ticalc.org
Basics Archives Community Services Programming
Hardware Help About Search Your Account
   Home :: Archives :: News :: September 1999 POTM Nominations

September 1999 POTM Nominations
Posted by Andy on 1 October 1999, 05:11 GMT

It is once again time to nominate your favorite programs that you feel are most deserving. As this month has had a plethora of great programs, we look forward to seeing what programs win the award.

 


The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.


Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
nicholas palko  Account Info

i believe the categories should be changed, so that there are only 68k and z80 nominations

     1 October 1999, 05:16 GMT


Hey all!
Gockies  Account Info
(Web Page)

Hey everybody- Vote for Grand Theft Auto!

     2 October 1999, 18:46 GMT

Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

"plethora" is one of your favorite words, isn't it?

     1 October 1999, 05:31 GMT

Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
ferich  Account Info

No, the word last time was "myriads."

     1 October 1999, 06:34 GMT


Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Nick Disabato  Account Info
(Web Page)

It's one of mine, but Andy stole it *grumble*
:)

--BlueCalx

     1 October 1999, 22:59 GMT


Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Elias Cotton  Account Info

ahh cant we all just get along.... share fav words and expressions it makes the world a nice cozy place to be...

     2 October 1999, 11:39 GMT

Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Why are programs that have already won the award, still on the nomination list? I know for a fact that Super Mario Quest and Prosit have already won, and there may be others. Wasn't this going to be one of the "changes" in the new system? Or was I mistaken?

If I was mistaken, what are the "changes" that were announced a month or two ago?

     1 October 1999, 05:33 GMT


Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
ferich  Account Info

I think the changes reflect the SAME games (versions, etc.) but SMQ is an upgrade version, and I believe Prosit too. The BASIC games were all compiled into one sections, but as far as I know, all programs on that list either came out or were upgraded recently in order to make that list. I could be wrong.

~ferich

     1 October 1999, 06:32 GMT


Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Um... that doesn't make any sense. So authors can basically resubmit their games, maybe with minor changes, and they can be renominated? What's the point of that? I thought they were only going to be renominated if the changes were major...

     1 October 1999, 14:58 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
ferich  Account Info

It doesn't, really. Like the comment that follows this one, it does allow people to make minor changes and post it under a new version number. But who's to say except for the programmer that the change wasn't valid or necessary? Maybe the programmer thought there needed to be an upgrade. Who knows?

The only thing that we (I don't necessarily agree with the system, either) problem with here is that programmers could beat the system by changing their program slightly. Other programmers whose programs are validly new and useful, but perhaps not as popular or interesting as the "tried and true" programs (such as SMQ, Pheonix, or Street Fighter) may find themselves in the gutter here.

I think there should be a new format for the nominations section. All *new* programs should be catalogued in their respective sections, while upgrades and revised programs should have their own section, similar to the TI-BASIC section.

~ferich

     1 October 1999, 19:39 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Philip Ringsmuth  Account Info
(Web Page)

I agree with your last comment completely. New programs should have their own separate section, including new BASIC programs, as those seem to be ignored.

-Fil

     1 October 1999, 22:10 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Programmers can submit upgraded/fixed versions of their programs anytime they want. I'm not questioning that.

My point is that if the program has already won the award, why should it be able to win again? What would be the point of that? The program has already been recognized, what more recognition would it get by winning a second time? Not much more. Let the other programs have their chance. :)

     2 October 1999, 07:41 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Kaleb Ruof  Account Info
(Web Page)

Strange, that's what I thought too...

Programs that have already won an award shouldn't be nominated again and again and again just because of simple updates.

     2 October 1999, 01:05 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Elias Cotton  Account Info

didnt we hear in the august potm's is still on the board... that even if prosit made a MAJOR change that it COULD NOT compete ever again... i beleive that was said by one of the staff members.. Kirk Meyer

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: August
1999 POTM Vote
Kirk Meyer
(Web Page)
No. However, he would get his screenshot which
he displays updated if he wanted, and if there
was a major change like that, it would be news.
POTM is supposed to recognize the new
programs...
i dont know if anyone can do that or if its been done before but oh well..

     2 October 1999, 09:08 GMT

Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Roberto  Account Info
(Web Page)

Uh,oh!

I forgot nominations were coming and I didn't release the second version of Mesh3d :(

-Roberto

     1 October 1999, 11:25 GMT

Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
no1

2 things:

1:each calc should have a seperate basic section

and

2:VTI rules!

     1 October 1999, 23:26 GMT

Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
elcobbola  Account Info
(Web Page)

Yes, each calc. should have a asm and basic choice. You guys don't throw all of the ASM programs into one big category, do you? Hell no.

     1 October 1999, 23:50 GMT


Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
ticalc_chris Account Info
(Web Page)

Used to be that way, only we had a really hard time finding often even 1 noteworthy BASIC program for each calculator. Perhaps there should be more than 1 award for BASIC programs overall, but one per calculator really didn't work :(

Chris

     2 October 1999, 07:25 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

But that was before the nomination process. Now the ticalc.org staff isn't involved in the process at all. So you guys aren't finding noteworthy programs, the users are selecting them.

So if you do divide TI-BASIC up by calculator, then the users will be selecting the most noteworthy program for that calculator.

However, since you group 89 and 92+ assembly together, I guess it would make sense to group 82/83/83+ together, same with 85/86, and 89/92/92+ maybe.

     2 October 1999, 07:37 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
elcobbola  Account Info
(Web Page)

Fine, whatever it takes to get more basic award slots. Also programs that have already won the award SHOULD NOT be able to win again!

     2 October 1999, 17:06 GMT


Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Shiar  Account Info
(Web Page)

Why not seperate games and utils too for each calc

     3 October 1999, 14:45 GMT


Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
ferich  Account Info

Too many categories.

     4 October 1999, 05:58 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: September 1999 POTM Nominations
Shiar  Account Info
(Web Page)

duh

     6 October 1999, 11:18 GMT

  Copyright © 1996-2011, the ticalc.org project. All rights reserved. | Contact Us | Disclaimer