Difference between revisions of "Talk:Puzzle Development"
(Created page with " == "Best practices" == I'm concerned about what appears to be one team (or at best, a few teams') opinions being presented here as canonical rules without attribution. For e...") |
(→"Best practices") |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
I'm concerned about what appears to be one team (or at best, a few teams') opinions being presented here as canonical rules without attribution. For example, the first item on the list says to write 50% more puzzles than you intend to include in the event. We did this for neither BAPHL 6 nor BAPHL 9, and those events turned out okay. I absolutely do not want to discourage people from stating what they thought was helpful/successful, but I don't like the idea of whoever gets here first speaking for everyone who's constructed. --[[User:DanKatz|DanKatz]] ([[User talk:DanKatz|talk]]) 20:54, 25 July 2014 (PDT) | I'm concerned about what appears to be one team (or at best, a few teams') opinions being presented here as canonical rules without attribution. For example, the first item on the list says to write 50% more puzzles than you intend to include in the event. We did this for neither BAPHL 6 nor BAPHL 9, and those events turned out okay. I absolutely do not want to discourage people from stating what they thought was helpful/successful, but I don't like the idea of whoever gets here first speaking for everyone who's constructed. --[[User:DanKatz|DanKatz]] ([[User talk:DanKatz|talk]]) 20:54, 25 July 2014 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Agreed. We also didn't write 50% more puzzles for BAPHL 7, and that turned out just fine. Can we find a better term other than best practices? The general steps at the top (start from the metas and work your way back) are good, but I don't want it to seem like there's only one way to do this. It's really going to vary from team to team. -- [[User: BenMSmith|BenMSmith]] | ||
Revision as of 17:09, 26 July 2014
"Best practices"
I'm concerned about what appears to be one team (or at best, a few teams') opinions being presented here as canonical rules without attribution. For example, the first item on the list says to write 50% more puzzles than you intend to include in the event. We did this for neither BAPHL 6 nor BAPHL 9, and those events turned out okay. I absolutely do not want to discourage people from stating what they thought was helpful/successful, but I don't like the idea of whoever gets here first speaking for everyone who's constructed. --DanKatz (talk) 20:54, 25 July 2014 (PDT)
Agreed. We also didn't write 50% more puzzles for BAPHL 7, and that turned out just fine. Can we find a better term other than best practices? The general steps at the top (start from the metas and work your way back) are good, but I don't want it to seem like there's only one way to do this. It's really going to vary from team to team. -- BenMSmith
