7 ms·

"Sorry, the rules clearly state that you can't browse websites that promote hacking or other criminal behaviour, like hackernews. It doesn't matter that HN isn'

"Sorry, the rules clearly state that you can't browse websites that promote hacking or other criminal behaviour, like hackernews. It doesn't matter that HN isn't actually a criminal website, we must always unquestioningly follow rules."

lelanthran 4y ago
> "Sorry, the rules clearly state that you can't browse websites that promote hacking or other criminal behaviour, like hackernews. It doesn't matter that HN isn't actually a criminal website, we must always unquestioningly follow rules." It's childish and immature, in a competition, to question the rules only after you have been caught breaking them. I never said rules should not be questioned, I said that you should question them before agreeing to them, not after you have been caught.
- richbell 4y ago
  > It's childish and immature, in a competition, to question the rules only after you have been caught breaking them. How is it childish and immature? They were clearly following the spirit of the competition. Furthermore there is no indication anywhere, unless I missed it, that they were cognizant of that specific rule prior to the competition. Perhaps they saw "no template generators" and didn't pay attention to the examples. Even if they specifically knew that GitHub was mentioned, they could have reasonably assumed that the rule specifically referred to its tenplating features and that they were fine.
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    > Even if they specifically knew that GitHub was mentioned, they could have reasonably assumed that the rule specifically referred to its tenplating features and that they were fine. You cannot claim it's a reasonable interpretation when no other competitor, nor the person who wrote that rule, nor the person who adjudicated that rule ... thought that. Sure, to you and me, we know what the intent must have been, but you cannot change the rules after the competition has ended because that is unfair to all the other competitors who abided by the rules.
    - richbell 4y ago
      > You cannot claim it's a reasonable interpretation when no other competitor, nor the person who wrote that rule, nor the person who adjudicated that rule ... thought that. You're just throwing around blind speculation. The students didn't even know they were disqualified until they reached out to the regional coordinator, how would you (an uninvolved third party) know if anyone else was disqualified or the thoughts of any of the staff? Edit: we also don't know what the person who wrote the rule meant because the students were only allowed to talk to the person who graded their submission and made the mistake in the first place. It's possible the person who wrote the rules meant "template generation features on GitHub" but just wrote it poorly. The rule in question is within the context of template generation, not VCS or anything else. ) H. Framework systems, such as Drupal, Joomla, Wordpress, Bootstrap, or other current technologies may be used; however, pre-built templates and themes for these sites are not permissible. If a framework system is used, a statement affirming that the template or theme used on the framework was built by the team must be posted on an “About” section or page. ) I. Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files, such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit, are NOT permitted.
    - skeaker 4y ago
      I'm more than okay with a little unfairness if it means stupid garbage rules like that can be removed, even retroactively. If I had to suffer through emailing source code back and forth with my collaborators because version control was banned, I would be beyond caring. Taking a competition so seriously that you prioritize "unfairness" over such blatant stupidity is far more childish than anything in the article.

lelanthran 4y ago

> "Sorry, the rules clearly state that you can't browse websites that promote hacking or other criminal behaviour, like hackernews. It doesn't matter that HN isn't actually a criminal website, we must always unquestioningly follow rules." It's childish and immature, in a competition, to question the rules only after you have been caught breaking them. I never said rules should not be questioned, I said that you should question them before agreeing to them, not after you have been caught.

richbell 4y ago
> It's childish and immature, in a competition, to question the rules only after you have been caught breaking them. How is it childish and immature? They were clearly following the spirit of the competition. Furthermore there is no indication anywhere, unless I missed it, that they were cognizant of that specific rule prior to the competition. Perhaps they saw "no template generators" and didn't pay attention to the examples. Even if they specifically knew that GitHub was mentioned, they could have reasonably assumed that the rule specifically referred to its tenplating features and that they were fine.
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > Even if they specifically knew that GitHub was mentioned, they could have reasonably assumed that the rule specifically referred to its tenplating features and that they were fine. You cannot claim it's a reasonable interpretation when no other competitor, nor the person who wrote that rule, nor the person who adjudicated that rule ... thought that. Sure, to you and me, we know what the intent must have been, but you cannot change the rules after the competition has ended because that is unfair to all the other competitors who abided by the rules.
  - richbell 4y ago
    > You cannot claim it's a reasonable interpretation when no other competitor, nor the person who wrote that rule, nor the person who adjudicated that rule ... thought that. You're just throwing around blind speculation. The students didn't even know they were disqualified until they reached out to the regional coordinator, how would you (an uninvolved third party) know if anyone else was disqualified or the thoughts of any of the staff? Edit: we also don't know what the person who wrote the rule meant because the students were only allowed to talk to the person who graded their submission and made the mistake in the first place. It's possible the person who wrote the rules meant "template generation features on GitHub" but just wrote it poorly. The rule in question is within the context of template generation, not VCS or anything else. ) H. Framework systems, such as Drupal, Joomla, Wordpress, Bootstrap, or other current technologies may be used; however, pre-built templates and themes for these sites are not permissible. If a framework system is used, a statement affirming that the template or theme used on the framework was built by the team must be posted on an “About” section or page. ) I. Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files, such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit, are NOT permitted.
  - skeaker 4y ago
    I'm more than okay with a little unfairness if it means stupid garbage rules like that can be removed, even retroactively. If I had to suffer through emailing source code back and forth with my collaborators because version control was banned, I would be beyond caring. Taking a competition so seriously that you prioritize "unfairness" over such blatant stupidity is far more childish than anything in the article.