Descon 14: Theme Determination

I believe I already do sir.

I would like to offer a dissenting vote. In my opinion, it's not prudent on our part to develope and publish plans to build a rocket that is designed to deliver and disperse material at altitude. "They" already think we can take out a tank at 5 miles, now they can say we actually held a contest to develope "Weapons capable of carrying bio and chemical agents to far away targets with pin point accuracy." We just don't need this type of publicity.

steve

I think you make a valid point. So, IMHO, all prize donations should be given equal prominence.

I also like the idea that first place gets you first choice of a range of prizes, rather than winning a specific prize.

I would hate to lose the association with r.m.r It's one of the positive things that r.m.r is known for!

Not really, Jerry. When the prizes come in they are all listed up-front and usually before the contest kicks off. Now, based on your most recent 12 months with Descon and EMRR, you have provided prizes for contests that have not even been created! A box full of Fire & Forget Rockets. So I guess, in essence, you do "already do". Hmmmmmm?

Nick

Agreed

Pay forward :)

Need another box?

Bah. Show all the prizes. The sponsors provide the prizes so that they can be seen providing the prizes, and it won't do anyone any good if half the prizes are hidden.

If you only want to award prizes to the top 50% of competitors (and save the rest for the next descon), that's a SEPARATE issue. I really like the way the first place finisher gets first pick of prizes and so on, rather than assigning arbitrary 1st prizes, BTW.

I don't really think that the promotion aspects of the prizes are lessened even if (almost) everyone who enters gets one. If that were true, we'd probably have seen a drop-off in sponsors by now. This IS DesCon *14*...

BillW

I think it's a good system too... everyone might have his own favorite among the prizes, so "first pick" is really a greater "value" - and the scheme also increases the chances of more finishers getting prizes that they like.

-dave w

Here is another issue not yet discussed, Vendor "A" donates a prize with a retail price of $200.00 and vendor "B" donates a prize with a retail price of $12.95. Both vendors get the same exposure for their donation. That just doesn't seem fair. Is there a way to give the higher value prize more exposure or status? They could at least have the retail value listed and ranked in that order. The winner can still pick what ever they want from the list.

This would *stay* this way, as it has always been done.

Nick

Fair enough. There are those that don't compete because it is labeled RMR though, so to test it out, perhaps we should have an RMR Invitational Descon for number 14, which allows any and all Online users to play.

Nick

Point... others?

Other ideas about theme... I will wrap them up on the weekend.

Nick

Point(s)!

It is not "imposed fairness".

All the donations are purely voluntary and the "relative benefit" of promotion for a $200 product is about the same for a $10 product. Both products receive mindshare which is what they seek.

You want to talk unfair?

Some wacky guy donated a $12,500 commercial recovery system to flyrockets campaign. NOBODY would need that except a commercial launcher. But he got premium placement, mindshare, and who knows how many sales from the donation. Or who knows how much "consultation fees" on the winner of the FREE item itself.

What about "Unconventional Recovery". Entry must be safely recoverable without using parachutes or streamers. This would allow gliders, helicopters, saucers, cones, tumblers, or some other interesting ideas.

-- Bob Cox

Keep the association with RMR. Just announce it through some of the other, popular groups if you want to attract more entries.

I see your point, but...

I kinda agree with Jerry.

Are vendors voting with their feet and not sponsoring the contest? If they are they are being replaced on an ongoing basis - it never seems to be short of prizes.

Good.