ticalc.org
Basics Archives Community Services Programming
Hardware Help About Search Your Account
   Home :: Archives :: News :: POTM April Results and May Voting

POTM April Results and May Voting
Posted by Andy on 1 June 2000, 19:15 GMT

We are pleased to announce the results of the April POTM contest. Additionally, it is time for you to vote for your favorite featured programs for the May POTM.

The June 2000 Newsletter has also been posted to the Newsletter archives.

 


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: POTM April Results and May Voting
DWedit  Account Info
(Web Page)

JASS for CrASH should win...

     1 June 2000, 19:37 GMT

Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Ciaran McCreesh  Account Info
(Web Page)

No ti86 programs last time! Oh well, everyone was obviously too busy to write any. I've nearly finished mine. Honest.

Oh, everyone vote for Dying Eyes, best program ever except maybe Peaworm.

Ciaran

I won't say "First Comment" because someone else will beat me to it...

     1 June 2000, 19:37 GMT

Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
DWedit  Account Info
(Web Page)

and nick will delete your comment if you do.

     1 June 2000, 19:40 GMT


Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Ciaran McCreesh  Account Info
(Web Page)

Probably. "First Comment" posts get on everyone's nerves.

Everyone vote for Dying Eyes. In case you didn't understand it the last time I said it. Vote. Vote. OK, maybe I should shut up now...

Ciaran

     1 June 2000, 19:49 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
calcfreak901  Account Info

"First comment" posts are explicitly banned by ticalc.org

and, by saying for everyone to vote for a program, you are likely signing its death warrant on the poll, and as far as this, yes, you should shut up now...

--future martian

     2 June 2000, 01:45 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Ciaran McCreesh  Account Info
(Web Page)

He he. I know. Things are not what they seem.

     2 June 2000, 19:20 GMT


Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Ciaran McCreesh  Account Info
(Web Page)

Knew it :)

     1 June 2000, 19:41 GMT


Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Nick Disabato  Account Info
(Web Page)

And if you *had* gotten first comment, I would have deleted it.

But I'm not going to now.

Ironic, isn't it :)

--BlueCalx

     1 June 2000, 20:04 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
David Hall  Account Info
(Web Page)

What happens if it says

First Comment:

on the first line, and then goes on to make some REALLY valid and interesting points about the article in question?

Hmmmm?

GOTCHA! ;)

     4 June 2000, 19:13 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Sebastian Reichelt  Account Info
(Web Page)

He deletes it as well. I did that once. It's the rules.

     4 June 2000, 19:54 GMT

Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
DWedit  Account Info
(Web Page)

I think there should be 4 votes: 2 for TI82-86, and 2 for TI89-92+

     1 June 2000, 19:42 GMT

Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Sebastian Reichelt  Account Info
(Web Page)

That doesn't make sense to me. Not all people have both of those calculators.

     1 June 2000, 20:02 GMT


Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
compman32386  Account Info
(Web Page)

I do

     2 June 2000, 00:17 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Nikku-kun Account Info

Yes, but you're not everybody. ^_^

     3 June 2000, 01:18 GMT


Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Ed Fry  Account Info
(Web Page)

actually there should be 6 votes. 82/83/83+ Basic/ASM, 85/86 Basic/ASM, and 89/92/92+ Basic/ASM. That way calcs and program types could be equally judged. The way it currently is now, almost always all ti-89 ASM games will win based on the number of owners of the calculator. At least this system gives fairness to the calculator type, the number of active calculator owners, and the style of programming.

     1 June 2000, 20:21 GMT

Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Sebastian Reichelt  Account Info
(Web Page)

Yeah, but then there would be only a few choices for each. I think the current way it makes more sense.

     1 June 2000, 22:36 GMT

Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
calcfreak901  Account Info

As an owner of an 83, 85, 86 and 89, I agree with you, especially since I program on all of them. I doubt that my programs will make it to the polls anytime soon, though because, at this point, I exclusively do BASIC math and science programs.

--future martian

     2 June 2000, 01:51 GMT

Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Daniel Bishop  Account Info

imho, there should be seven:
1. 82/83/83+ game
2. 82/83/83+ nongame
3. 85/86 game
4. 85/86 nongame
5. 89/92/92+ game
6. 89/92/92+ nongame
7. best overall program
(There is an obvious reason why I am not suggesting POTM categories for the 73/80/81.)

I don't think there's a need to make a distinction between asm and basic. The best games are written in asm and nearly all nongame programs are written in BASIC, so the game/nongame distinction pretty much covers it.

     2 June 2000, 18:56 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: POTM April Results and May Voting
Bengt Werstén  Account Info
(Web Page)

That´s to much,
Three is enough.

     2 June 2000, 19:37 GMT


clarification
Daniel Bishop  Account Info

There is one very important detail I forgot to mention in my last post. We should be able to vote for any programs and not just the featured ones.

Three *is* enough if you can only vote for featured programs, because there aren't enough featured programs for 7 POTMs. However, seven awards is a good idea if you can vote for any program and not just the featured ones.

     3 June 2000, 03:38 GMT


Re: clarification
Sebastian Reichelt  Account Info
(Web Page)

We should be able to rank programs ourselves, on a scale from 0 to 10. In the File Info, I mean. Each month the highest ranked programs would be determined and promoted to "Program of the Month."

     3 June 2000, 05:04 GMT

Re: Re: clarification
calcfreak901  Account Info

That would be great, especially if combined with the seven vote and user nomination systems proposed above.

--future martian

     3 June 2000, 15:35 GMT


Re: Re: clarification
James!  Account Info

User file rankings would be great! Nick (or someone else at ticalc.org) are you reading this? Would it be possible to include user file rankings in the download pages?

     4 June 2000, 22:00 GMT


POTM Vote Sugesstion.
Ed Fry  Account Info
(Web Page)

Click on the link to see a previous suggestion I made awile back when this system was first put into place. It's basicially what I think the POTM should be IMHO.

     3 June 2000, 19:17 GMT

1  2  

You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.

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