Wild guess here, but is it that your challenge gets much less attention than the usual challenge series, therefore you start complaining about not getting enough attention span from players?
Well here’s a crazy million dolar idea: how about you make an actually decent, well formulated, consistent and most of all, FUN challenge for us to participate?
Maybe then we’ll focus on yours a little bit more
As said previously by others in this thread, the most interesting challenges sort themselves out and get at the top of the forum feed. And that’s not only for long lasting series, but also one-time-only challenges (like La Marche 1960)
Also, why would you want to have 50 participants on a single challenge? It’s extremely demanding and time consuming. Some CSR judging rounds got heavily delayed because of that.
The point of a challenge is not to gather everyone and their mothers around the same fireplace, it’s to gather some people that like your idea and have fun together
I remember having over 50 entries in the last CSR I hosted (CSR137) - but by keeping the initial reviews for each car short and sweet, I was able to complete the entire review phase sooner than expected.
And I was just thinking it would be nice to gather by the fireplace. And in fact, when there are only 5 participants, the evaluation is much easier. It just seems to me very laborious to create a large task if there are only 3 participants. And 50 is just interesting, since one person will have so many gifts at once. At the same time, the more cars, the worse the quality of reviews, as in QFC. Therefore, I do not see this as a big difficulty. Now it has become much easier to drive data from one poster, for those who like it, but for complete convenience it would be convenient to have a printed text.
Well sometimes challenges fail and have very few participants. That’s just how life is. You can’t force people to enter a challenge, so I can’t see what’s the point of bringing up a low number of entries due to just a few people liking the challenge enough.
The quality of reviews is purely the responsibility of the host, and it’s not set in stone. If there’s more entries than expected, it’s understandable that the host requires more time (unless it’s specifically QFC which has a more restricted schedule).
It’s fine if you don’t like what the host said about your car, after all it’s just his opinions and thoughts about your entry. If that’s the case, then don’t participate in any challenge that said person hosts. There’s no need to limit creativity and variety of challenges just because “some get lost in time”.
QFC review quality is a very, very special case of review quality. Hosts are expected to put their reviews out in about one week, and the challenge is intended to have short reviews - I initially put in a limit of 140 characters per review, but that was quickly done away with.
If you want a detailed, involved review of your car, there’s other challenges you can enter. If you want a review of your car within a week of the challenge closing and a new round every 2-4 weeks, there’s QFC. QFC occupies a unique position on the forum, and short reviews are an intrinsic part of that.
Yes, some hosts have tried doing CSR-length reviews for QFC. A lot of them have ended up regretting trying to do that with the 1 week time limit. 1 week for reviews is manageable and sustainable if people keep reviews short.