3 ms·

> The rule didn't say some parts of Github was okay, the rule said Github was not allowed. The rule is clearly written with the mistaken belief that GitHub is

> The rule didn't say some parts of Github was okay, the rule said Github was not allowed. The rule is clearly written with the mistaken belief that GitHub is a templating engine. The person that judged their submission also confirmed their misunderstanding. I'm not sure what type of competitions you've been a part of, but I have seen several where the rules are changed or re-interpreted on the fly because someone pointed out an error in the instructions or rules.

lelanthran 4y ago
> I'm not sure what type of competitions you've been a part of, but I have seen several where the rules are changed or re-interpreted on the fly because someone pointed out an error in the instructions or rules. Yeah, and if they pointed it out before the competition ended, that would count as "on the fly". Flagging it as erroneous, ambiguous or similar after you are disqualified for breaking it is something I've never seen before, and I guess neither have you.
- richbell 4y ago
  > Yeah, and if they pointed it out before the competition ended, that would count as "on the fly". "On the fly" includes after initial disqualification or final results. In some cases it is not possible or desirable to change the winners, but the competition organizers nevertheless admitted the fault and did their best to compensate the team. The organizers of this competition seemingly have done nothing. The medium post states they submitted their website on the weekend and received no notification that they were disqualified until they reached out to the regional coordinator. At that point, several days had already gone by and the judging was completed. How do you propose they should have handled the situation when they had no idea they were disqualified until after the competition ended? > > Flagging it as erroneous, ambiguous or similar after you are disqualified for breaking it is something I've never seen before, and I guess neither have you. I went to an all-day CTF where a team retroactively went from last place to third or second place because the organizers realized the team approached the challenge in a way that wasn't technically allowed but followed the spirit of the competition. The team was promptly notified of the initial judges decisions and had an opportunity to state their case, which was deliberated amongst the staff and accepted. These high school students, who spent months working on this project, were not given the same opportunity.

lelanthran 4y ago

> I'm not sure what type of competitions you've been a part of, but I have seen several where the rules are changed or re-interpreted on the fly because someone pointed out an error in the instructions or rules. Yeah, and if they pointed it out before the competition ended, that would count as "on the fly". Flagging it as erroneous, ambiguous or similar after you are disqualified for breaking it is something I've never seen before, and I guess neither have you.

richbell 4y ago
> Yeah, and if they pointed it out before the competition ended, that would count as "on the fly". "On the fly" includes after initial disqualification or final results. In some cases it is not possible or desirable to change the winners, but the competition organizers nevertheless admitted the fault and did their best to compensate the team. The organizers of this competition seemingly have done nothing. The medium post states they submitted their website on the weekend and received no notification that they were disqualified until they reached out to the regional coordinator. At that point, several days had already gone by and the judging was completed. How do you propose they should have handled the situation when they had no idea they were disqualified until after the competition ended? > > Flagging it as erroneous, ambiguous or similar after you are disqualified for breaking it is something I've never seen before, and I guess neither have you. I went to an all-day CTF where a team retroactively went from last place to third or second place because the organizers realized the team approached the challenge in a way that wasn't technically allowed but followed the spirit of the competition. The team was promptly notified of the initial judges decisions and had an opportunity to state their case, which was deliberated amongst the staff and accepted. These high school students, who spent months working on this project, were not given the same opportunity.