Do you guys think having writers assigned months in advance would be a good solution? The biggest benefit is "fuller" tests and more frequent events, with the downside of not being able to make changes to events for the next month as they would already be WIP or ready, possibly as well as more difficulty finding writers for popular events due to the commitment. I think it does come down to your priorities/interests and generally what you want SMEC to be - would you want more frequent but not necessarily the most popular events or less frequent but more thought-out and generally-popular events? The good thing is this can always be changed based on interest.SilverBreeze wrote: ↑February 13th, 2023, 6:20 pm I’d love to see SMEC come back. I think it’d also help to have SMEC “quizzes” that are 15-25 min long, so that SMEC writers don’t have to commit to a full test in one month. This also makes it easier to get a full test, since actively finding a co-writer can be difficult. This way, people who only have time to write half a test can see a SMEC quiz scheduled and offer to add more questions. I agree a longer cycle would also help increase people willing to run events.
Events like Digital Structures were run - may be interesting to see what sort of events can be created or modified to be done virtually. Only difficulty with builds is that they tend to be harder to grade so it would require more committed graders, without the help of "automatic" scoring like how SkyCiv was able to calculate your Boomilever's efficiency. The good thing with it being virtual is that computer science events are much more feasible, depending on everyone's interest in any possible ones.pumptato-cat wrote: ↑February 13th, 2023, 9:19 pm Random thought, but have build events ever been run? I wonder if having a miniature version of current builds, or maybe something new such as ornithopter might be fun. I can't think of any build events with easily accessible materials though, so this is probably not the best idea.
