I think that we should put in the new rules that someone who wants to organize a competition must at least have competed in x competitions. x = 1 would be a minimum (of course...) x = 2 would be good for me. That sounds quite logical, but when the organizer never competed before, that's very hard for him. I also agree that in some parts of the world, that's not so easy to compete. So I just give this as an idea and to have a feedback.

I think this is already taken care of in that the WCA has to approve any competition. There has been talk of cubers in Australia filming their unofficial cube meets in order to convince the board that they can smoothly run a competition and be trusted to stick to the regulations. Chances are, unless a delegate flies to Australia, or one of them flies to a competition elsewhere, there will never be an "experienced" cuber to run a competition. However, if they prove their ability through other means, the WCA board should be able to approve their competition. Likewise, the board can tell anyone trying to hold a competition that they are not experienced enough, even if they HAVE been to a competition.

I agree with blade. Even if someone has gone to a bunch of competitions, if they've never offered to help judge/scramble or do anything, they're not able to run their own. And it is possible for someone to go to a single competition and learn, especially if they go to that competition with the intent of learning how to organize/run a competition. Also, if someone with zero experience asked me to come to their competition, I would simply be a co-organizer and work with them.

So both of you think that a good organisation depends more on who organize it then which experience this person has...

Isn't it a combination of both? Obviously the experience matters, but that depends on the person. I guess I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about. WCA competitions have been set up to a certain standard, and it's difficult to understand the standard, much less meet the standard, if you've never seen the competition in action. There have been instances where people have recommended that a math professor act as a delegate. Whereas the professor was probably intelligent, and most likely trustworthy, they would have no clue of what's going on. I do think that it's best for an organizer to have been to a competition. Otherwise, video evidence can try to reduce the deficiency of what in-person experience provides.

[quote="Edouard Chambon":2evkenyy]So both of you think that a good organisation depends more on who organize it then which experience this person has...[/quote:2evkenyy] I'm saying that good organization can't be measured simply by the number of competitons someone has competed in. I'm guessing things like their age, maturity, etc are bigger factors. By your proposal, Dave Hedley Jones (CEO? of Seventowns), wouldn't be a good organizer, since he's never competed. Of course, he's a WCA delegate.

Right, someone who goes to competitions but is not a part of the organizational process would make a terrible delegate and organizer. You not only have to go to a competition, you have to ACTIVELY help out, and do more than just participate. Dave Jones, with the power of SevenTowns, can organize a competition, but he is not good at actually running the competition. It is important to have people who respect rules, and don't take short cuts just because they're tired. The people facilitating the judging of the competition and the application of the rules also must have some form of cube knowledge.

[quote="BryanLogan":2bo1t4m7][quote="Edouard Chambon":2bo1t4m7]So both of you think that a good organisation depends more on who organize it then which experience this person has...[/quote:2bo1t4m7] I'm saying that good organization can't be measured simply by the number of competitons someone has competed in. I'm guessing things like their age, maturity, etc are bigger factors. [/quote:2bo1t4m7] And even more so, knowledge of competition procedures, rules, etc. It's possible for someone to have read the regulations thoroughly, discussed matters with those who have run competitions, and run a few unofficial competitions of their own. This person would probably be a better organizer than someone who has been to three WCA competitions, but never been a part of the organizational side of them. All in all, I think a hard rule would be a bit too restrictive on those who would otherwise run a great competition. I say leave the decision to the board.

Ok ok. But don't misunderstand. I did not say : good experience => good organizer but : no experience => more difficult to be a good organizer

Yes yes, it depends very much on the person. I'm not really sure this is worth arguing over

Another thought I've had on this: Why do we need to pigeonhole the way competitions are run? I've been to 3 "types" of competitions, a European competition (from what I understand German Nationals was not quite "normal"), a US "West Coast" style competition (only Nationals), and multiple US "East Coast" competitions. Each of these competitions had a different feel and style to how they were run. Personally, being to a bunch of EC comps, my style of organizing follows the competitions I've been to. If someone is able to look at the regulations, and come up with their own organizational style, I say great. People come up with new ideas when able to do things on their own. If they can prove to the WCA that they are competent and capable of running a competition while following the WCA rules, then I don't see why being to a competition is a necessary requirement.

[quote="DanCohen":apllkkrl]Another thought I've had on this: Why do we need to pigeonhole the way competitions are run? I've been to 3 "types" of competitions, a European competition (from what I understand German Nationals was not quite "normal"), a US "West Coast" style competition (only Nationals), and multiple US "East Coast" competitions. Each of these competitions had a different feel and style to how they were run. Personally, being to a bunch of EC comps, my style of organizing follows the competitions I've been to. If someone is able to look at the regulations, and come up with their own organizational style, I say great. People come up with new ideas when able to do things on their own. If they can prove to the WCA that they are competent and capable of running a competition while following the WCA rules, then I don't see why being to a competition is a necessary requirement.[/quote:apllkkrl] could you elaborate a bit more about the differences? sounds interesting