So, I'd like some further feedback on how to handle the deadlines.
The current structure is:
Initial submissions
Initially, a deadline is set, which is always midnight (UTC) on a specific date, usually about two weeks from when the rules are posted. Entries will never close before this deadline, overriding the rules below.
However, if entries are received close to the deadline, it is extended. If 3 or less entries have been received, entries close one week from the most recent entry. If 4 or more have been received, entries close 72 hours from the most recent entry.
A level being updated (prior to entries closing) also has the same effect - the deadline is extended from the time of updating by one week / 72 hours as applicable.
Updates
Updates (once entries have closed and the playing phase has begun) work more or less the same way as initial submissions.
The one difference is that the deadline extension is 72 hours, regardless of the number of entries.
What I'm wondering is whether this structure should be kept, or whether it should be changed. Possible suggestions (aside from simply staying how it is now):
- During the initial submissions, only extend the deadline in respect to new entries, not to an already-submitted entry being updated.
- Do not extend the initial submission deadline at all. However, keep the extension for updates, so that the end of the updates-allowed part of the playing phase only comes once no more updates are being made.
- Go back to absolute deadlines in all cases. Even if a submission is made one minute before the deadline, don't extend it.
I'm thinking my preference is the first option - keep extending the deadline for initial submission as long as new entries are coming in (not just updates to existing ones), and make no changes to the current rules in regards to deadline for updates during the playing phase. This is because someone updating their levels during the creation phase isn't really an indication that the creation phase is still going; as this could just as easily be done during the update phase (which would extend as long as the authors feel further updates need to be made).
One point also came up - technically, there's no rule stopping someone from submitting a blank or incomplete level during the creation phase, then finishing the level off during the update phase. Obviously, this isn't the intention of how the update phase should be used, but it would technically be allowed. I figure that anyone who uses this kind of loophole in the first place (which I'd think unlikely in this community) would be equally likely to try and loophole any rule that tries to prohibit it, but perhaps a better solution is to allow for someone to simply indicate their intent to submit a level, and allow them up to the end of the update phase to actually submit one (perhaps with a rule that, if they indicate intent but do not submit a level in the end, they're prevented from simply indicating intent for the next few contests (but could still enter if they actually submit a full-fledged level during the creation phase; and it is of course possible that such a rule could be made to only apply to repeat offenders)). One of the reasons why I see some kind of system like this as nessecary is due to the contests only going ahead if 3+ entries are received (and a difference in the number of prizes between whether 3 entries or 4+ entries are received). I feel that if it's simply a matter of "anyone can join in arbitrarily until the update phase ends", then there's a significant risk of people not submitting their levels by the end of the creation phase, which would skew the number of contests that actually go ahead - hence why I prefer a system of either "levels must be submitted before then" or at least "intent to submit must be indicated before then".