I suggest re-naming From: "London Python Dojo" To : "London Python Party"
Please note that "The Public" are consistently [1] Googling for "Python Party" more than "Python Dojo". And Party is totally less martial-artsy. [1] http://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore?q=python+dojo#q=python%20dojo%2C%20%20python%20party&cmpt=q On 15 July 2013 13:40, Jonathan Hartley <tart...@tartley.com> wrote: > I guess that makes sense: With the dojo we want to encourage > participation, whereas with the game challenges I was thinking of, they are > optimised to producing finished, working projects (where a proven track > record is a good positive indicator.) > > Jonathan > > > > On 15/07/13 13:33, Stestagg wrote: > > I wonder, with the dojo happening every month, and most people turning up > most times, if this might turn into a bit of a popularity contest. > > If a leader won last time, then people will be more likely to go for the > 'safe option' and join that person next time. > > I do like the current method of having random team choices > > Steve > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:14 PM, René Dudfield <ren...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That could work with a theme... the goal doesn't have to be a game? >> It's more inventing the problem as you go? >> >> Unrelated thought for a good exercise... new requirements are introduced >> at half time... and then 5 minutes before the end... like real life. >> On Jul 15, 2013 2:05 PM, "Jonathan Hartley" <tart...@tartley.com> wrote: >> >>> I don't think this helps, but it's a model I think is otherwise widely >>> applicable, so I'll spread the seed: >>> >>> One model I've seen work well on game programming challenges is that >>> self-selected leaders will each pitch their project vision, and then >>> participants will decide which leader's team they would like to join. >>> Leaders may also prefer other pitches to their own, and decide to revoke or >>> merge pitches (generally, only one leader in a merged pitch will retain the >>> 'leader' tag) >>> >>> This has advantages that: >>> >>> * self-selected leaders are vetted by the crowd. If they are revealed, >>> during their pitch, to be blustering buffoons, then people can vote with >>> their feet. >>> >>> * everyone gets to work with the project/leadership that they choose, so >>> in theory happiness is maximised (for everyone apart from the 'failed' >>> project leaders.) >>> >>> * projects which are popular are allocated correspondingly generous >>> personpower. >>> >>> The disadvantages are: >>> >>> * It isn't remotely relevant to our current dojo format >>> >>> * It doesn't give even distribution of team sizes >>> >>> Jonathan >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12/07/13 20:53, xtian wrote: >>> >>> I like the sound of this - Scrapheap Challenge style. You're right, it >>> would take a bit more organisation though. >>> >>> On 12 Jul 2013, at 14:31, Alistair Broomhead < >>> alistair.broomh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Something that may may not work (I guess it would take a fair amount >>> of organisation) once a challenge has been picked, we ask people to >>> volunteer as team leaders, they get a git repo set up and write tests, but >>> their main role is to advise their team and give them a nudge on things >>> which are stopping them from progressing. This would mean that each team >>> has an 'expert', but I guess it would also mean people who were willing to >>> take this role would have to bring a laptop off their own -an issue for me >>> as I don't own one... >>> On 12 Jul 2013 14:19, "Javier Llopis" <jav...@correo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >> Another person could simply say: mmm... interesting but... not for my >>>> >> level. And stop coming. Do you really want this? >>>> > >>>> > When all's said and done, if someone doesn't think it's for them, then >>>> > it's not for them. We can try to be as accommodating as possible, but >>>> > you can't please all the people all the time. >>>> > >>>> >>>> ...And in this case, I would rather try to keep the expert coders in >>>> instead of the newbies. Better be challenged than bored. >>>> >>>> Just my 2p >>>> >>>> J >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> python-uk mailing list >>>> python-uk@python.org >>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> python-uk mailing list >>> python-uk@python.org >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> python-uk mailing >>> listpython-uk@python.orghttp://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jonathan Hartley tart...@tartley.com http://tartley.com >>> Made of meat. +44 7737 062 225 twitter/skype: tartley >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> python-uk mailing list >>> python-uk@python.org >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> python-uk mailing list >> python-uk@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > python-uk mailing > listpython-uk@python.orghttp://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk > > > > -- > Jonathan Hartley tart...@tartley.com http://tartley.com > Made of meat. +44 7737 062 225 twitter/skype: tartley > > > > _______________________________________________ > python-uk mailing list > python-uk@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk > > -- Love regards etc David Miller http://www.deadpansincerity.com 07854 880 883
_______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
