My suggestion would be to do so a week sooner because it shows up a few days into the month. I know that last year it prevented me from participating because it was "100 movies" in one month and I thought it was too late to reach the goal. This year it was also a couple days into the month but I was home sick and thought I could catch up.

If it had shown up in the newsletter in the week prior to the start date I know I would have been participating a year ago.

It's John Sinnott. He specifically asked me to tell him just a week prior, because that's when they do the newsletter. He does a lot of reviews, so you can find his contact through the reviews.

I've been wondering about the checklists. It seems to me that only a handful of participants even bother with them in any challenge other than Horror (which is a world unto itself!). I know some participants don't use them because it "feels like work". Those tend to be participants who are quiet in discussion threads, too, so I don't know that there's much we can do to further engage them and that's okay.

But I also see a lot of participants who are active in discussion threads who don't bother with checklists as well. Given that 100 movies is pretty much an abandoned inherent goal of these challenges - for various reasons - I wonder if perhaps we ought not consider a sort of arbitrary cap on checklist items. You know, kind of standardize them from challenge to challenge. Obviously, Academy Awards and Criterion have built-in categories but the rest are sort of improvised.

What I'm thinking would be something like this:

• Decades are great because they're a constant.
• X of Y list of a limited pool of prominent directors/actors for the challenge at hand
• X of Y list of a limited pool of sub-genres
• X of Y list of a limited pool of languages/countries of origin

To keep things fresh, the pools of directors/actors and sub-genres would rotate each year.

Any thoughts?

I think we've been slowly moving towards standardization. Ultimately, I guess it's all the prerogative of the Challenge thread starter, who so far seem to be very open to the will of the masses.

This reminds me to put in vacation for the entire month of October so I can get crazy with my uber-checklist in Horror.

I always used to post checklists even if my use of them was spotty, and there were only a couple times I came even close to completing them. I thought I abandoned them last year, but I just checked my sig and I used one for the TV challenge in January. I think I skipped it for Oscars because I knew I wasn't going to watch a whole lot (and didn't), but after that... I don't know. I think it may be because I haven't been feeling good about my performance in challenges lately. I learned long ago that it's not a competition with other participants, but I just feel like I haven't been as dedicated to these as I have in the past. I watch what I want to watch then take credit if it qualifies, rather than tailoring my viewing around the challenge. At least in the past I've been better about checking the unwatched pile for qualifiers.

I have been doing better this month so I might decide to add a checklist...

Would shorter, more manageable checklists entice you to give them a go again?

I don't know if other participants run into this issue with checklist items but if you don't happen to have a film in your own personal collection they can be hard to find unless you're willing to shell out some cash. If a title isn't available via Netflix, Amazon Prime, or your local library, it can be tough to complete the checklist. It makes you long for the days of Blockbuster Videos being on every other block! I'm not sure what can be done about that besides having the participants check free streaming availability before a challenge begins. Of course this issue might not effect anyone else and could just be me being cheap.

I'm poor, so I get it! Maybe we could institute a tiered checklist system. One for casual participants with demanding schedules and little disposable income, and another for Trevor-level participants. I know Chad has done that with the Horror Challenge and it seems doable for most of the rest. Thoughts?

It's not just you. For every challenge, I watch things I already own or stuff on the DVR. I don't want to spend much time tracking things down, especially if I have to pay for it (No Netflix/Prime).

It's not just you. I don't have loads of disposable income but do have a limited monthy DVD buget. I'm a collector and have always been a collector (books, comics, records, CD, DVD). All my life I've scoured local stores and then the internet for titles to add to my collection at bargain prices. I cycled Columbia House accounts to get cheap prices (~$4.50/title) until they no longer had anything I really wanted. Because of that I've built a sizeable collection over the years but many times have purchased a title with those limited funds just to satisfy a checklist item even if it were not on sale. In such cases I attempt to make sure it's a title that sounds interesting enough that I'll watch it more than just for a challenge or is a "classic" of the genre (which means I ought to own it "just because") but there are some for which I've purchased titles that *only* get watched during a challenge. The "Riftraxx" titles are examples. I dislike MST3K/Rifftrax/Cinematic Titanic and rarely find them humorous but purchased a Rifftrax title for every challenge that has that as a checklist item. I hated doing that but I also made sure it was a title I either wanted or that qualified as "classic" in some form. I chose Rifftrax as they can be watched without the "comedic" interference if desired. That's now been expanded in most challenges to include "Hosted" so I can use Elvira (or others) which are nostalgic as I grew up watching such programs. I've resorted to scouring the internet for other titles to try to stream one for challenges but that's frequently problematic and often I resort to the same title(s) every year (the 1900, 1910 sections especially as I don't care for silents much and don't want to purchase them just for checklist). Often I either can't find the title needed/wanted or streaming is choppy. I don't have a "fast" connection - it's a 1.5MB DSL which once was considered fast and now is barely suitable due to all the crap sites feel the need to foist on visitors - and I use ad/script blockers to help. I share that connection with my wife so I frequently get lousy streaming quality as she might be watching a TV show she missed (she won't let me cancel cable either). I'm too cheap to actually *pay* for streaming and I never rent(ed) much either - why rent when I can own - and rely solely on my collection for 99% of material needed for challenges. It's been a very long time since I checked the local library for material as my genre collections have always bested theirs (years ago I found it sad when my then ~100 novel SF collection had everything they had and more). I would expect the same today with their SF/Fantasy/Horror selections on DVD but I should visit them nontheless as I could be surprised.

Anyway... all that to say: "You're not alone."

The Horror Challenge might also get more checklist participation because Chad uses "Checklist Completed" as a separate prize category. I know the last time I actually worked at completing a checklist (a couple of years ago) was because of that reason.

I no longer do the checklists because in most of the challenges I don't plan on watching the kind of numbers necessary to complete one.

My $0.02. I don't normally work on completing checklists, as I just like to watch what I want to watch and am in the mood to watch.

I did the checklists as best I could in the first year I participated in the challenges. And I confess it was fun. But since then, I have so many things in my collection I need to watch and that dictates my choice of viewing items in each challenge, so there's usually not a wide enough range to be suitable for doing checklists.

I must bring a different mindset to the challenges because I almost always try to do the checklists. I figure that I can watch whatever I want any time but during the challenges the checklists encourage me to try different things. I do not buy dvds for the challenges but I do tape movies from Turner Classic Movies and other channels on occasion. I also use Netflix, the local library, Youtube and other streaming sources on occasions. I prefer checklists for challenges but I guess if they were removed I could always use one from the past with minor variations.

I love doing the checklists. I like being able to mark things off as I watch them and fill that sucker in! However, I have run into problems with some of the list items-trying to find something to fill it in without having to pay extra for it. I have a great local library with many options, but even then it can be hard to find the more obscure stuff without buying. My other problem is that I don't necessarily want to watch some of the items needed. The first time it was fine but after than, you've given it a shot, now you know you don't like it but have to watch it.

I guess my thoughts are that I'd be ok with streamlining them but I'd be sad to see them go. I have been able to find quite a few movies I would never have watched without them.

Though, leaving them as is would be fine too, I think. More of the challenges have gone from getting an extra chance at the monthly prize (for those that offer it) to one chance for participating and that is it. So, the main reason for finishing has been taken away...

Not sure. I like having a variety in the checklist so I have a better chance of matching something, but I have very little chance of completing them, though I did try and come close a couple times. In concept, I do like the discovery factor of the checklist.

Some people mock me for still having Netflix physical instead of streaming, but it was this kind of situation that turned me off of their streaming service when they first split off the charges. I have a large enough collection that I don't really need to browse for something to watch--more likely I'm looking for a particular title, and streaming libraries just aren't conducive to that.

Guess we're getting close to time to start a Criterion discussion thread. I assume CardiffGiant will host again, but if not I could probably manage it. That one basically runs itself anyway at this point. It's probably my favorite challenge of the year, to be honest, and a big reason for that is that the discussion thread is always interesting. I give credit for that to the regulars who are enthusiastic about participating - and, of course, to CardiffGiant and Trevor before him, for hosting leadership.

Just to follow up on the checklist discussion, I was never proposing that they be scrapped. On the contrary, I was trying to see if we might engage some of those who have backed off from bothering with them by abridging them.

I can't wait till the Criterion discussion thread, for two reasons. One, finally back to just participating in a challenge. Two, it means the horror challenge is coming up, and some horror titles I own are eligible for the challenge, Gojira, Godzilla King of the Monsters, Halloween, and Cat People.

Not to ignore the current topics forever, but I have a quick random thought.

Since participation in the discussion threads is our ultimate goal (right?); perhaps participants with no discussion thread posts shouldn't be in the running for prizes, and winner announcements should only be made in the discussion threads.

In spirit, I tend to agree. As a host, though, this isn't particularly practical. For one thing, verifying who has participated in the discussion thread requires cross-checking the list thread with the discussion thread and running a search for each list thread participant to see if he or she has a post in the discussion thread. That's as tedious as it is time consuming.

This also encourages prize-seekers to post just once in the discussion thread to meet the minimum. They could wait until the last day and post "Had fun!" That one post may not actually contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way, but then we have to debate the merits of what constitutes participation.

I'll tell you this much: As a host, I hate prizes. It took me a month to give away the prizes for this year's TV on DVD* challenge! That was partly my fault, because I used the credit that GoldenWheels graciously allotted me to maximize the number of prizes, rather than go for a couple big ones. My hope was to increase the chances of participants winning *something* and walking away from the challenge happy. You'd be surprised how hard it is to get people to claim a damn prize, though!

I thought I was done with the Sci Fi Challenge, but two prizes were unclaimed, so today I had to redraw for them.So I feel your pain. You'd think people would jump at winning a prize. The first two prizes were claimed within two days.

People didn't appreciate your socialistic generosity! Maybe fewer, larger prizes would have been fewer contacts and also more likely to get people to claim.

I don't post much in the discussion threads, even when I'm hosting. I'd rather spend the time watching stuff.
No, I wouldn't.

Has anyone considered asking *up front* for mailing addresses from those wishing to win a prize? Post the request several times during the month to allow people to decide if they want to win one of the prizes and respond. Provide one last chance at the end of the month including the list of respondents just in case someone was missed or forgot. A couple of days into the next challenge you have your pool of interested parties and simply draw from that. Post the results in the discussion thread and you're done. You already have mailing addresses so you just sent out the prizes.

You can still require a winner has a somewhat active list or at least watched one film. It would be great if winners actually participated in discussions but as Dimension X says there are some who would rather watch another film than spend time typing comments and I understand that desire.

Keeping a list of mailing addresses is an additional "chore" I wouldn't want to handle (but I'm lazy). I have asked people to "opt out" of drawings in the past, and I actually had two people do that.