PLANE CHALLENGE 2020 - 2021 - Judges corner

[IanW]

After lengthy discussions (mostly serious :) ), between the organisers and the eminent panel of appointed judges, we have established the judging criteria.

The winner will be the person who achieves the highest aggregate score in the following categories:
1. Degree of complexity (C) (1- 5)
2. Workmanship (W) (1- 5)
3. Design/Innovation (D) (1 - 5)
4. Result (R) (0 - 5)

The final score will be the average of all 3 judges scores for C(W+D+R) i.e., all 3 judges must agree on the score for C for each entry but their individual scores for W, D and R may vary.
The overall challenge winner, apart from bragging rights, will receive a token trophy, something akin to the highly prized urn that holds “The Ashes”, which will be so prized by the winner, it'll be mentioned prominently in his/her will. :;

When you have finished your plane and are happy it’s ready for judging, sum up your build experience in no more than 200 words, concentrating on such aspects as any special technique(s) required, major problems overcome, and perhaps what inspired your design/project if applicable (simply wanting to make a plane is perfectly acceptable!)
POST this description, along with a maximum of 10 photos in the thread which will be headed “Done & ready for judging” or something similar. This thread will be attached as a “sticky” so it remains near the top of this page & easy to find. You need not rush to post the finished item, if you complete your plane in plenty of time, you can live with it a while and make minor tweaks until you feel you have it as good as it can be, but don’t forget to post the final version by the due date.

OK, so now you all know what you are doing.

But wait, there’s more!
In order to spice things up a little, and perhaps entice a few more lurkers who are still fence-sitting to ‘avago’, we have decided to offer a prize. We will still be choosing a ‘serious’ winner, but given the wide range of skills & experience being brought to the competition, we thought it would be most fair if everyone was in with a chance, so the winner of the prize will be decided by lottery. The conditions for going in the draw will be the same as for The Challenge, you must register by starting a thread, make a reasonable effort to document the build, and post the result in the “Done” thread.
The prize is a set of layout tools (cutting & pin marking gauge, scribing knife and re-calibratabe square all in Olive wood & brass as shown: 481930

If you have any questions of the judges or organisers, please ask them in this thread; we will try to answer them here provided they are of a general nature and do not confer any advantage on any particular person. Any answers or advice given will be visible to all – PMs will not be responded to!

OK, that’s the “serious” business, now back to the fun part….
:U
Cheers,

[Simplicity]

I just want to say, how honoured I am to have three of the nicest gentlemen this forum has ever had the privilege of having to judge my humble plane.
I sincerely wish all of them a long life, there tools are always sharp , there glass never empty.
There stash of timber always full.


Long live the Judges.
Your most humble servant,

Cheers Matt.

[Bushmiller]

I think the section that has the three addresses for the delivery of red wine is missing from my version of this thead. Could you please supply the same? (Preferably by PM to maintain discretion and utmost secrecy.)

:)

Regards
Paul

PS: I note wth some distress that sycophancy is alive and well in the Victorian capital. Fortunately I just know it will fall on deaf ears.

[Simplicity]

I think the section that has the three addresses for the delivery of red wine is missing from my version of this thead. Could you please supply the same? (Preferably by PM to maintain discretion and utmost secrecy.)

:)

Regards
Paul

PS: I note wth some distress that sycophancy is alive and well in the Victorian capital. Fortunately I just know it will fall on deaf ears.

I’ve taken care of the judge’s needs regarding “beverages” Paul.
No need to go there, just move along.

Cheers Matt.

[doug3030]

Well, now that I know that at least one of the judges has a thing for Olive wood, I might have to dig a bit deeper into the timber vault.

There's some Olive in there somewhere :wink: About 10 trunks of it I think from memory :2tsup:

[Bushmiller]

I’ve taken care of the judge’s needs regarding “beverages” Paul.
No need to go there, just move along.

Cheers Matt.

Oh. :sad1:

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

Well, now that I know that at least one of the judges has a thing for Olive wood, I might have to dig a bit deeper into the timber vault.

There's some Olive in there somewhere :wink: About 10 trunks of it I think from memory :2tsup:

The proverbial olive branch?

:wink:

Regards
Paul

[Picko]

Ooh, they're nice. Happy I'm off the fence.

[Sheets]

If one of the criteria is "complexity", looks like Simplicity gets eliminated straight away. I'd protest that, Matt - (should also be "degree of simplicity" - that would help me out, too). And then there's "Workmanship" - might be contsrued as Gender bias (blatant use of curves not withstanding)?

Just trying to level the planing field :wink:. (Should also be marks for best/most puns. Let's face it; with six months to go, we might as well get credit for it :D).

[Simplicity]

If one of the criteria is "complexity", looks like Simplicity gets eliminated straight away. I'd protest that, Matt - (should also be "degree of simplicity" - that would help me out, too). And then there's "Workmanship" - might be contsrued as Gender bias (blatant use of curves not withstanding)?

Just trying to level the planing field :wink:. (Should also be marks for best/most puns. Let's face it; with six months to go, we might as well get credit for it :D).

Sheets,
There bloody good points,
If I’m being looked at or my plane in a way that discredits me just because of my “name”
That’s wrong !!!!

I’m going to look into a Royal commission on this.
Heads will roll,

Cheers Matt.

[Mountain Ash]

Perhaps a 5th category (or maybe 6th, after the "Best use of a pun") could be ingenuity. Those of us still in lockdown face extra challenges when it comes to sourcing materials (although some may protest that we have extra time available :oo: to offset this)

[IanW]

Hey folks, I hate sounding like a wet blanket, but please ease off on the general chatter in this thread. While the spirit of levity & camaraderie the challenge has generated is great to see, this thread is meant for the reasonably serious business. There may be some genuine questions that need to be asked, and it will all get lost in the general clamour if this keeps up......
:cool:
Cheers,

[IanW]

Perhaps a 5th category (or maybe 6th, after the "Best use of a pun") could be ingenuity. Those of us still in lockdown face extra challenges when it comes to sourcing materials (although some may protest that we have extra time available :oo: to offset this)

I think item 3 covers that, M.A, ("innovation"). :wink:

Fletty came up with the judging criteria, and personally, I think he done good - they should help level the playing field a little. With any challenge like this there is going to be widely differing levels of skill & experience and access to machinery, which is going to make judging a very tricky affair.

I'm sure being named as a "winner" will bring a warm glow to someone, but the main purpose is to get as many people as possible having a crack at making a plane. Those like yourself who've already been there know what satisfaction making a good working tool brings, but that there's also some anxious moments and frequently, minor disasters to be negotiated along the way. The idea of the draw prize is to help keep spirits up so you'll all press on to the finish.... :U

Cheers,

[doug3030]

Complexity - a complex issue.

I note that complexity is a multiplier for the calculation of the overall result.

Than means that it is going to play a very large role in the rankings of the entries. Therefore I feel it would be nice if we could get some sort of an idea as to how the judges see "complexity".

Would a plane with a lot of adjustable parts be deemed more complex than a pair of planes designed to make matching profiles, but are not adjustable but get their "complexity" from the high degree of accuracy required to make two complementary profiles on the workpieces? Would a Japanese plane consisting of only a body, blade and wedge but needing the bed and blade to meet with microscopic precision at a precise angle be considered complex despite it's simple appearance?

Would the complexity of the finished plane be assessed in isolation or would the tools available to the maker help determine the score? To cite an extreme example, Terry Gordon, in his workplace with all his precision jigs, fixtures and methods of work would probably find it simpler to make his most complex moving fillister plane than I would find it to make Paul Sellers poor mans rebate plane which uses a chisel as a blade.

My thoughts on the matter are that I can see that this would encourage people to push their limits to step up past the simpler plane builds. However, putting that much emphasis on complexity may also discourage people from making a couple of simpler planes to build some skills before working up to the more complex.

Lets do the maths:


The winner will be the person who achieves the highest aggregate score in the following categories:
1. Degree of complexity (C) (1- 5)
2. Workmanship (W) (1- 5)
3. Design/Innovation (D) (1 - 5)
4. Result (R) (0 - 5)
The final score will be the average of all 3 judges scores for C(W+D+R)

- simple plane (C=1) with perfect scores for al 3 other attributes - 1 x (5+5+5) = 15
- complex plane (C=5) but minimal in all other aspects - 5 x (1+1+1) = 15

The most perfectly executed simple plane maxes out at 15 points and therefore cannot possibly outscore the poorly made badly designed complex plane which will score a minimum of 15 points so long as it can at least mark the wood, thereby avoiding a zero score for Result.

I know it looks good on paper to reduce the judging process to a mathematical equation but I can see this taking the competition in directions it was not intended to.

For my 2c worth, I would rather see a judging table of functional, well-made and designed planes made up to the complexity that the maker is able to stretch to reach rather than a lot of overly complex planes poorly made and designed because the makers were driven by the competition parameters to stretch beyond their limits before they have developed and consolidated their skills.

If the current judging model is the one we finish up using then a lot of care will have to be taken in assigning the scores for "complexity" more so than anything else.

[Oldgreybeard]

The criteria for the judging has been discussed and accepted by the judging panel , Matt and myself. We will monitor the situation on a regular basis but it is not a question of
If the current judging model is the one we finish up using This is the criteria which has been adopted.

If you have suggestions by all means raise them through your thread - I read all updates to everyone's thread each day and will ensure that your suggestions are considered. But please do not use this thread for other than posting your submissions to the challenge as Ian has outlined. This thread is to help them do the job we have asked of them.

Thank you
Bob

[doug3030]

If you have suggestions by all means raise them through your thread - I read all updates to everyone's thread each day and will ensure that your suggestions are considered. But please do not use this thread for other than posting your submissions to the challenge as Ian has outlined. This thread is to help them do the job we have asked of them.

Apologies if I have posted this where I should not have. Obviously I interpreted what Ian said very differently to how you did.


Hey folks, I hate sounding like a wet blanket, but please ease off on the general chatter in this thread. While the spirit of levity & camaraderie the challenge has generated is great to see, this thread is meant for the reasonably serious business. There may be some genuine questions that need to be asked, and it will all get lost in the general clamour if this keeps up......

I thought what I said was "reasonably serious business" and "genuine questions that need to be asked". But maybe it was just general chatter in the spirit of levity and camaraderie.

[IanW]

Bob, I think Doug has a serious question and it does affect everyone, so I reckon we should address it here. I'll give it a go:

To be honest, I misread Fletty's scoring system, I took it that all marks were additive, or I would've questioned that myself - my oversight! :doh:

Bear in mind that the real "winners" may not be those who get the highest scores - the experience & the boost to confidence for first-timers will be worth far more than any external accolades.

And I can assure you, Doug, having marked many an exam paper in my time that even at the highest academic levels, there are elements that are subjective when it comes to grading any assignment- no perfect scoring system has ever been devised, to my knowledge.

"Complexity" is going to have a degree of subjectivity, that's undeniable - what may be complex to (a) may be a cakewalk for (b), due to previous experience, access to gear, etc. I foresee some heated (but friendly!) discussions between the judges on this one. It may entail all sorts of aspects of the build, from concept to realisation, not simply how many knurled screws or bits of brass are involved. Furthermore, an overly complex design could easily end up having a negative on 'workmanship' and 'result', particularly for a newbie, so a high score for complexity may not be reflected by high marks in those categories. However, I think we should have some regard to the demands of a complex build - I don't think anyone will argue if we rate a skewed infill badger plane a bit higher for complexity than a scratch-stock?

In the end, it's highly likely we won't have too much trouble picking a 'serious' winner, whom nobody will deny deserves the plaudits. Let's hope an equally deserving person goes home with the draw prize, a lot is learnt about plane making, and most of all, a lot of fun is had by all! :U

I hope that goes someway to allaying your concerns..
Cheers,

[Simplicity]

The main adjective that Bob put to me at the very beginnings day one, and we have whole heartedly stuck too, and will continue too stick to like crap on a nappy is the doing bit, this is a individual “Challenge” it is NOT a competition, the prize for winning is “creating ” a tool you can use and be proud of, your own personal objectives are what you are aiming for.
Irrelevant of what tools or gear you may have or skills.
Hence why the fun trophy is worth a staggering $3 AU.
People don’t get hung up on this or that,we want to enjoy and learn from your journey.
Just by entering you have won already.

Please stop making me talk grown up it hurts.

Cheers Matt.

[doug3030]

To be honest, I misread Fletty's scoring system, I took it that all marks were additive, or I would've questioned that myself - my oversight! :doh:

Ian, I certainly agree that there should be a reward for complexity, but in proportion.

In this system there are two factors with 1 - 5 points and one with 0 - 5 points but complexity can, working as a multiplier, affect the score for a plane by anywhere from 0 to 60 points. Really, what is the most important thing about a plane? That it does its job? You could make an extremely complex plane to do the same job as a simple plane if you wanted to. You might not win many points for innovation and design but whatever points you do get in the other categories will be multiplied by five, whereas the plane that does just as good a job, if not better, without the bells and whistles only gets its points multiplied by one because it's just a solid body, blade and a wedge.

I can see what was trying to be achieved with this system but I really think it will be driving the results away from where it was intended rather than towards it.

[IanW]

...... but complexity can, working as a multiplier, affect the score for a plane by anywhere from 0 to 60 points....

Um, that's highly unlikely, Doug. The minimum score for complexity is 1, so your minimum multiplier on that side can't produce a zero product. You would have to have zero for all of the other categories to end up with a zero. That person isn't in with a very good chance of taking the laurels, are they?!


...... I can see what was trying to be achieved with this system but I really think it will be driving the results away from where it was intended rather than towards it......

Well, since you've stirred the pot, I guess we need to consider your concerns at the next judges & organisers meeting. I'll get back to you all on this point...

Cheers,

[doug3030]

Well, since you've stirred the pot, I guess we need to consider your concerns at the next judges & organisers meeting. I'll get back to you all on this point...

Thanks Ian, I appreciate that you have heard and are considering my concerns instead of dismissing them out of hand.


Um, that's highly unlikely, Doug. The minimum score for complexity is 1, so your minimum multiplier on that side can't produce a zero product. You would have to have zero for all of the other categories to end up with a zero. That person isn't in with a very good chance of taking the laurels, are they?!

Just to be clear on that Ian, the point I was making was how many points the multiplier can affect an individual score; I was not saying that the multiplier could cause a particular plane to score zero.

Any plane with a complexity of 1 means the other three figures are multiplied by 1 therefore 1 x (5 +5 + 5) = 15, same as 5 + 5 + 5 = 15,
therefore zero affect from the multiplier.
Compare that to a plane complexity of 5 where 5 x (5 +5 + 5) = 75, which is 60 more than 5 + 5 + 5 = 15.

Hence the single attribute of complexity can mean anywhere from zero to 60 points on a given entry. Is complexity really up to 12 times more important than any of the other criteria? I mean, seriously, complexity is not always a desirable attribute in any case.

[Bushmiller]

I feel obliged to comment, although in doing this I hope I am not perpetuating the very thing the panel of judges wish to prevent and I am a culprit in this regard. So I apologise for my part in initially directing this thread down a less than serious path. Clearly the intent is to state the objectives and provide a vehicle for questions about planes. That is admirable.

However I see this as a limited invitation to discuss. The "Challenge" is purely on the making of a hand plane and we should be wary of questioning the people giving up their time to what in many ways will be an equally rewarding quest for them too. I would hate to think that I was responsible for it becoming a thankless task like so many volunteer positions:

I respect the wish that this particular thread is kept for sensible discussion (but not including re-writing rules). My philosophy on the Challenge is that I am privileged, as a member of the Forum, to be invited to participate. I do not expect to build the best plane, it is not important that for me to have superior skills to anybody else, because I don't, and nor is it important that I come out the other end with a prize. It is, however, important that I am part of a like-minded group of people and I am reveling in seeing other participants' development including their own trials and tribulations. This aspect makes the Challenge differ from conventional competitions and I have consequently deliberately avoided using the word "competition." I don't see it as that. Perhaps it is where I have arrived in life. Think full circle and an adult version of "Show and tell."

I would also add that it is more likely that we will attract additional participants if the Challenge is seen as one for ourselves more than the other people in the class. Enough from me. I hope you get the drift.

Regards
Paul

[banjopicks]

I feel obliged to comment, although in doing this I hope I am not perpetuating the very thing the panel of judges wish to prevent and I am a culprit in this regard. So I apologise for my part in initially directing this thread down a less than serious path. Clearly the intent is to state the objectives and provide a vehicle for questions about planes. That is admirable.

However I see this as a limited invitation to discuss. The "Challenge" is purely on the making of a hand plane and we should be wary of questioning the people giving up their time to what in many ways will be an equally rewarding quest for them too. I would hate to think that I was responsible for it becoming a thankless task like so many volunteer positions:

I respect the wish that this particular thread is kept for sensible discussion (but not including re-writing rules). My philosophy on the Challenge is that I am privileged, as a member of the Forum, to be invited to participate. I do not expect to build the best plane, it is not important that to superior skills to anybody else, because I don't, and nor is it important that I come out the other end with a prize. It is, however, important that I am part of a like-minded group of people and I am reveling in seeing other participants' development including their own trials and tribulations. This aspect makes the Challenge differ from conventional competitions and I have consequently deliberately avoided using the word "competition." I don't see it as that. Perhaps it is where I have arrived in life. Think full circle and an adult version of "Show and tell."

I would also add that it is more likely that we will attract additional participants if the Challenge is seen as one for ourselves more than the other people in the class. Enough from me. I hope you get the drift.

Regards
Paul

I couldn't have said it as well but I totally agree and let's get on with building whatever we have in mind. The best part is learning from others of similar mind and just getting to show it off in the end. I'm loving this.

[yvan]

Would the esteemed judges of the 2020-21 Woodworking Plane Challenge entertain the idea of a Popcorn Prize bestowed on the plane voted Best by the army of non-participating forumites who have pulled up a chair and ordered refreshments to watch the enthralling contest?

A worthy foil to the Archibald's Packers Prize I would say!

Cheers Yvan

[IanW]

Would the esteemed judges of the 2020-21 Woodworking Plane Challenge entertain the idea of a Popcorn Prize bestowed on the plane voted Best by the army of non-participating forumites who have pulled up a chair and ordered refreshments to watch the enthralling contest?

A worthy foil to the Archibald's Packers Prize I would say!...

Indeed yvan, that possibility has already been discussed, and we will quite likely set up a poll when the time comes....
Cheers,

[Simplicity]

This may inspire some of the people here, who are doing wood bodied planes.
A group I follow on some other site, that I won’t mention.


Tool as Art - Art as tool (https://www.facebook.com/groups/248944098868856/permalink/1074572776305980?sfns=mo)

Cheers Matt.

[Bushmiller]

I keep checking this section to see if somebody else has entered the challenge.

At the time of posting there are eighteen participants. One of the benefits of the challenge is that everybody comes out of this with with something: A plane of course! One that you can use.

:2tsup:

So I am expecting more Forumites to put up their hand.

:cool:

Regards
Paul

[derekcohen]

Thanks Ian, I appreciate that you have heard and are considering my concerns instead of dismissing them out of hand.



Just to be clear on that Ian, the point I was making was how many points the multiplier can affect an individual score; I was not saying that the multiplier could cause a particular plane to score zero.

Any plane with a complexity of 1 means the other three figures are multiplied by 1 therefore 1 x (5 +5 + 5) = 15, same as 5 + 5 + 5 = 15,
therefore zero affect from the multiplier.
Compare that to a plane complexity of 5 where 5 x (5 +5 + 5) = 75, which is 60 more than 5 + 5 + 5 = 15.

Hence the single attribute of complexity can mean anywhere from zero to 60 points on a given entry. Is complexity really up to 12 times more important than any of the other criteria? I mean, seriously, complexity is not always a desirable attribute in any case.

Doug, we agreed to use this formula: cn=v=fλn c n = v = f λ n

I trust that explains it well enough.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[doug3030]

Doug, we agreed to use this formula: cn=v=fλn c n = v = f λ n

I trust that explains it well enough.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Thanks for clarifying that Derek. :C

But surely you would need to use a logarithmic scale for n rather than a linear one. :rolleyes:

[Oldgreybeard]

Ian had attempted to simplify the formula to be used to judge our challenge (post #1), but only served to confuse us as he presented the complex formula as a simple integer primary school equation.. wrong Ian .. we are much smarter than that- some of us even went to secondary school and can understand more complete explanations. Derek defined the judges agreed formula in much more detail as cn=v=fλn c n = v = f λ n

I have carried out extensive research and analysis of this equation over the past 1/2 hour or so and can say categorically that the equation has nothing whatsoever to do with arithmetic, algebra, calculus , trigonometry or even quantum mechanics - NO, the answer is in Derek's impressive qualifications in clinical psychology. As one uneducated in these matters to others similarly unqualified, my research revealed that the formula is used to define the effects of the brainwaves emitted in different areas of the brain when subjected to stimuli from the optical nerve, cones and rods and how the brain interprets these stimuli to define likes and dislikes (f in the formula) and to rate these in a manner that we, who are unfamiliar with intricacies of such matters, equate as good, better and best (n in the formula).

Doug3030 was almost there when he suggested a logarithmic scale, but my research suggests the the application of calculus, derivations and correlations are probably a better fit , although as I said in the preceding paragraph cn=v=fλn c n = v = f λ n is not purely a mathematical formula as we, woodworkers, would envisage. My research this morning failed to find any formula which would define the level of achievement and satisfaction I expect to experience when I complete the challenge. Whether someone judges it as 99/100 or 9/100 is largely irrelevant if I can hold my head high and say I made it, it works like I thought it would, I did the best I could and I am proud of my achievement.

I trust we all get to experience that feeling.

Cheers
Bob

[Bushmiller]

My research this morning failed to find any formula which would define the level of achievement and satisfaction I expect to experience when I complete the challenge. Whether someone judges it as 99/100 or 9/100 is largely irrelevant if I can hold my head high and say I made it, it works like I thought it would, I did the best I could and I am proud of my achievement.

I trust we all get to experience that feeling.

Cheers
Bob

Nicely said Bob.

My earlier post decrying frivolous comment prevents me elaborating, but thank you for the research.

Regards
Paul

[Mountain Ash]

Hi Derek, Alan and Ian. I am happy to present my offering. Are you going to set up the thread as indicated or should I just post it here?

[IanW]

Hi Derek, Alan and Ian. I am happy to present my offering. Are you going to set up the thread as indicated or should I just post it here?

No, hold off a bit & I'll set up the 'done' thread for you shortly. It will get a bit shambolic if the completed planes are posted in individual threads. I'll set it up for you within the next 24 hours, I promise......
:)

[derekcohen]

I agree with Ian.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Bushmiller]

I saw a plane testing thread which looked as though it might be of interest to those of you still looking for blades or those where the absence of a blade is the only thing preventing you from entering the challenge.

The thread is by gwertyu:

Plane iron sharpness testing (woodworkforums.com) (https://www.woodworkforums.com/f152/plane-iron-sharpness-testing-239322)

He links to a detailed Youtube vid, but this is the shortened version.

Plane Iron Test Results Fast And To The Point - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DykzsRWznro)

I hope it is of some interest to you, but not enough to relegate me to bottom of the challenge again.

:wink:

Regards
Paul

Ps: It has been a bit quiet on the challenge front. Did we do the Galipoli thing and down tools for the festive celebrations and play football instead? Also, how long should we indulge in the revelry? It's just that the alcohol supplies are running low and my stamina is waning.

:)

[Simplicity]

I saw a plane testing thread which looked as though it might be of interest to those of you still looking for blades or those where the absence of a blade is the only thing preventing you from entering the challenge.

The thread is by gwertyu:

Plane iron sharpness testing (woodworkforums.com) (https://www.woodworkforums.com/f152/plane-iron-sharpness-testing-239322)

He links to a detailed Youtube vid, but this is the shortened version.

Plane Iron Test Results Fast And To The Point - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DykzsRWznro)

I hope it is of some interest to you, but not enough to relegate me to bottom of the challenge again.

:wink:

Regards
Paul

Ps: It has been a bit quiet on the challenge front. Did we do the Galipoli thing and down tools for the festive celebrations and play football instead? Also, how long should we indulge in the revelry? It's just that the alcohol supplies are running low and my stamina is waning.

:)

Paul,

The Bitching will continue, till moral improves.

Or we fall down drunk(Only for those that enjoy a refreshing beverage).

Cheers Matt.

[Chief Tiff]

Ps: It has been a bit quiet on the challenge front. Did we do the Galipoli thing and down tools for the festive celebrations and play football instead? Also, how long should we indulge in the revelry? It's just that the alcohol supplies are running low and my stamina is waning.

Yep; having a holiday break. I dislike all forms of football but daughter supplied me with “Cards Against Star Wars” so have been playing that in lieu.

Still working on mine piecemeal; at this moment I’m discovering how far my woodturning skills have atrophied trying to knock out some handle designs.

[Simplicity]

People of the Plane Challenge

ATTENTION!!!!!!

So has Bob hinted suggested about in his thread.

Do we want a time extension.
“Time extension”
(June 30 2021)

Or would you prefer to leave it as is ending on 28 March 2021,

I have suggested to Bob that we put this to a vote.
With you the participants only sending Ian W(One of the Judges) your vote for either yes or no in a private message,
BUT there is one small RULE, you are to only message Ian with.

“Yes I want a time extension for the plane challenge” or “no to a time extension for the plane challenge”.

Any moaning, whinny, bitching, will invalid your vote, Ian doesn’t need or want to be involved in personal slang matches.

Besides I personally know he his very very busy with a large grumpy chainsaw at present.

If we get 70 percent yes we extend the end date.

How does that sound. Input please!

Cheers Matt.
Ps I’m voting yes for a “time extension”, like anybody of my generation wasting money at the local video arcade.

[doug3030]

If we get 70 percent yes we extend the end date.

How does that sound. Input please!
A point of order, Matt. Your proposal to make the change does not meet the necessary criteria as previously laid down. :doh:


I have just made an executive decision. Not sure that I have been appointed as such - but I did it anyhow.

Executive decision - No extensions will be granted unless approved by ALL members of this forum , their wives, partners and parents.
There is now according to Doug's calculation 197 days to go.

Cheers
Bob

[Simplicity]

A point of order, Matt. Your proposal to make the change does not meet the necessary criteria as previously laid down. :doh:

Doug,
I’m just after some input,

Cheers Matt

[doug3030]

Doug,
I’m just after some input,

Cheers Matt

You did see the smiley on the end of the post?

[Simplicity]

You did see the smiley on the end of the post?

No I missed that Doug.
My apologies.

Cheers Matt.

[doug3030]

No I missed that Doug.
My apologies.

I should have thought of that. I think it is because you do the forum on your phone that often your smilies don't show up on my computer, so possibly my computer smilies don't show up on your phone. :2tsup:

[Sheets]

Ok, I'm already finished, so an extension won't affect me. But I say that an extension for the right reasons (as Matt has explained) should certainly be granted and any outside assistance is ok as well.

Steve

[Bushmiller]

I agree with Steve. My own viewpoint is that the essence of the challenge is participation rather than meeting a deadline. Of course,so the challenge had a reasonable time frame, a finish date was set and it was done in the environment of lockdowns and worldwide pandemic. Arguably it is more desireable for participants to complete their project than be rejected for failing to meet the deadline.

I should point out my own disclaimer in that I am behind in the project. However, if I fail to meet the original deadline I am fine with that. For me it was, and still is ,the participation aspect that is important. Truthfully it never was a race., but I am comfortable with whatever is decided.
Regards
Paul

[Pittwater Pete]

I have not started yet but that is my own fault. Because I have just joined the fray, I will remain neutral.
Have fun.
Pete.

[Mountain Ash]

Ok, I'm already finished, so an extension won't affect me. But I say that an extension for the right reasons (as Matt has explained) should certainly be granted and any outside assistance is ok as well.

Steve

Ditto. The journey is as important as the destination....... :doh:. Cliche possibly but often true

[Cklett]

Hi, I think we do not need a vote. To me.it looks pretty like most are supportive.

I would like to see as many planes finished as possible. So my vote is "yes"



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Ironwood]

I too think we need to give as many as we can, the opportunity to produce a finished plane.
I am supportive of an extension.
A realistic timeframe needs to be set, maybe all entrants need to be contacted by PM by the judges to see how much extra time is required .
There has to be a line drawn somewhere .

[Simplicity]

Some very good points coming in,
It does seem quite a few are in favour of a Time extension,
If my maths is close, from today till the end of June is a 137 days.

Brads point is correct too, we need a line draw somewhere.

Cheers Matt.

[Simplicity]

There will be no Vote,
After discussions with Bob, and Ian W,

We have come to an conclusion, that most were in favour of a time extension none appear dead set against the idea.

The due date for your plane to be finished is now

30 JUNE 2021
TIME EXTENSION!!!


So get a move on people(This one including)

Cheers Matt/Bob [emoji41]

[labr@]

I just went to look at the final entries in the "Plane complete, ready for judging" thread and was shocked to see only a couple of entries had made it by closing time. The first post in the thread still says "just remember to post by the due date, which is 26.3.21.". Then I had a look around and found the date was extended. It might be an idea to update the thread with the new date.

I also notice that 1 other entry is in its own "Plane complete" thread rather than the official sticky one. Can this be incorporated into the sticky thread? It's a fine looking entry and it would be a shame if it slides off the page due to other posts.

I know I'm not an entrant but I think it would be good to remove the comment posts from the "Plane complete" thread to keep it simple for reviewing. I'm hoping there will be a people's choice (or popcorn prize as someone called it) poll and I think keeping the thread for entries only would make it easier for everyone including the official judges. I know this would mean extra work for someone so understand if its left as is.

[IanW]

Thanks for the heads-up Bob, I have had my eye off the ball a lot these last few weeks thanks to lots of family business - nothing serious, just all the drama & rigmarole of getting a (very) elderly parent settled into new digs - it's quite the process!

I have asked admin to move bellbodyboards' post lock stock & barrel into the designated spot. I could move it using 'edit' but then it would show under my name which could be a bit confusing.

Yairs, some of the entrants are very chattery alright, and have added a bit of chaff to the wheat, but we'll winnow it out at the end. One thing I do wish is that the blokes would go easy on the "reply with quote" button. It's often done just to comment on or reply to one line or phrase in a long post full of pics. I guess it's harder for those who use their phones, to edit the quote down to the sentence or phrase they want to comment on (& remove the pics that don't need duplicating unless you are calling attention to something in the pic itself), but it would sure clean things up a lot if you could do so....
:)
Cheers