indicates serious intentions to support the project, but should not be considered within the criteria for evaluating publications. In addition, Free TON House has a fast news service (Lightning) and a glossary (whatisit) - service articles describing the basic concepts of the world of cryptocurrencies and the Free TON blockchain, designed to understand the main articles. Lightning and “Whatisit” are not included in the contest submission and should be considered within the “additional benefits” criterion.
Free TON House в заявке к конкурсу подал 188 статей отвечающих критериям конкурса (уникальные статьи, более 1000 знаков на английском языке), 165 (более 2/3) из них описывают проект Free TON. Из поданных статей 166 прошли критерий полной уникальности, 9 статей частично удовлетворяют указанной оценке. Только данные статьи следует рассматривать в рамках критериев конкурса.
Так как предложение #167 изменило подход в оценке конкурсных публикаций, мы разъясняем цифры, указанные в нашем предложении.
Журнал FTH переводит свои статьи на 4 языка, поэтому в заявке было сообщено об общем количество публикаций 785, включающих как созданные так и переведенные командой журнала статьи. Данная цифра характеризует работу, проделанную командой Free TON House за полугодовой период, указывает на серьезные намерения по поддержке проекта, но не должна рассматриваться в рамках критериев оценки публикаций. Кроме этого у Free TON House работает служба быстрых новостей (молнии) и глоссарий (whatisit) - сервисные статьи, описывающие основные понятия мира криптовалют и блокчейна Free TON, предназначенные для понимания основных статей. Молнии и “whatisit” в конкурсную заявку не входят и должны рассматриваться в рамках критерия “дополнительные преимущества”.
Due to the fact that many jury are inattentively refer to applications that do not comply with the contest terms, e.g applications that have not get more than 6 points - should be deviate. In the following proposal we accept 1 point as a reject.
Explanation:
When voting, the point given are added to the sum and the sum is divided on the number of juries
Example: 5 + 7 + 10 + 8 = 30 these are points
Number of votes - 4
Next 30/4 = 7.5
If points are given by 50%+1 juries, it’s the points which are calculated and not rejects.
It is also proposed to increase the size of the jury reward up to 500 TONs, if jury vote for 100% for all the submission of the participants.
The percentage of tokens awarded to the jury will be distributed based on the number of votes each juror casts. For example, if one juror votes 50 times and another juror votes 5 times, the juror who votes 50 times will get 10 times more tokens than the juror who votes 5 times.
Add to current contest administrators @Dedicate_s@elsbeththeone one more contest administrator @stop_think_ask with reward 1000 TONs for his efforts.
Procedural remarks
This proposal does not change the initial conditions of the contest, and improves general motivation of the participants of the competition and the jury members.
Contest administrators play a liaison role between the contest participants and the jury. They do not influence the decision of the jury in any way.
Its quite confusing from the logic perspective.
You submit to the contest with 785 articles and you say in your submission that from these 785 as many as 188 are unique ones.
Now you say what JMs should and should not do when evaluating your exact submission.
I am a bit confused:) should I do what rules say or what you say?)
Technically, if I act according to the rules, I should reject your submission. I understand you did a great deal of work and the rule may be wrong, but we should apply a rule to all without exclusions or amend it. Again for all.
If we trace the entire history of this competition, we can see that in the first edition of the proposal for holding the competition, the following indicators were adopted as a criterion: the number of publications, including publications in different languages, to which the criteria 2/3 were applied. After the conditions of the competition were changed, only indicators for articles in English were accepted as quantitative indicators. Free TON House submission lists 188 articles in English and 785 were published: 188x4=752 + 33 articles that are translated. The proposal to exclude such a participant as Free TON House on the basis of such rhetoric indicates that the supporters of such a decision do not like a fair fight and are hardly interested in the development of the Free TON ecosystem.
Если проследить всю историю этого конкурса, то можно увидеть, что в первой редакции предложения о проведении конкурса в качестве критерия были приняты показатели: количество публикаций, включая публикации на разных языках, к которым применялись критерии 2/3. После изменения условий конкурса - в качестве количественных показателей были приняты показатели только для статей на английском языке. В конкурсной заявке FreeTONHouse указаны 188 статей на английском языке и 785 публикаций всего: 188х4=752 + 33 статьи, которые являются переводными. Предлагая исключить такого участника как Free TON House на основании подобной риторики свидетельствует о том, что сторонники такого решения не любят честной борьбы и вряд ли заинтересованы в развитии экосистемы Free TON.
Specifically, your question is discussed in the jury, because on the one hand there are strict conditions of the contest, and on the other, there must be some kind of reasonable decision in everything.
The articles that you indicated in the application are considered, and there are 785.
According to the terms of the contest, the proposal specifies what is considered publications. And our submission is made strictly in accordance with the rules of the contest. I am explaining my position, because due to changes in the terms of the competition, everything has become a little confusing.
I am sorry, what is going on here?
Are you accusing JMs of your own mistakes?
I don’t see here any published rules that say you can make JMs disregard info in your own submission. And it literally says you have 785 entries in your submission. It also clearly stated your have 188 unique ones, which turned out to be 168 when checked.
Now, can you please answer when did the amendment you mentioned took place?
Didn’t you have enough time to change a couple of numbers in you submission when you learned the amendment took place?
As for a personal attack on a JM (Mikhail) I find this totally unacceptable. As well as JM’s being accused of not liking " a fair fight and" being “hardly interested in the development of the Free TON ecosystem”.
This labelling and accusations are all totally unacceptable!
I answered above. There is a clear definition in the rules of the contest what to consider as publications and also which publications to take into account when forming the number of indicators. And this question was decided on AMA.
This contest’s rewards has been automatically calculated according prize grid logic by TonPay.infocontest accounting interface.
Anyone can verify this calculations and export address/reward excel format suited for further payments via smart contract. https://tonpay.info/contests/1/164
We’ve recently released v1 of TonPay.info.
Now its automatic calculated rewards for submissions and jury.
We have ideas for further developing of TonPay.info and verification/payoff processes using deBots are in priority. And we find the way to get investments for them)
As I know this contest has not been paid. Will be very soon.
