Blitz 2023: Feedback and Reflective

[Negrek]

Another Review Blitz is now well over, and it's time to think back on how it went and how it could be even better in future years! There weren't any dramatic changes to the event's structure this year, but there are a couple things I'd like to think about going forward.

First, the topic of this thread's poll, when should we hold Blitz going forward? The event was originally conceived of as an end-of-year event to wrap up on obligations and kick-start new year's review goals. The date at which the event starts has crept forward steadily based on responses to yearly polls, to the point where it's now mostly in January. I'd like to try and settle on a consistent timeframe going forward, so please respond to the poll with when you think it would be best to hold the event!

Second, how did you like the week two catch-up theme? We've had several requests over the years for better incentives for catching up on stories rather than jumping between a lot of different ones, and this was our latest try at accommodating that request. Did it work well for you? Is there something else you think we should try?

Other than that, feel free to post how you thought the event went, what you liked or thought could be improved, and anything you'd like to see in the years to come. One way or another, I hope you enjoyed the event, and I look forward to our next Blitz!

 

[Ambyssin]

Speaking personally, I'm quite bummed with how far into January this blitz has been creeping. I think my personal participation speaks to that. It's just how my schedule works out with work. Entirely in January means I'm, at best, participating in one or two weeks tops.

Second, how did you like the week two catch-up theme? We've had several requests over the years for better incentives for catching up on stories rather than jumping between a lot of different ones, and this was our latest try at accommodating that request. Did it work well for you? Is there something else you think we should try?

I thought it worked out well in both ways. As a review, it incentivized me to push forward on some fics. I even managed to catch up with a few of them. And, like, prior to this Blitz the only fics I was ever caught up with were HoC and Fledglings. So, that's saying something.

As an author, week two was my biggest week for getting reviews on my chapter fic that were not just the first couple of parts. After the catch-up week, most of the engagement stopped. I'm not sure I would have gotten as much attention were it not for the theme. I'd love to see it return.

 

[K_S]

I kinda have the opposide problem. Per work, my load starts to clear up in jan. If we ran an even in december i'd only be able tonparticipate the first two weeks. Tail end december is a horrid time of year for me and electronics usually are banned/heavily restricted per respecting the religious reasons of my family.

This year was a huge exception as i was basically bed bound and couldnt do anything but electronics/read for huge chunks of time and was exempt from the usual practices.

I dont know if anyone else has simular obligation but i actually vote to do the event in febuary. It'll cause less friction with those with religious obligations (christian and catholic at least, i'm not too sure of other faiths holiday timelines but a quick skim of a holiday list did show feb to be rather light in that regard) and would adress some of the complaints about time/availability end of year brought up this year...

 

[K_S]

As for week 2...

I saw a lot of fics get attention overall that week. It made week one a "test the waters week" then week two became a "tear into what you liked best" sort of thing... Week one and twos challenge complimented each other well.

How did week 4 go down though? I was trying to casually gauge how fics were being tackled with that one and it was a bit of a "unable to tell" sort of thing.

 

[Spiteful Murkrow]

Another Review Blitz is now well over, and it's time to think back on how it went and how it could be even better in future years! There weren't any dramatic changes to the event's structure this year, but there are a couple things I'd like to think about going forward.

First, the topic of this thread's poll, when should we hold Blitz going forward? The event was originally conceived of as an end-of-year event to wrap up on obligations and kick-start new year's review goals. The date at which the event starts has crept forward steadily based on responses to yearly polls, to the point where it's now mostly in January. I'd like to try and settle on a consistent timeframe going forward, so please respond to the poll with when you think it would be best to hold the event!

I actually was one of those people who was quietly a bit happy that Blitz moved out into January this year, since it meant that the event didn't overlap with holidays where I'm normally prioritizing time with friends and family. If the event had to be moved, the main meta arguments for time slots I can see would be:

A: December as a "[YEAR] in review / best of [YEAR] / farewell [YEAR]" exercise, even if it's admittedly not my personal preference since holidays are holidays.
B: Some sort of fixed relative time slot to the annual anniversary event as something akin to a "mid-year" event. I'd suggest 6 months after said anniversary, but that unfortunately almost entirely overlaps with NaNoWriMo, perhaps counting down to the 6 month mark 4 weeks in advance could work?

Second, how did you like the week two catch-up theme? We've had several requests over the years for better incentives for catching up on stories rather than jumping between a lot of different ones, and this was our latest try at accommodating that request. Did it work well for you? Is there something else you think we should try?

I liked it, and it definitely encouraged me to go back to a number of stories that I had been stalled on for a while. It did feel a little biased towards "lots of short chapters" stories (e.x. reviewing the whole of Hoenn Short Stories Collection: The Elite in Week 2 would've earned a maximum of 74.5 points, versus a maximum of 62.5 in any other week from RB5) but I suppose that it's a general artifact of Review Blitz scoring in general, so I can't really fault Week 2 in particular for it.

Other than that, feel free to post how you thought the event went, what you liked or thought could be improved, and anything you'd like to see in the years to come. One way or another, I hope you enjoyed the event, and I look forward to our next Blitz!

I personally didn't have any issues with Review Blitz 5, and didn't come in with a ton of expectations other than a personal goal for trying to win prizes. Like yeah, the scoring seemed a bit biased to short chapters again this year, but not everyone's natural review style can grind out a ton of words in response to bite-sized chapters, so short of fiddling with the long chapter bonus, I'm not sure there's much that can be done there.

Something that I did think was probably worth putting some thought into tweaking for next time is that I noticed that some reviewers seemed to unfortunately go unrequited in terms of reviewing attention in spite of putting in a lot of effort reviewing ( @K_S was the most extreme example of this dynamic that I can think of, who according to the leaderboards posted 142 reviews in the event and received 3 total during the whole of RB5 from a forum search of his stories ). I also recall a couple points during the event where some participants mentioned in TRcord that they felt pretty disheartened about putting in a bunch of effort reviewing other stories only to not get much attention in return. I don't know whether or not things ultimately worked out for them by the end of Week 4, but it was something that I noticed.

Obviously, people are going to read whatever they want, and shouldn't be obligated to read one story or another in an event built around voluntary participation, but I do wonder if it'd be worth trying to cook up some sort of "pay it forward" bonus for reviews. I don't know whether that's something that works better in one particular week or an ongoing thing through the span of the entire event, but it does feel like it could potentially be a mechanism for encouraging writers to try out some of the stuff that the people reviewing their stories are writing themselves.

Dunno, just my two cents about everything. I'm sure that others had a pretty different experience than I did, so perhaps they'll have more to say about things that I overlooked or else didn't pick up on.

 

[K_S]

In all candor i gotta wonder what the exchange rate of reviews penned to recieved was. If it was abysmal then i totally second Spites "pay it forward" bonus idea... Honestly even if it was meh i'd still second it... Because, at least from casual glance, i wasnt seeing a lot of tales from active reviewers getting a lot of activity.

And if anyone does math it out... In all fairness dont count my ratio... 140ish reviews penned to 3 recieved would break any coherency out of the data curve.

 

[Negrek]

Thanks to everyone who's voted in the poll thus far! Since Spiteful Murkrow's the only person I've seen suggest an alternate timeslot in the thread, I'm currently interpreting votes on the "secret sixth thing" category as being for his "six months from the anniversary" suggestion. Please speak up if that's not accurate!

How did week 4 go down though? I was trying to casually gauge how fics were being tackled with that one and it was a bit of a "unable to tell" sort of thing.

Here are some basic stats on reviews and weekly themes:

Week 1: 179 reviews / 7 days = 25.6 reviews/day, 101/179 theme (56.4% theme)
Week 2: 157 reviews / 7 days = 22.4 reviews/day, 145/157 theme (92.4% theme)
Week 3: 142 reviews / 7 days = 20.3 reviews/day, 116/142 theme (81.7% theme)
Week 4: 136 reviews / 9 days = 15.1 reviews/day, 82/136 theme (60% theme)

It's difficult to say how much of an impact the weekly theme had on these numbers relative to factors such as people having earned enough points for the prizes they wanted and therefore not reviewing as much in the final week, people scrambling fics they'd set out to hit in the final week regardless of whether they were on theme, etc. However, I think it's safe to say that the Week 1 and Week 4 themes were the least popular.

B: Some sort of fixed relative time slot to the annual anniversary event as something akin to a "mid-year" event. I'd suggest 6 months after said anniversary, but that unfortunately almost entirely overlaps with NaNoWriMo, perhaps counting down to the 6 month mark 4 weeks in advance could work?

Given the way NaNo went this year, who can say whether November's going to be a big month for writing challenges going forward? =/

But a major consideration is that the mainline Pokémon games have been published in November for a while now, and we really don't want those releases overlapping with Blitz. This combined with various Artober/Drawtober/Inktober challenges makes me leery of the October/November timeframe for holding big events, but October more than November could be an option.

Something that I did think was probably worth putting some thought into tweaking for next time is that I noticed that some reviewers seemed to unfortunately go unrequited in terms of reviewing attention in spite of putting in a lot of effort reviewing ( @K_S was the most extreme example of this dynamic that I can think of, who according to the leaderboards posted 142 reviews in the event and received 3 total during the whole of RB5 from a forum search of his stories ). I also recall a couple points during the event where some participants mentioned in TRcord that they felt pretty disheartened about putting in a bunch of effort reviewing other stories only to not get much attention in return. I don't know whether or not things ultimately worked out for them by the end of Week 4, but it was something that I noticed.

Obviously, people are going to read whatever they want, and shouldn't be obligated to read one story or another in an event built around voluntary participation, but I do wonder if it'd be worth trying to cook up some sort of "pay it forward" bonus for reviews. I don't know whether that's something that works better in one particular week or an ongoing thing through the span of the entire event, but it does feel like it could potentially be a mechanism for encouraging writers to try out some of the stuff that the people reviewing their stories are writing themselves.

In all candor i gotta wonder what the exchange rate of reviews penned to recieved was. If it was abysmal then i totally second Spites "pay it forward" bonus idea... Honestly even if it was meh i'd still second it... Because, at least from casual glance, i wasnt seeing a lot of tales from active reviewers getting a lot of activity.

And if anyone does math it out... In all fairness dont count my ratio... 140ish reviews penned to 3 recieved would break any coherency out of the data curve.

I think this is a point worth discussing. While we're never going to be able to enforce any sort of strict rules of reciprocity about reviews (without warping the character of the entire event, I suppose), it is important to me that people feel as though what they're getting out of the event is at least somewhat proportional to what they're putting into it. Right now, the point system at least ensures that anyone who reviews many stories can buy themselves several reviews in return, but I'd welcome any suggestions that people might have about ways of incentivizing people to "give back" to people who are reviewing a lot, and in particular their own stories. The most straightforward option would be to make a weekly theme where the bonus is based on reviewing someone who's previously reviewed you, but this presents problems for people who haven't received many reviews in the first place. Feels bad if you can only get a theme bonus if you review one of, say, three different fics--or even have no options at all.

 

[K_S]

Hm, how about a base .25 point add on for reviewing someone who reviewed you? Thered be less elements of strong arming the masses and the bonus wouldnt be high enough to hurt those who dont get it per the circumstances you outlined.

 

[K_S]

Sorry didnt mean to double dip i hit post instead of edit. Appologies!

However, I think it's safe to say that the Week 1 and Week 4 themes were the least popular.

Week 4 was a monster to navigate... I mean, i appreciate the list you provided but it was so convoulted i wound up just poking at whatever and ignoring any bonus potential. Wasnt week 1 right at new years? (I cant find the blitz start date in my records or on site for some reason) Might of been some holiday hang ups that nipped into the buildup of the blitz.

 

[Spiteful Murkrow]

I think this is a point worth discussing. While we're never going to be able to enforce any sort of strict rules of reciprocity about reviews (without warping the character of the entire event, I suppose), it is important to me that people feel as though what they're getting out of the event is at least somewhat proportional to what they're putting into it. Right now, the point system at least ensures that anyone who reviews many stories can buy themselves several reviews in return, but I'd welcome any suggestions that people might have about ways of incentivizing people to "give back" to people who are reviewing a lot, and in particular their own stories. The most straightforward option would be to make a weekly theme where the bonus is based on reviewing someone who's previously reviewed you, but this presents problems for people who haven't received many reviews in the first place. Feels bad if you can only get a theme bonus if you review one of, say, three different fics--or even have no options at all.

I admittedly don't have any solutions here that I can vouch for confidence won't break things wide open for scoring or unintended dynamics, but it might make sense to consider something like the equivalent of the "long chapter" bonus for "pay it forward" reviews with TBD restrictions of how often they can be claimed (to keep people from just drilling down one author that reviewed them in particular) per week with two phases:

- An Early-Blitz Phase where the "Pay it Forward" bonus applies to anyone who's reviewed one's writing at any time on TR (let's say for argument that it would end with Week 2)
- A Late-Blitz Phase where the "Pay it Forward" bonus applies to people who have reviewed one's writing during Blitz itself, which naturally would be a list that would keep theoretically expanding up until the very end of the review

Obviously, this would need more fine-tuning and playtesting, but I figured that it was at least worth some consideration.

 

[K_S]

A Late-Blitz Phase where the "Pay it Forward" bonus applies to people who have reviewed one's writing during Blitz itself,

This seems the sanner of the two options so the judges/admin dont have to comb over every tale for who read what ect. Also end game (maybe even closong week) would give the oportunities a time to build up

 

[Negrek]

Week 4 was a monster to navigate... I mean, i appreciate the list you provided but it was so convoulted i wound up just poking at whatever and ignoring any bonus potential. Wasnt week 1 right at new years? (I cant find the blitz start date in my records or on site for some reason) Might of been some holiday hang ups that nipped into the buildup of the blitz.

Yeah, that's understandable--it was more complicated to tell what was and wasn't eligible for that week than for the others. I do want to retain themes that encourage people to check out stories that haven't gotten as much attention during Blitz, but haven't come up with a good way to do so that people find easy to understand and convenient yet.

Hm, how about a base .25 point add on for reviewing someone who reviewed you? Thered be less elements of strong arming the masses and the bonus wouldnt be high enough to hurt those who dont get it pqqer the circumstances you outlined.

I admittedly don't have any solutions here that I can vouch for confidence won't break things wide open for scoring or unintended dynamics, but it might make sense to consider something like the equivalent of the "long chapter" bonus for "pay it forward" reviews with TBD restrictions of how often they can be claimed (to keep people from just drilling down one author that reviewed them in particular) per week with two phases:

- An Early-Blitz Phase where the "Pay it Forward" bonus applies to anyone who's reviewed one's writing at any time on TR (let's say for argument that it would end with Week 2)
- A Late-Blitz Phase where the "Pay it Forward" bonus applies to people who have reviewed one's writing during Blitz itself, which naturally would be a list that would keep theoretically expanding up until the very end of the review

Obviously, this would need more fine-tuning and playtesting, but I figured that it was at least worth some consideration.

I think that some kind of bonus for reciprocal reviewing is definitely part of the answer. What I'm concerned about is where that leaves people who haven't received many or any reviews on their stories and who therefore have limited or no options to earn such a bonus. Ultimately there probably needs to be an alternative way for them to earn the bonus; the trick will be figuring out what would be fair to offer as an alternative, which would ideally also reward people who write a lot of reviews.

 

[Spiteful Murkrow]

I think that some kind of bonus for reciprocal reviewing is definitely part of the answer. What I'm concerned about is where that leaves people who haven't received many or any reviews on their stories and who therefore have limited or no options to earn such a bonus. Ultimately there probably needs to be an alternative way for them to earn the bonus; the trick will be figuring out what would be fair to offer as an alternative, which would ideally also reward people who write a lot of reviews.

Actually, the thought crossed my mind that this year’s Week 1 theme of “review a new-to-you author” would’ve worked quite well as an alternative “pay it forward” condition for participants who haven’t been reviewed a whole lot. Assuming the reciprocal bonus would apply specifically for responses to reviews during Blitz throughout the event and there was also a mechanism for keeping players from redeeming it from one author in particular ad infinitum (e.x. a 1x per week per given reviewee cap), it’d inherently favor newer faces earlier on before reviews start filling in, and other participants later on without squeezing out “new to me” authors.

As for what Week 1’s theme could be if we went that route, we could just dust off RB3’s take of Week 1 where the theme was “new (to me) stories” in general. Since reviewing stories from all-new authors like in RB4 and RB5 would already satisfy the condition and be rewarded with a further bonus.

Granted, this idea was basically the equivalent of a napkin scribble, so maybe there’s something big I’m overlooking, but I figured I’d at least throw it out there.

 

[Flyg0n]

First, the topic of this thread's poll, when should we hold Blitz going forward? The event was originally conceived of as an end-of-year event to wrap up on obligations and kick-start new year's review goals. The date at which the event starts has crept forward steadily based on responses to yearly polls, to the point where it's now mostly in January. I'd like to try and settle on a consistent timeframe going forward, so please respond to the poll with when you think it would be best to hold the event!

Totally forgot to answer so here I am!
I do think in January is ideal, as opposed to mid december when people will have to choose between Blitz and holiday events, So anytime after Jan 1st is cool by me

Second, how did you like the week two catch-up theme? We've had several requests over the years for better incentives for catching up on stories rather than jumping between a lot of different ones, and this was our latest try at accommodating that request. Did it work well for you? Is there something else you think we should try?

Probably my favorite part of Blitz! Finally made big progress on catching up on stories in general and binging things! Definitely keep!

Other than that, feel free to post how you thought the event went, what you liked or thought could be improved, and anything you'd like to see in the years to come. One way or another, I hope you enjoyed the event, and I look forward to our next Blitz!

The three chapter bonus points for longfics was great to keep as well. I was really motivated to finally catchup on some stuff.

RE: Reciprocity My two cents here is I truly have never really gone in on effortful reviews wanting or expecting anything back, especially since I can buy reviews. granted, this is entirely my personal opinion, and I do understand a general desire for people who go high effort to maybe hope for something. I think a small bonus is fine but as you said, what of folks who don't have many reviews, as well as the idea that a reviewer should expect something in return for something done voluntarily is hm... (as opposed to catnip-like games where the point is an exchange).
That said I wonder if mutual review exchanges or catniplike stuff is a better solution for folks who specifically feel like they want a review during blitz? Or perhaps even a situation where trading reviews can get you some kind of small equivalent bonus point? Maybe a 'review someone who reviewed you or set up an exchange for .25 bonus points' kind of thing?
That said its overall not a concern of mine still as I mostly am into getting spurred into giving reviews bc I am lazy during the rest of the year lol

re: ideas I remember before blitz I had suggested some kind of additional sort of system to sort of let people pursue their own personal goals, but I have no idea how feasible that is to actually track. Basically sort of an overall 'personal goal' that nets some small bonus points... Like people who want to either play catchup, read oneshots, or etc can 'select' a predetermined thing as their Blitz goal and gain a little extra for doing that, if that makes sense.

 

[Negrek]

First of all, the poll has closed, and ultimately ended in a tie between "December" and "Mid-December to Mid-January." Given the tie, I'll be going with my preference, which is mid-December to mid-January, and we'll see how it goes. Thank you to everyone who voted!

Actually, the thought crossed my mind that this year’s Week 1 theme of “review a new-to-you author” would’ve worked quite well as an alternative “pay it forward” condition for participants who haven’t been reviewed a whole lot. Assuming the reciprocal bonus would apply specifically for responses to reviews during Blitz throughout the event and there was also a mechanism for keeping players from redeeming it from one author in particular ad infinitum (e.x. a 1x per week per given reviewee cap), it’d inherently favor newer faces earlier on before reviews start filling in, and other participants later on without squeezing out “new to me” authors.

As for what Week 1’s theme could be if we went that route, we could just dust off RB3’s take of Week 1 where the theme was “new (to me) stories” in general. Since reviewing stories from all-new authors like in RB4 and RB5 would already satisfy the condition and be rewarded with a further bonus.

Granted, this idea was basically the equivalent of a napkin scribble, so maybe there’s something big I’m overlooking, but I figured I’d at least throw it out there.

So the idea would be that "review a new author" and "review someone who reviewed you during Blitz" would be always-on bonuses that could be claimed anytime during the event?

RE: Reciprocity My two cents here is I truly have never really gone in on effortful reviews wanting or expecting anything back, especially since I can buy reviews. granted, this is entirely my personal opinion, and I do understand a general desire for people who go high effort to maybe hope for something. I think a small bonus is fine but as you said, what of folks who don't have many reviews, as well as the idea that a reviewer should expect something in return for something done voluntarily is hm... (as opposed to catnip-like games where the point is an exchange).
That said I wonder if mutual review exchanges or catniplike stuff is a better solution for folks who specifically feel like they want a review during blitz? Or perhaps even a situation where trading reviews can get you some kind of small equivalent bonus point? Maybe a 'review someone who reviewed you or set up an exchange for .25 bonus points' kind of thing?
That said its overall not a concern of mine still as I mostly am into getting spurred into giving reviews bc I am lazy during the rest of the year lol

We could definitely try something to encourage more review exchanges among participants! It's tough, because we did run multiple catnips during the event, and having too many of that kind of thing does seem to suppress participation. But while a fair number of people did set up additional review exchanges under their own power, we could perhaps do more to facilitate that, especially for people who might feel awkward just asking in Discord for anyone interested.

re: ideas I remember before blitz I had suggested some kind of additional sort of system to sort of let people pursue their own personal goals, but I have no idea how feasible that is to actually track. Basically sort of an overall 'personal goal' that nets some small bonus points... Like people who want to either play catchup, read oneshots, or etc can 'select' a predetermined thing as their Blitz goal and gain a little extra for doing that, if that makes sense.

Yes! I think this is something we're interested in doing, but weren't able to pull together in time for this year's Blitz. What we'd been thinking of was "achievement badge" sorts of things that could be added to your Blitz user profile. There would be some standard ones to earn (like "write 30 reviews" or "earn 100 points," or whatever), but you could also set a custom goal to get a custom badge. Not a direct translation to points, but does that sound like something you'd be interested in?

 

[Spiteful Murkrow]

So the idea would be that "review a new author" and "review someone who reviewed you during Blitz" would be always-on bonuses that could be claimed anytime during the event?

Yes, that is correct. And the two bonuses seem to do a good job of covering each other's weaknesses (dunno if it makes sense for them to stack, or be mutually exclusive for claiming, since I can see arguments both ways). At the very beginning of every Review Blitz, everybody is starting out putting content into the void, which de facto incentivizes trying out new authors. As reviews fill in, they'll have more options to "review someone who reviewed you during Blitz" in return.

It does raise the question of what should be done for Week 1's theme. My personal suggestion is just to yoink RB3's version of it where it was "stories you've never reviewed", which would be fulfillable while chasing either "pay-it-forward" bonus (and chasing "never reviewed author" would trigger it by default), but I'm sure that there are also other opening themes that would potentially work well with the slot.

 

[K_S]

Thoughts about the servey numbers. .

While "mid dec to jan" did net 6 points if you calculate all the "jan" and later month options you got 9 points. Thats pointing to jan and up beong a prefered date... More so then then mid drc to jan... And possible sceduling conflicts the later group is trying to avoid dealing with.

 

[Negrek]

Yes, that is correct. And the two bonuses seem to do a good job of covering each other's weaknesses (dunno if it makes sense for them to stack, or be mutually exclusive for claiming, since I can see arguments both ways). At the very beginning of every Review Blitz, everybody is starting out putting content into the void, which de facto incentivizes trying out new authors. As reviews fill in, they'll have more options to "review someone who reviewed you during Blitz" in return.

It does raise the question of what should be done for Week 1's theme. My personal suggestion is just to yoink RB3's version of it where it was "stories you've never reviewed", which would be fulfillable while chasing either "pay-it-forward" bonus (and chasing "never reviewed author" would trigger it by default), but I'm sure that there are also other opening themes that would potentially work well with the slot.

Makes sense! I think there's a number of themes we could use to fill the void of "review a new author" if we decided to make that into a permanent/separate bonus. "Stories never reviewed" is an option for sure; one way or another I think I'd like to keep W1 a "try something new" theme, so if people like a fic they find they have the opportunity to catch up on more of it for bonuses throughout the rest of the event.

Thoughts about the servey numbers. .

While "mid dec to jan" did net 6 points if you calculate all the "jan" and later month options you got 9 points. Thats pointing to jan and up beong a prefered date... More so then then mid drc to jan... And possible sceduling conflicts the later group is trying to avoid dealing with.

Because the number of options people could select on the poll was unlimited, I don't think it makes sense to look at the votes in that way. We know that 6/11 people who voted chose Dec-Jan, so we know at most five people selected one of the January+ options and also did not like the Dec-Jan option.

The poll didn't attract a ton of votes (eleven compared to ~35 people who participated in the last Blitz), and there have been more people who prefer a January or later start talking in the thread than people preferring something in December, so I do worry that the poll results may not be representative. I'll take another pulse check after next year to see how people feel about the timing, and if we need to move into January (it does at least seem clear that there's not a lot of excitement about going farther out) in the future, we can do so.

 

[K_S]

why not pm everyone who participated directly to ask?

 

[Negrek]

The hassle of doing that is considerably larger than for a poll and doesn't strike me as worth it in this instance.

However, I did realize that I didn't actually set an end date on the poll, so it had not in fact properly closed. As a result, I'm leaving voting open until March 17th, so if there's anyone who didn't get a chance to give their opinion on timing, they still have some opportunity to do so!