and for sure, not one post in MYOC discussion is "should film x count?"

All I know is that lots of forums/blogs do some type of horror marathon/challenge in October and they don't do anything else the rest of the year. No cleansing comedies of November, just nothing.

I also think someone broke the Trevor-bot. I haven't seen him so involved in challenges for awhile.

We are pretty unique with the multiple and then year-round Challenges. No one should feel the need to participate every month, but since we're at a website that obviously has heavy home media viewers, it's nice to cover all the bases for whenever someone is feeling a binge coming on.
Broken, or fixed?

Bored waiting for the NFL games to start......

So, we wait a week or two and check the poll results? How many is enough to start another Challenge?

First things first. Dimension X, I am sincerely sorry for upsetting you by maligning your challenge. (I'm also greatly impressed by your research and table making work.)

Regarding HA vs. MYO: by any measuring stick, HA is a flop of a challenge that I screwed up. I wasn't holding it up as a superior challenge to MYO. I was illustrating that even relative to such a dismal disappointment of a challenge as HA, MYO's numbers are dubious.

My point was to establish whether there's room for a new challenge by looking at how effectively existing challenges service the function of community-building. To that end, the raw numbers are only part of the story. You've shared nothing about the substance of those comments.

71 posts were before this year's MYO challenge started, mostly sharing themes either chosen or considered, with some side conversation about Gimp. (A dozen were from shadokitty.)

pacway is right to note above that "and for sure, not one post in MYOC discussion is "should film x count?" I've made no secret of how grating I found having to field that question with HA, and yeah, if you audited any given HA discussion and removed the posts that were strictly about that, you'd probably lose half or more of the entire thread. Sidestepping that issue doesn't necessarily help MYO discussions, though. There's no interactivity between posters until post 96 on 9 May, when Cardsfan111 commented about TheBigDave's point about 1984 being such a cool year for movies. And, as davidh777 noted:

I'd also like to note the following exchange:

Back to the present conversation:

I've perceived the entire discussion about the nature and value of the challenges to be purely about the extent to which they service the community. DVDTalk is a ghost town for various reasons, one of the greatest being the alienation of several prolific longtime members by a flurry of questionable moderation choices over the last two years. That's something entirely outside the purview of challenges to compensate for or offset.

We have a very simple choice: Content ourselves that the paltry numbers we have today are as good as it's gonna get anymore, or be willing to upend some stuff in hopes of rejuvenating some folks. I don't believe we're going to have much success luring in many newcomers, but I do believe there are a lot of existing members who may be more interested in participating on the forum if there was something new and interesting for them to discuss.

Haven't caught up yet, but: Counting thread views and posts may be skewing "reality".... in all directions.

Personally, I keep windows open permenently (potentially lowering unique "visit" numbers; potentially inflating "refresh" numbers if my phone decides to do thay for me), while post count in discussion threads varies more with time (not enough of it to offer input), time (too busy watching), time (too busy working), commonality (watching similar things, fostering discussion), etc. It ignores the unquantifiable engagement in favour of perhaps counting/promoting side-discussions, mild agreement, etc.

Also, I like the History Challenge. )

Nerd! :P

I like Historic challenge but I think the boundaries are way too loose on what counts. An X-Men movie shouldn't count. Even if it shows the involvement of mutants in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Dark Shadows shouldn't count because some episodes take place in the past where it then becomes a costume drama.

I get you might lose some participants but it's a history challenge on a dying forum. Maybe change the title to add in "documentaries" and you might attract someone that just thought they had to watch bible and George Washington movies.

How about a show of hands. What challenges do people like/dislike/are indifferent?

Like:
TV
Action
Drive-In
Historical
SF
Animation
Horror
Comedy

Indifferent:
Criterion - I'd like this more with a rotating secondary distributor (smaller ones, not WB)

MYOC - I like the concept but for me, it's just an excuse to some up with some plan to watch my unwatched titles. Might be more fun for small groups of people to share a challenge, so they have something to talk about.

Academy Awards - Don't care about the award show. More work than I care to do, to find qualifying movies I own.

Holiday - Too much work to find something new to watch. I'm not going to dig around a season set to find one holiday episode.

Dislike:
I don't hate any of them

FAVORITES
Horror
Holiday
MYOC

LIKE
Animation
Sci-Fi
Drive-In
Action
Comedy

INDIFFERENT - Seems unnecessary since I watch TV during the other challenges.
TV

DISLIKE - I participate, but get bored after a week or two.
Criterion
History
Academy Awards

I've worked really hard to forget the X-Men: First Class Eligibility Debate of 2011. THANKS. -_-

As I said, I think at this point it's best to just strip it back to the originally proposed alternating War/Western format.

Love
Academy Awards
Criterion

These are the only two I have consistently done year-in, year-out with the one exception of missing Oscars 2015 for reasons unrelated to the challenge. Because of their finite (though ever-growing) number of eligible films, I view these as potentially complete-able. And I appreciate that the discussion threads for these two, because of the fixed pool of movies, is generally concentrated enough that someone else has seen whatever I've watched and want to discuss.

Like
TV on DVD*
I don't generally watch TV as a rule, so the lion's share of my viewing of TV content is in this one challenge. I do like the shift from TV to Oscars.

Sci-Fi & Fantasy
Animation
Horror
Holiday

I'm not consistently active with those four, but I do like knowing they'll be there any given year in case I do have the itch. Holiday for me has largely become about gorging on various versions of A Christmas Carol the last few years.

Indifferent
Action/Adventure/Crime/Mystery
Drive-In/B-Movie/Exploitation
Make Your Own
Comedy

To date, I've only participated in the 2016 Action, 2011 Drive-In, and 2010 & 2011 MYO. I've yet to do Comedy at all. Not even sure why, since I'm perfectly content with those genres and milieus.

1. Agreed.
2. Very much agreed. "Drama" is so loose a definition - even moreso than 'action', 'drive-in' or the haziness of history.
3. I often wind up watching some 'Romance' in Feb (Oscars), some for History, loosely-'romance' for Drive-In (exploitation-y), a fair bit under Criterion and then comedies in November. Bend the challenges to your will! If a lot of films are double+ genre-d, they'll fit somewhere 95% of the time.
4. Very much so. Never occurred otherwise, even with slightly shifting dates. I actually quite like using some optional early time for current nominees, and then having the AA Challenge run all of February, whenever the awards are scheduled.
5. Probably. But I'd probably choose to be limited to Oscar-y drama and romance, undermining the point of it being nominally separate.

Caveat, caveat, maybe.

If you rarify it enough, a) it becomes challenging rather than A Challenge (i.e. headaches and confusion), b) you may exclude potential interest, c) it mayn't need a whole month. Therefore...

What about a split?

FEBRUARY = OSCARS, but:
Sub/Separate minichallenge A: Feb 1-14 - Romance & Musicals
Sub/Separate minichallenge B: Feb 15-28 - Pure Drama

Halving each makes them more optional, easy, and/or ignorable. It also makes dual-challenging films easier.

I, too, like the Historical challenge and would like to see it tightened up quite a bit. Even though I generally save a few for that one I'd be willing to give up the "costume drama" aspect and make it the War/Western/Documentary challenge plus give it a year for cutoff - that is *nothing* about events after year xxxx is eligible.
LOVE:
SF/Fantasy
Comedy
TV
Horror

LIKE:
Historical - I'd like it better if the focus were to be tightened.

Action/Adventure/Crime/Mystery

MYOC - Although I normally use it as a way to watch my unwatched TVonDVD titles making it more a extension of that one rather than something truly different.

INDIFFERENT:
Drive-In - I like this well enough but most of what I watch here could be watched in others. It's fun but I often have to break it up with "better" films to keep from burning out.

Holiday - I've found there are very few "holiday" films I actually like well enough to watch every year and most new ones are just wastes of time. After doing it once I'll not dig through my collection to find a single holiday episode of a TV program. Plus I find most of those episodes are just plain "bad" and not to my tastes. Because of everything we do during the holiday season it becomes a chore to do this one so I make no real effort and just put down titles if I happen to watch one with friends/family.

Animation - Even though I have lots of animated films and TV shows I greatly enjoy I tend to "burn out" faster on animation than any other film type. As a result it's another where I put down something if I happen to watch it but don't go out of my way for a daily viewing.

DON'T LIKE (I don't "hate" them but I don't participate other than reading the discussion threads):
Academy Awards - I'll echo Mr. Peepers: I don't care about the award show or who wins plus it's more work than I care to do to find qualifying movies I own.

Criterion - Many of these are "art" type films for which I have little affinity or tolerance. After discovering I'd be watching the same 30-50 films every year because of this I stopped participating.

I wouldn't mind a smattering of "Criterion plus...[those few almost-comparable companies]", but there's still something different about CC (however much individuals may take umbrage occasionally) because there's a distinct feeling of selection and choice and quality, rather than [just] licencing opportunities. It seems they pursue films, rather than luck into them. I do think Eureka's Masters of Cinema should be countable (particularly with the crossover).

I also tend to think that there's scope to roll Oscars in with, maybe, Baftas & other awards of (alleged) near-quality.

But purity (or whatever term) does make eligobility easier. And anyone CAN watch/count whatever theh like perpetually anyway, so why not have moderately restrictive rules?

Two weeks is a curious denomination of time. I can certainly look back on challenges where, after two weeks, I was already reaching a point of burnout and I know that's common.

However, I also know that because of reaching that point of burnout, I've counted on having two more weeks to work on the challenge at hand. Often, I've used Week 3 to lay low and recharge before a more concerted focus to finish with Week 4.

50 movies in 2 weeks is a different critter from 100 movies in 1 month. I could be talked into giving it a go; I do see some appeal and potential to it. But I'm wary that it would just be too limited.

Another thought: What about moving Criterion to February? That and Oscars seem to be two that several challenge regulars both skip, and some of those who do participate in them have indicated waning interest and desire to see some kind of alternative or expansion. Granted, for me it would suck because that would have my two favorites competing for my viewing time simultaneously, but I'm also well aware I'm in a small minority.

My mentor's mentor told him about teaching history that "when you get up to events that took place in your own lifetime, it's time to shut up." I think at one point in the brainstorming for the very first Historical Appreciation challenge, I proposed a similar restriction, where each participant would have their own cutoff point based on their age. As with pretty much every other idea I had for that challenge, though, it died a quick death because for whatever reason, that challenge attracts a high quotient of participants who are hellbent on rationalizing why every single movie of all time *should* count for it.

(I'm genuinely glad anyone who ever participated in any HA challenge and enjoyed it got something out of it, but I'm even more glad to not be responsible for it anymore.)

In my likes/dislikes list I failed to include "The Neverending Watch The Movies You Should Have Already Seen Challenge" in my "likes" list. It's not tied to a month or genre (unless you tweak it for a challenge - something I feel is rather a cheat) and has turned out to be quite fun. I often use the film selected for me to break things up in the monthly challenges. Sometimes it syncs, often it does not. I use it to be "forced" into watching movies I've put off viewing for one reason or another. There are currently only a few participants which is a shame as it's such a easy challenge in which to participate.

Surely this is a great compromise - group/collaborative MYOCs.

Echo.

Hence, piggyback Challenge 13 on MYOC. Whether it be Drama, Romance, Musical, rotating or combinatory. Nothing changes on the face of it, but those who WANT (officially-sanctioned) change get it anyway.

Literally everyone wins. No problems with dual/duelling February challenges, no faffing about with mini-challenges, no more reason to ignore MYOC, meaningful discussion in May... how is this not the obvious solution?

At the very least this should be an option within the poll:

New Challenge (Feb)
New Challenge (within MYOC)
New Challenge (...sometime)
No More Challenges
Do What Thou Wilt

I thought the prevailing opinion was leaning to Oscars BEING the main theme for all of February, rather than being made to seem like an afterthought...

...I don't recognise that summation.

I disagree completely that it's a mistake to expand on war/western - as above, war/western is a valid subset and CAN be the WHOLE challenge on a person-by-person basis. No harm, no foul.

And everyone marathoning Mad Men..? Isn't it more accurate to say "a few" and add "..accompanied by much eye-rolling and complaints"...? There ssometimes seems to be a heavy hand of exclusion in some challenges (horror, history) which contrasts starkly to a more open hand of inclusion (holiday, Drive-In, MYOC) which - surely? - does more to foster community and discussion.

(That may read more vehemently or harshly than it's intended. Hopefully not, but..)

Don't these three stats taken one after the other besically invalidate the potential conclusions of the first? Or, if numbers are stable and commenting may be similar/up, what purpose does noting a perceived lack of views serve?

May it be skewed (as I mused) by technology? Or time constraints? Or actually be a positive statistic - the posts: views ratio must be exponentially higher, suggesting that at the very least repeat viewers are commenting more frequently, rather than merely perusing.

Same here.

Whenever I see someone bring up quality or greatness with their releases, the first thing the pops into my mind is Armageddon, and then I can't take anything they say seriously. That's not a reflection of the person, that's just me hating Armageddon. Plus it's Bay's second Criterion release. There's much better talent out there that should be in his place.

I want to jump back in with an updated list but I can't figure out the best method to make a good list.

Yeah, it's important for any challenge to not be so niche it's of no interest, but this was an instance of one that was never really interesting because it was too inclusive. Out of all the years I was part of Historical Appreciation, I can only remember two substantial conversations. One was about Marshal Petain and the other was whether X-Men: First Class should count. We had a whole lot more debate like the latter than we ever had chatter like the former.

BobO'Link is a trouper, showing up each year and giving it go and trying to help shape discussions. He's probably the best spokesperson that challenge could have:

I fought the inclusion of costume dramas from the beginning, arguing it expanded the challenge's scope too far. So we went from War/Western to Downton Abbey/Mad Men, and we still never really had much in the way of substantial conversation as a result. Any given HA discussion thread consists more of debates about what someone wanted to justify watching than what they had actually, you know, watched.

Maybe Costume Drama should be married off with Romance/Musical, I dunno.

Talking point: Is personal engagement directly linked to challenge content?

Or is it just a personal (read: arbitrary, changeable, "human") thing?

And, if the latter, does adding/removing/moving/changing challenges help with this theoretical community engagement - or would not trying to get "the community" engaged in existing challenges be more of a good starting point?

No one should feel obligated to take part in challenges that don't interest them (or, watch things they don't care about*). But equalling sitting on the sidelines and decrying a lack of participation is... well.


*Excepting that BRANCHING OUT is an 'important' side-effect, and "engagement"/discussion can be negative as well as positive - or argumentative and rhetorically persuasive.