5
\$\begingroup\$

A few years ago you beat us (PPCG) to getting out of beta and getting a design. It is time for us to strike back. I am planning on hosting a King of the Hill challenge Programming Puzzles and Code Golf VS. Code Review. I would like to know if you are interested in doing this with us. If you are I will have more information about it coming soon. It will most likely be a javascript challenge using stack snippets as answers to allow for anyone to run the handler online. So how about the challenge?

I may be able to make more languages join then javascript.

It will be co-op vs. all of Code Review vs. all of PPCG. Each person gets one bot and one side to join.

\$\endgroup\$
9
  • \$\begingroup\$ chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/63002/… \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 1:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ ^ official chatroom \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 1:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ our meta \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 1:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @trichoplax (and for Christopher to see too): I can try to get my computer running connected to the internet overnight for a few days during on which I can run interpreters and communicate data to a server. I can't guarantee anything though; just putting this out there :) \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 2:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @trichoplax that was a typo. I only meant to put JS. but with hypers offer that may change \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 2:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HyperNeutrino dude that would be awesome. I gotta get a spec out there for the challenge and get a handler up and running \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 2:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ So, I frequent both sites. Am I going to have to pick a side? (Am I going to get exiled for heresy?) \$\endgroup\$
    – CAD97
    Jul 29 '17 at 17:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @CAD97 your choice. (Coose the winning side. \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 23:27
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Can we require all bots to be reviewed on Code Review after having been posted? \$\endgroup\$ Aug 2 '17 at 21:05
30
\$\begingroup\$

The title says "A friendly challenge", but really, what this is is a duel. For honor and glory. There is no possible good outcome to a duel. PPCG is going to lose. Then you'll be out for revenge a rematch. When is it going to end? Can't we just get along and be friends?

\$\endgroup\$
14
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's as if PPCG and Code Review were forever incompatible. I wonder why that would be. ;-) \$\endgroup\$
    – Phrancis
    Jul 29 '17 at 4:28
  • 18
    \$\begingroup\$ I was being facetious with the trash talk, but also provocatively serious. PPCG folks are, by nature, competitive. It's the foundational premise of the site. If there are two possible outcomes to this challenge, only one of which is deemed acceptable, then that's a setup to a bad situation. \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 7:11
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ "How can someone win when winning means that someone loses?" - Scatman John \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 8:45
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ "D̶o̶g̶s̶ good code and c̶a̶t̶s̶ bad code living together! Mass hysteria!" \$\endgroup\$
    – Jamal Mod
    Jul 29 '17 at 16:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ Wait you imply CR would win? Why not PPCG? \$\endgroup\$
    – EKons
    Jul 30 '17 at 9:52
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @200_success Different people may have different "acceptable" outcomes. For example CR does a good job in perfecting real-life code, something PPCG doesn't do. On the contrary, PPCG gets most of the HNQ and challenges users to golf their code, something that requires working your mind, making it think better...and shorter. \$\endgroup\$
    – EKons
    Jul 30 '17 at 9:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ΈρικΚωνσταντόπουλος this challenge would be in the form of bots taking part in a competition, so golfed/professional code doesn't really matter (I say that with a grain of salt). 200_success is saying that if we challenge you to a duel, but are only OK if we win, then the whole thing is set up for failure. \$\endgroup\$
    – Stephen S
    Jul 31 '17 at 0:47
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It also doesn't help matters if users participate in both sites (I don't - but many of our users do) and are forced to choose a side. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 15:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ @EBrown You're either with us, or you are the enemy! \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 15:37
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @ncalmbeblpaicr0011 That is precisely the kind of hyper-competitive attitude I am wary of. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 15:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Tsss, I would submit a golfed bot and a CR bot with different strategies, it'll all be about the meta in the end. \$\endgroup\$
    – konijn
    Aug 3 '17 at 20:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ -1 PPCG always wins. On PPCG, a PPCG user always wins every challenge. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 3 '17 at 21:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @NoOneIsHere 10/10 for logic right there :P \$\endgroup\$ Aug 4 '17 at 19:06
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ Hiya, ppcg member here. I think this challenge idea is such a bad one, and am thoroughly happy that you declined. I had thought the alleged "PPCG vs CR" thing had died a while ago, but someone thought it was a good idea to bring up fake hostility again. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 4 '17 at 21:06
18
\$\begingroup\$

No.

This will not be a battle between PPCG and CR. In fact, it is not acceptable to post a challenge on PPCG where only some people are allowed to participate. Now you might say "Anyone is welcome to participate, but if they're not a member on CR then they will fight for PPCG!" but that's just cheating.

In the post Continuing the discussion about the friendly challenge it was suggested that users will be divided by their userid rather than their main site. That's fine, that's not PPCG vs. CR, that's just another version of your previous Red vs. Blue.

So it will not be a challenge between PPCG and CR. It will be a challenge between some PPCG members, possibly some CR members, and possibly some other members. But it will not be PPCG Team and a CR Team. It would be better to call the teams Red and Blue, or Yellow and Purple, or whatever.

In addition to not being a good idea to battle sites between each other, the challenge proposal also haven't answered concerns and questions raised in comments and seems like more of an idea than the rules for a challenge.

Those who want to participate in the King of The Hill battle may feel free to participate. I'd recommend posting your bots on Code Review afterwards to get improvement suggestions on any aspect of the code (Review it enough and it might become the ultimate bot, except that we already have one of those).

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ As much as I want to think that this is killjoy behaviour, I have to agree. I personally thought that this was doomed from the outset, and wasn't really going to work. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 4 '17 at 19:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ However, I am currently working on a better, more co-operative challenge idea, and was wondering if you guys would be interested? I'm writing up a meta post here at the moment, but just wanted to see if you were open to it. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 5 '17 at 17:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @cairdcoinheringaahing You might want to chat with us about the idea in our chat room \$\endgroup\$ Aug 5 '17 at 19:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm delighted to see this response. I'd add that king-of-the-hill contests on PPCG are usually very friendly and supportive, with people offering each other advice on their code and strategy. PPCG might not be as different from Code Review as might at first appear. The idea of a contest between two overlapping communities was not a consensus decision but a spontaneous individual action (albeit well meaning). \$\endgroup\$
    – trichoplax
    Aug 6 '17 at 9:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm down voting for the lack of awareness and numerous assumptions put into this answer. The contradiction of saying "no" and then telling people to do it if they want does not help, either. That's not to say that it's pas merit. \$\endgroup\$
    – tuskiomi
    Aug 25 '17 at 5:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tuskiomi First of all, you didn't actually down-vote. Secondly, the "No" is for "It will not be a PPCG vs. CR thing". \$\endgroup\$ Aug 29 '17 at 8:03
13
\$\begingroup\$

I think this is pretty much doomed from the outset (but don't let me stop you having fun).

To see why it's doomed, imagine things were the other way round:

Hey, PPCG, let's have a collaboration to write the clearest, simplest, most maintainable and well-documented code!

First, this would be a blatant attempt to secure "home field advantage", and second, you'd be quite right to say, boooooring. If you were interested in helping people to write clear, simple, etc. code then you would already be contributing to Code Review, and if you weren't then a challenge probably wouldn't make you change your mind.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well here is the thing. It about knowing how to code. You don't need to know how to make it fit in as little space as possible. \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 23:23
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Christopher the point still stands. People who are interested in both are probably already on both sites. \$\endgroup\$
    – trichoplax
    Aug 6 '17 at 9:16
4
\$\begingroup\$

Working out some details

I'm here from Team PPCG (sigh we need a better teamname). The intention of this answer is to work out some details.

Where will this be posted?

Since this is an intersite competition, who hosts the competition? I think it should probably be us, because

  • A member of our site challenged you, and
  • We actually have a tag because we like playing around with bots and killing each other we host competitions like these within our site

What will be the KoTH?

There is now a draft on our site for this challenge: https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2140/sandbox-for-proposed-challenges/13492#13492

So, we'll need a bunch of CR members to join PPCG?

Yup.

What if I'm an active member of both sites?

Should we make users side with the site on which they have more rep or more badges, or should we let everyone pick freely? I side with the latter personally.

What if everyone joins PPCG?

Since PPCG is obviously so great [citation needed], what do we do if when everyone joins our team?


Meta

I will edit ideas into this post; feel free to answer these questions in comments or in your own answers.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ the sandbox post will be coming tomorrow most likely. It is getting late and I would probably end up posting it on main instead \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 1:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ Sandbox codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2140/… \$\endgroup\$ Jul 29 '17 at 2:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ "What if everyone joins PPCG?" Then CR is out of people so PPCG wins. ;) \$\endgroup\$
    – EKons
    Jul 30 '17 at 9:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ Despite being an avid golfer, if this actually happens, I might defect to Code Review. I'll see myself out. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 19:27
  • \$\begingroup\$ @cairdcoinheringaahing :P Don't worry, we probably won't exile you :P \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 19:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HyperNeutrino at the moment, I feel exiled over at code golf D: If this actually does happen, I'm afraid I'll gaće to join CR, before Aug 26th at least. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 19:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ @cairdcoinheringaahing That is true... \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 20:02
-1
\$\begingroup\$

To address a concern about us pulling a Stack Eggs:

I promise as the current overseer of this challenge that any bots that are intentionally messing with other bots codes/submissions with be disqualified and depending on the circumstances reported to moderators for removal. I really want this to go well and hope the best.

And may the odds ever be in your favor!

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "And may the odds ever be in your favor!" in whose favor you say? \$\endgroup\$
    – EKons
    Jul 30 '17 at 10:01
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ uhhh no bias. Everyone \$\endgroup\$ Jul 30 '17 at 18:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ Some biased user probably downvoted that's why I'm asking. \$\endgroup\$
    – EKons
    Jul 30 '17 at 18:11
-1
\$\begingroup\$

To even things up, another possibility would be a two stage deathmatch.

The PPCG stage would be normal. Everyone would contribute their bots. It plays to the PPCG strengths of individualized competition.

The Code Review stage would be different. Instead of many bots, we'd produce one bot (or one bot per competing language) via iterative review. This would play to Code Review strengths of collaborative feedback.

So PPCG would have the advantage of more contestants while Code Review would have the advantage of iteration after the initial deathmatch. I don't know which advantage wins, but that's part of what makes the challenge interesting.

We could make the golfing languages (Jelly, etc.) not available for bots, as it can be guessed that Code Review doesn't normally use them.

Note that this way, it's Code Review methodology versus PPCG methodology. So some people could compete on both sides. This also allows people to participate without joining PPCG.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Golfing languages are terrible for bots. Besides, most of the time we don't even golf our bots :P \$\endgroup\$ Jul 31 '17 at 19:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'd love to see a Jelly/Java battle to the death! \$\endgroup\$ Aug 1 '17 at 19:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .