Official Schedule for Revising Regulations

jbcm627 (2010-04-08 21:50:18 +0000)
I'd like to propose an official timeline / deadline for modifying the regulations. There are a few reasons for this: * Initially, I was unsure when discussion about 2010 regulations would begin (in part due to being uncertain about when they would take effect). * It is now April, and the 2010 Regulations have not gone into effect - we are several months later than last year, and the process is dragging out quite a bit. It would be nice to know when new regulations would take effect in order to better plan competitions, since some regulations may change how competitions are run. * Modifying the regulations every single year can be a somewhat cumbersome process. In order to address these issues, I would like to suggest a few things: * A set deadline when regulations should take effect (Say, Feb. 01). This prevents uncertainty as to when the regulations become official. * A set period of time for discussion on the forum (say, all of January: Jan. 01 to Jan. 31.). This prevents the process from dragging out like it is now. It also prevents premature discussion, or discussion being pushed up too early. * A sub-forum in the regulations form dedicated to topics pertaining to a specific year's revision. Instead of mushing topics from all years together, a single sub-forum can be devoted to each year's revision. This can help keep track of discussion about a current year, and can also place limits on when and how discussion can occur (as in, a forum can be locked so no new suggestion threads can be made after that year's regulations are official). This complements my first two suggestions, and also avoids the problem of thread starters not using the [201X Ideas] thread name convention. * A bi-annual process, instead of annual. I don't care about this one as much, just wanted to throw it out there.
BryanLogan (2010-04-08 23:52:58 +0000)
I'd vote against having an official schedule. With a deadline, some things might be put into effect without adequate discussion. I would like to see a goal that regulations take effect at the beginning of the year rather than discussing them at the beginning of the year. But I wouldn't see any issue with having multiple revisions of the regulations done throughout the year for minor changes. For major things, save them for the new year unless there's an immediate requirement (like the blindfold regulations). But there's no reason minor clarifications couldn't be added mid-year. Yes, you don't want to have 14 revisions throughout the year, but having 2 wouldn't be bad.
jbcm627 (2010-04-09 00:35:16 +0000)
[quote="BryanLogan":1b8l07lc]I'd vote against having an official schedule. With a deadline, some things might be put into effect without adequate discussion. I would like to see a goal that regulations take effect at the beginning of the year rather than discussing them at the beginning of the year.[/quote:1b8l07lc] You sort of contradicted yourself there - no deadline, but regulations should take effect [at a set time] at the beginning of the year? Or do you just mean there should be a goal instead of hard deadline? Either way, if there isn't room for adequate discussion during a month or two before a deadline/goal, I don't see how even more time would help. If the board doesn't have a good decision based on current discussion, it can probably be put off until the next revision. Without a deadline (or goal), how do you keep discussion from drawing out over 4+ months like it has? [quote="BryanLogan":1b8l07lc]But I wouldn't see any issue with having multiple revisions of the regulations done throughout the year for minor changes. For major things, save them for the new year unless there's an immediate requirement (like the blindfold regulations). But there's no reason minor clarifications couldn't be added mid-year. Yes, you don't want to have 14 revisions throughout the year, but having 2 wouldn't be bad.[/quote:1b8l07lc] Alright, but how do you draw the line between major and minor? Changing "should" to "must" might make a big difference. Just save everything for the next revision, unless it is immediate as you said. Also, if organizers/delegates aren't informed of changes (say, a new scrambling program) in the middle of the year and don't check this forum regularly, changes could go into effect without them being aware of it. At this point, I can't be sure which set of regulations will be official for competitions I'm planning in May and June. I would rather know in advance when changes will be coming into effect so I (and others) can plan accordingly.
BryanLogan (2010-04-09 02:05:22 +0000)
[quote="jbcm627":1kypwu7b]Or do you just mean there should be a goal instead of hard deadline?[/quote:1kypwu7b] A goal, not a hard deadline. I would hope that the major changes could be agreed upon so that some things could take effect on Jan 1st (like add/drop events/format changes). [quote="jbcm627":1kypwu7b] Alright, but how do you draw the line between major and minor? Changing "should" to "must" might make a big difference. Just save everything for the next revision, unless it is immediate as you said. [/quote:1kypwu7b] If it makes a big difference, then it's not a minor change. When the change is discussed, people can weigh-in on the consequences of changing it.
Lucas (2010-04-09 23:54:17 +0000)
I'm actually in favor of starting discussion in October, with a goal of having the rules in effect early January. That way, regulations apply exactly to the competitions in the years they are intended.
Ron (2010-04-11 18:42:14 +0000)
For me the exact date for finalising regulations is not that important. January, February, March, April are all fine. The main thing is that next time we should stick to the original planning and we should start discussions earlier. Sorry that it took such a long time. It has been an extremely busy time here.
jbcm627 (2010-04-11 20:30:53 +0000)
Alright, let me give an example scenario: 2 competitors are preparing for a competition at the end of April. Both competitors have magics that do not lie completely flat: one side is above 2 tiles high, but below 45 degrees. * Competitor A notices that 45 degree magic angles will be allowed in the new set of regulations. He [i:f55oeydx]assumes[/i:f55oeydx] the regulations will come into effect soon, and therefore does not restring his magic, and does nothing different when practicing. * Competitor B notices that 45 degree magic angles will be allowed in the new set of regulations. He [i:f55oeydx]does not assume[/i:f55oeydx] the regulations will come into effect soon, and re-strings his magic and practices making the magic lie flat. At the competition at the end of April: * If the new regulations are official, competitor B has wasted time practicing making his magic lie flat, and has wasted time re-stringing his magic, and is annoyed. * If the new regulations are not official, competitor A gets a +2 on most solves, and is annoyed. The assumptions made by the competitors could easily have been corrected by an announced goal/deadline for when regulations should become official.
Ron (2010-04-11 20:36:48 +0000)
Hi Jim, I agree with you, it is just a matter of time on my side. The new regulations will be in place for all competitions after this weekend. Ron
jbcm627 (2010-04-11 20:44:03 +0000)
[quote="Ron":2e9w1w1n]Hi Jim, I agree with you, it is just a matter of time on my side. The new regulations will be in place for all competitions after this weekend. Ron[/quote:2e9w1w1n] Ok, thanks for letting me know. But I'm less concerned about how long it takes to actually get through the regulations - if it takes 4 months, it takes 4 months - I understand that this isn't always something you can help. I'm more concerned about seeing an announcement made well in advance stating a goal/deadline (or changes in a goal/deadline) for when new regulations should become official.