Contest Alert: Fool's Gold

[Oufa 3,734]

lol. really?
you think it's nice golds? 

[Patokus 24]

Good :D

[Zev_merkava 63]

Where are the rules for this contest (Fool's Gold video, 1 April 2016)?

 

Everything that looks like a link to the contest rules seems to link to the announcement of the winners, but I want to see the official announcement of the rules.

 

EDIT: the reason I wanted to see the rules (which seem to have been hidden...) was that I also noticed the extra 6 seconds in the winning entry, and wanted to review the rules. Of course, this topic is now locked, so instead of replying to those who discussed the extra time, all I can do is edit my own comment. Please see the comments in this topic that I "liked".

 

The extra time is a nit-picky issue, so I guess it's something of a judgement-call...

Edited April 11, 2016 by Zev_merkava

[bombersniperpro_111 1]

Thank you! I did.

[Guest]

Congrats to winners.

[DeadBolt 54]

The Real winners would be those who caught the 50k gold,....
 

[Anonono 1,233]

1st place's video was more than 30 seconds long...

[Sir.Diegold 4]

I saw two but was kill-all golds

[Canada_wins 145]

1st place's video was more than 30 seconds long...

Good point.

I never bothered to consider that.

So, to see if you were taking things on out context, I rewatched that vid to find out if at least 6 seconds of it was not of a Tanki game. What did I find? All of the vid (except maybe 1 second) is of the Tanki game, so the person went at least 5 seconds over the contest's rules.

Maybe Tanki made the same mistake I did.

Even so, to be fair they should give the 2nd place person the 1st place reward, the 3rd the 2nd place's, and the 4th the 3rd place's.

[theFiringHand 21,351]

I know about those extra 6 seconds. The point is though, that those 6 seconds did not contribute in any way to make the winner's entry better. Hence my decision.

[Canada_wins 145]

But it still broke the OBJECTIVE rule.

 

EDIT: My personal view is that the intent/"spirit" of rules are more important than their wording/"letter".

The only reason I argued for the wording/"letter" of this rule is because the intent/"spirit" of it was not mentioned or even implicit.

So what do I mean for those who don't understand these big words?

I mean that there are times rules should give their intentions, so that people will be FAIR in being FLEXIBLE.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Canada_wins