YA Buddy Readers' Corner ♥ discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Challenge Archive
>
The Scrabble Challenge - March 2016
At least we have been dealing with people who don't show up at all...
The plan sounds like it would work Cinthia, but then those teams are still done a member :( there's no one to replace them with
Maybe if people get voted off a team we could just switch to a points per person ranking. I don't know if that's fair though.
@meaghan. You would still be down a member regardless. At least you'd know who you are working with.
I have to agree with whoever said it before but dealing with a non-cooperative member really takes the fun out of the game.
I have to agree with whoever said it before but dealing with a non-cooperative member really takes the fun out of the game.
But I don't think that would really work either though, because of how the points are based this time (off of scrabble letters, which are limited to the team)
Yea that's true, I like knowing who I can accept to participate. It still doesn't solve the unfairness factor though :/
Yeah, for this specific challenge it wouldn't really make sense but for April's challenge I think it would make a decent amount of sense.
@katherine. We r ranking where we r because of 1 team member. I know the mods are making it fair and I am very grateful for all the hard work they put in but I feel it's unfair when 1 of those members isn't really contributing but bringing the team down.
Yes, but if we took the voting people off method and went to a system of ranking teams by points per person would that make any sense. The people who aren't communicating make everything so much more difficult...
As far as I understand the scoring the total points are based also on the amount of people participating. That's exactly why Team A is 4th place and not 2nd.
This might be a radical idea but what if there was some limit to the number of people that could join a serious team? That way the mods could have a back up list of people who want to join/switch to a serious team and then if someone had to drop out for any reason there would be a few backups???
Sounds like about every serious team is having issues other than maybe the 1st place team. That to me shows it really can't be a matter of something has happened that they can't read, it's more a matter of signing up for something they probably shouldn't have. Team B has 6 members, I've submitted 19 reviews, Ari has submitted 10 and Ashley 7, obviously we're taking part. But then we have one member submitted 1 and the other 2 nothing. Really kind of takes the fun out with half the team missing, something like this relies on everyone so you can clear boards and get more tiles etc. Would be a lot more fun for everyone taking part if we all had active teams.
While Team E (my team) is leading, and our issues aren't as bad, we still have one member with only 1 review posted. The rest of us are just extremely motivated, and have read tons of books, carrying that sixth persons weight. Her lack of reviews is affecting our new altered scores as well though.
Does this happen in all the challenges this is only my second. So far we only have 2 members who have read 6 or more books at the 1/2 way mark the others have done 1-4 they have how ever all communicated with us which is nice.
Gillian wrote: "Does this happen in all the challenges this is only my second. So far we only have 2 members who have read 6 or more books at the 1/2 way mark the others have done 1-4 they have how ever all commun..."It seems to only have been a problem the last two or three months. I think it might be that we are getting a lot more new people and some of them don't understand that when you join a serious team that you are committed to read 12 or more books. Or maybe it's an adjustment period with the newly added 'medium' teams?
Well, I think I was a bit spoiled before, only entered one team challenge last Oct and our slowest reader read like 20 books. LOLIt would make sense though that a few people each month might have issues with making the time but it would seem pretty easy to ask to move to a fun team or drop out if they know they aren't going to make it.
I agree with bookbuyer it seems like more of a recent issue.
That's everybody for dealing with my venting I'm better now.
That's everybody for dealing with my venting I'm better now.
Mod
Sarah wrote: "To be honest, we've had this problem to some degree in every team challenge."Yep. There's just no way that we can fully stop it.
Maybe it's time to adjust the rules if it's a problem that's getting worse, perhaps set a number of reviews like 3 a week or you get moved to medium or fun unless it's set up in advance to submit later. (I know some do a bunch of reviews at once but they could arrange that ahead of time). Someone also suggested a list of alternates too, they could be reading and reviewing getting prepared to fill a spot if needed....seemed to be a lot of late arrivals last month, they could be alternates.
I think maybe, just maybe, people who fail to deliver in one challenge should be prevented from signing up to the next one.
Or maybe not a complete ban, but a ban from medium and serious from the month. Like they could only join a just for fun team?
The only thing with alternates is that it'll be hard to get motivated if you're not sure you'll ever get a team.
@Tati yes! I have seen the same people sign up over and over again and they never read the minimum amount of books, and sometimes they never participate at all, I think that is a fabulous idea.
I completely agree with the idea as well, just want to make that clear :) but since the just for fun teams don't matter in specific book count, I thought some leniency there might be nice!
When I saw there was a medium team for this round I was overjoyed because my experience with my last fun team was distant and not a lot of fun! So I joined the medium team and aimed high with my reading goal (8+ books). I've only read one this month. I feel terrible for being a bad teammate and I'm really trying to read more but school and such have got in the way. I know this is not the case for everyone that doesn't communicate or participate in their team, as they could get placed on a team and then simply not care enough. I'm just not sure prohibiting someone who doesn't meet the requirement one month is necessary, maybe for repeat offenders.
What Tati is saying wouldn't be permanent, just a one month thing. I think maybe the team should discuss it too? Like if the person communicates and explains, that person shouldn't get a month ban, but if they're just gone, which shows a lack of caring, then a ban might be necessary?
Tati wrote: "I think maybe, just maybe, people who fail to deliver in one challenge should be prevented from signing up to the next one."I had that thought too, a month or even couple of months only allowed just for fun.
I definitely don't believe anyone should be prohibited from joining a just for fun team.And this isn't just happening in this group, it is in all groups with team activity, unfortunately.
Another suggestion to think about.... perhaps Just for Fun teams should be a lot larger. For instance if 20 people are signed up then just split into 2 teams of 10. I know a lot of challenges involve clearing categories etc. that way there is some hope of them being able to have a bit of fun clearing categories for some of these challenges. Maybe some that should be on a just for fun team shy away since if they only have like 5 members reading 1-7 books they don't actually get much interaction done during a challenge.
What about if we let them on a fun team and they read 8 books they are allowed to enter a medium team the next month and if they read 12 they can join a serious team the next month?
I like all those ideas. I think any starters should really just start on for fun teams. It helps you get acquainted with the rules and the way things are done.. Also helps you see where you are at and if you are able to read 8 books or more then move up the ladder. That's a brilliant idea. As for the banning, I agree with whoever said repeat offenders should be banned from serious groups until they can prove they are fit to be in serious groups.
I appreciate the addition of the 'medium' groups - it's very helpful! I think maybe the 'demotion' to the lower level group should happen if someone doesn't meet their quota for 2 months in a row (one month could have something just come up and it's not an always thing), and then if it happens again in the new level, then there can be some discussion with the person about why they're signing up but then not towing their end of the line.I know for myself personally, I joined a medium group this time and I'm still struggling to finish my first book! It's not a normal month for me (I'd usually have somewhere between 3 & 7 books by now) so if it were me to be 'demoted' to the just for fun group next month, I'd feel that was almost a bit unfair. That being said, I do understand where this is coming from - it's disappointing to be part of a team that doesn't 'care' enough to complete their reading.
I'd actually not mind at all if I were asked to sit out a month or two if I didn't make my quota. If something came up and I didn't make it even if that was out of my control I'd be fine with the "punishment" so to speak. Maybe exceptions could be made depending on communicative the people are though as everyone may have a realistic excuse here or there. I'm not really sold on the whole I'm in a slump thing though, would seem they may actually need the month off we're talking about in that case.
I completely agree! I'm usually a fast reader and I can read a lot during a month but when me and only one other person are carrying the team I really lose all incentive to read more to be honest. That being said, I do totally get life getting in the way buuut, people should really communicate it more. Like, I got surgery this month and being on the computer for long periods of times kind of bothers me but I planned around that to get my 8 books in. I participated once in a tower team challenge in another group and they had separated groups into chatty ones and non-talkative ones -- which helped because everyone communicated. Maybe that could be an option. I can see the demotion thing for month being helpful, though, it might add too much strain on Abbie and Sarah to keep track of.
I have to admit I've lacked joining in challenges for the last month (Feb) because I was in a reading slump I knew I was unpredictable on how much I'd read. So this month, I joined a fun team whilst I get back into my groove but I've felt a little down about the communication within my team (fun) :( now I know life gets busy and stuff but I kind of join teams to encourage me to read more, communicate with different members and essentially make new friends. Maybe this month I got a major busy team or maybe I'm just too much of a chatterbox...The only trouble with all these additional rules is they have 2 admin running these challenges I don't think they have the time to baby us all. I think adding more rules means they work harder to keep a challenge fun for us but then where does their own reading time go?
Essentially they started this group to share the love of reading if they spend 75% of their time patrolling challenges then they only get 25% of their time reading. They also don't get paid for the time they put in for running this group and challenges.
Side note: I think you admin do a wonderful job of helping us make these fun challenges, make it fun for us to read together and share ideas and reviews and make new friends and answer the millions of questions we bombard you with daily about challenges, let alone still managing to read and post reviews yourself and live some form of life.
Sorry adding my 2 cents worth
I get that the points need to be adjusted but at the same time i feel kinda like we are getting punished for posting. I believe everyone should have to be in a fun group if it's their first month. and i also feel like there should be a "punishment" for not meeting the stated number of books for that level. you have it posted every time we do a challenge about how many books per level "should" be read but i feel like it's not really communicated as a needed number vs a "should be done" number
Nikki wrote: "I have to admit I've lacked joining in challenges for the last month (Feb) because I was in a reading slump I knew I was unpredictable on how much I'd read. So this month, I joined a fun team whils..."I agree that the teams to me a like a social life. I meet new people, have fun doing something I love and chat with older friends.
I also agree that our mods are some of the hardest working gals I know! Thank you Abbie and Sarah! You guys are a large part of what makes this group fantastic!
Yea that's the only thing about trying to add more rules to the challenge, since our admins already put so much time into this. However, with the whole first time needs to be a fun team, I don't completely agree. I had my first time in a fun time, and then realized that I wanted a group with more structure (even though my team had a couple amazing people who were as motivated as I). However, my friend Allison did a serious team on her first try (at my request mainly) and we've been doing great together on our team. I think maybe instead of it being made a strict law, it should just be heavily requested? Because some people know their reading skill, and could be amazing readers only now doing their first challenge.
That's just my opinion though, and if more people wish for that rule, I get that too :)
Here are my two cents when we're all discussing teams and problems with it.I hope that the fun team would be with more ppl in it.
I joined fun teams several times, and often from all ppl in our group maybe two were active ones, others just there to fill up the space (I have to say that one month I was the one who was a terrible member because I fell into reading slump that month).
Being in that kind of a team is far from fun since chat thread is always without new posts and you lose your motivation to read books for challenge.
Now, when there are medium teams I welcomed that wholeheartedly.
I had a luck to be a part of the team where all members are active, but the thing is - now I, as a slow reader and as a person who gets too many times distracted, feel like a shitty member because I read only 4 books when others read a lot more.
If "for fun" teams had more members, we could have more fun by participating, just saying!
I agree with Irena! I have the same issues as her!
Mod
I think we all understand that Sarah :) I'm sure none of us want to force you to take more time with these challenges, since we can see how much you already put into it. I am still enjoying these challenges a ton (they've really helped me to get reading again), even with the few issues that come with it! :)
Mod
__________|_Buddy_|__Points__|__Total__| Points
__________|_Reads_|__Earned__|________|__Adjusted
Team E._____|__42___|__123____|__165__|__111.4
Team A._____|__19___|___93_____|__112__|__73.6
Team B._____|___5___|___84_____|___89__|__71.7
Team C._____|__19___|____92___|__111__|__70.7
Team D._____|__17___|___76_____|__93__|__60.7
Sarah wrote: "I'm sorry you guys are having so many problems, and we'll definitely listen to your suggestions, we do spend a lot of time on these challenges though, and I'm not sure how easy it would be for use ..."I definitely do appreciate you guys for all the work you put into these and don't want to give you extra but I'm kind of thinking in my mind making a hard and fast rule that people need to stick to might actually ease your workload in future months.
From what I've seen you guys do an awful lot of chasing down members and trying to get interaction out of them. If it were set that people needed to do their share and even if a date was posted they needed to be posting by it's going to be the teams watching and letting you know so really it should end in just a matter of jotting down a list for the next month of those that can only participate as just for fun.
Yeah, I was thinking like Carrie as well. In the end, the challenges would involve less people (how many people have vanished from this one?), so there would be fewer reviews to check, not to mention less time chasing people down.
Also I think the rule should only be in the sign up, just if you signed up for a medium team last time and did not meet the book count, you need to sign up for just for fun team, just like serious if not you need to sign it for a medium team,It might just give people time to think OK I need to sign up for this team because I didn't do this last month, of course not everyone is going to read the rules, or fall the rules, but this might weed out some people, and also it might help make the fun teams more fun
Also maybe say if this is your first challenge and let's say it's a plan if you have not already read 36 books this year then you need to sign up for medium, at the meeting level if you have not read more than 24 books then you need to sign up for fun
It's self policing people should be able to read the rules and realize where they need to sign up, it shouldn't add any extra work except for a little more typing in the first post for Sarah
And I agree Sarah and Abby rock!!!
And most groups this size there are definitely multiple moderators, and they managed to do all this all by themselves, much appreciation to you girls!!!
The book count previously isn't a bad idea at all. I've seen some ask for serious that have barely ever written reviews at all or have maybe a handful of books so far for the year. I'd hate to say everyone had to start out as Just for Fun when there could possibly be someone joining the group tomorrow that's already read 200 books in 2016 and would be an obvious choice for a serious team. But that may be a lot of work added to wrangle everyone up by their lookups to get them on the right teams when they should be able to make the choice themselves. The easiest solution would probably still be sign up where you think you belong as it is now but if not making the quota the next month you could only do Just for Fun, that would only require the mods to jot down those that didn't do their part for the next month then as that month finished they would be welcome to try the higher rank again.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
YA Buddy Readers' Corner ♥
Books mentioned in this topic
Eternal Hunter (other topics)The 5th Wave (other topics)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (other topics)
Firegirl (other topics)
The Wrath and the Dawn (other topics)
More...
Again I'm speaking about serious teams..