Ton Hospel wrote: > > In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.1021102090542.1109A-100000@gentoo>, > Consider that the mingolfs have been running for months in an > essentially referee-less mode without any real problems. I think a lot > is to be learned from them, since they are basically an attempt to run > golfs with minimum overhead. > The minigolfs have been great! But there are drawbacks, The leaderboard keeps changing, but results are posted for only the best of each solution. The TPR challenge allows someone like me (an intermediate player) to see how the best players improve their solutions stroke by stroke. This could be done in minigolf, but it does not seem like the right place for it.
> Especially mtve's attempt at a referee-less golf system is relevant > here. This system can fully automatically receive, run and accept or > reject entries (see https://www.frox25.no-ip.org/fcgi-bin/index.pl). This looks promising! > I think that with this system basically only one referee is needed > who goes into the system at least and possibly no more than once a > day and checks entries for too heavy rule-abuse. He can then amend > the rules, and add extra testcases (then the bad boys will be > automatically rejected). He is also the one you can mail the difficult > rule questions and if you disagree with what the automated system did, > but you should not expect an answer before a day has elapsed then. Does the current system also test entries on input? I assume so, since it says that I've passed, but I haven't refereed before. If it does, can the pending scores be combined into the leaderboard, adding a pending tag? This would take care of the golfer's need for instant gratification. It may also provide amusement as someone ahead actually drops *back* if an entry is later rejected. I don't think that "rejection" has been a major issue except in the early stages of a tournament as new test cases are found, or among those that are aware that they are pushing the limits. > Would people be willing to referee and play under such a system ? Speaking for myself (and for prakash), I will play under any system, prize or no prize. And I will gladly wait a few days for Jason, et al to get a closed tournament together. An "open" tournament doesn't leave much room for players at the back of the pack who post incremental improvements on a less than stellar solution. Michael Fore score has several days to go ... our fathers brought forth on this continent a new game, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all characters are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil debate, testing whether that solution or any solution so conceived and so dedicated can long endure.
