Most of us, I'm sure, come to this site either to solve delightfully tricky programming puzzles, or to see what insane golfs other members of our community have written.

However, now we ackgnowledge the creative brilliance of those that come here to write those challenges that we've collectively sunk so many, many hours into.

I, Helka Homba, and some other members of the community are organizing a competition for writing creative challenges.

Sign up and view the rules here, and discuss the competition here.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Just to make sure, you edit the hackmd.io page adding your name to sign up? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 11:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ @EriktheOutgolfer yes. \$\endgroup\$
    – Pavel
    Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 14:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ Did it, thanks. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 15:24
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ This appears to be a link-only question :( — can you copy over the key rules for those of us too lazy to click a link? \$\endgroup\$
    – Dave
    Commented Apr 3, 2017 at 15:12

1 Answer 1


I'm not so sure the no-sandboxing rule is a good idea. The Sandbox exists for a reason: most of us need feedback to find issues that we've overlooked. If a bunch of people post challenges to main without using the Sandbox first, we'll inevitably end up with a lot of challenges getting put on hold as unclear. I can understand why you'd want to have the rule, but perhaps there's a better way to achieve that goal while still having the ability to use the Sandbox as quality control.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Sometimes the Sandbox is useless for me. I have made some great successes without Sandbox. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 2, 2017 at 2:56
  • 14
    \$\begingroup\$ @SIGSEGV An anecdote is not evidence. \$\endgroup\$
    – user45941
    Commented Apr 2, 2017 at 3:31
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I think that's part of the challenge: whether you can make a high-quality challenge by yourself without the assistance of others involved. Only the best can do so \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 3, 2017 at 21:00
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ @AnthonyPham That's exactly why this is a bad idea. It's hard to write good challenges - that's why we have the Sandbox. Having a competition where people don't use the Sandbox will result in a lot of low-quality challenges being posted, which is exactly the problem the Sandbox was created to solve. \$\endgroup\$
    – user45941
    Commented Apr 4, 2017 at 4:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SGSEGV yeah but your last challenge was not \$\endgroup\$
    – user63187
    Commented Apr 5, 2017 at 15:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mego Playing devils' advocate: The entire premise that we need a sandbox is a good idea is based on anecdotes. We haven't actually performed any studies on the effectiveness on the sandbox. That said, I do agree, we should remove the no-sandbox rule. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 5, 2017 at 16:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oh. By the way, I partly agree to this idea. I mean, tags get chosen randomly, what if we get king-of-the-hill or cops-and-robbers? That's the reason why I partly agree to this idea. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 6, 2017 at 22:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Additionally, since the winner is judged by the total score, edits and improvements made after the challenge was posted will still be taken into account by people when deciding to vote. So the rule won't prevent people from having their chances to win increased by the help of others. (Nor should that happen: IMO, the goal of a competition like this should be to have fun creating and solving quality challenges. Counteracting means by which challenges can be improved does not help towards this.) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 8, 2017 at 12:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @user2428118 It's also impossible to prevent others from making edits, which makes the whole independence thing moot. \$\endgroup\$
    – user45941
    Commented Apr 8, 2017 at 14:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .