2
\$\begingroup\$

I wrote a challenge, I was concerned it would need some fine tuning, but was not able to get anyone on board to help me test. So I posted it to the main and it turned out while it was pretty fun it did need a good deal of tuning.

I would like to do a improved version of the challenge. I don't want to modify the old challenge because there are already over 50 answers on it and a rule change midway through would not be fair to the players. However the new challenge wouldn't be much different, I would tweak the scoring system and change a couple of numbers in the challenge to make things a bit more difficult along with implementing a number of user suggestions. It would definitely be solidly in dupe territory. So what can I do? Should we make an exception? Should we close the older question as a dupe of the newer one? (I've never seen that done on this site but it does happen on other sites)

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ If you decide to post the second iteration, regardless of what is done with the first iteration, you should wait for a while before actually posting it. If you post it in a month or two, after the original has died down, you could make a stronger case for it being different enough to not be a dupe, since it wouldn't be drawing attention away from the original. \$\endgroup\$ – Mego Jun 16 '17 at 20:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mego I would have thought it best to post the challenge as soon as possible, that way the idea is still pretty fresh and people are interested. I feel people are probably more likely to VTC when they don't think a challenge is interesting. Although perhaps in a month people will have largely forgotten about the old one and the idea will be fresh again. \$\endgroup\$ – Wheat Wizard Jun 16 '17 at 22:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ We could close the first as a dupe of the second...? \$\endgroup\$ – caird coinheringaahing Jun 17 '17 at 3:18
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @WheatWizard That's kind of what I was thinking - in a month, the challenge will have died down, and so the second iteration will be fresh. It's especially a good idea if the old one will be closed as a dupe of the new one, because you don't want to close a good challenge while it is still getting answers. \$\endgroup\$ – Mego Jun 17 '17 at 8:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mego Ok I see I get what you are saying. But I wouldn't call the old one a "good challenge" ;) \$\endgroup\$ – Wheat Wizard Jun 17 '17 at 12:12
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Definitely agree on closing the first as a dupe of the second. Call it a beta run. If someone ~in the future~ discovers the old one they would be directed to the new one, which would have a better algorithm. I certainly thought the original was intriguing, but definitely had some trouble spots (there were no less than five instances where the entire alphabet was available, despite previous answers--like TRANSCRIPT--having "used up" lots of them, which may have been fine, but I feel it detracted from the "restricted source" flag). \$\endgroup\$ – Draco18s Jun 20 '17 at 17:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .