Sign up or log in to submit a post.
Thanks! Excited to have you as part of the community
Thanks! We'd love to make it free (maybe we can one day), but it's really about how altruistic you are for now. All subscription fees go straight into the prize pool and get paid out to the communities favourite projects each week - we don't take a cut, it's about makers helping each other out financially rather than just advice/fun. If we raise some funding in the future we can use that to help with the prize pool and make it subscription free You're feedback is really helpful, as it aligns with our own current frustrations with the model that we're trying to work out!
If you ever do want to join, then use the code PIONEER503 and you'll get 3 months at half price.
Thanks James :)
I'm curious about how you decided which feedback to showcase? Given that it's 2 pieces of feedback each from 3 companies out of the hundreds on Pioneer (and each piece of feedback can only receive a maximum of 1 upvote so it's not like they were the most popular pieces of feedback)
yeah definitely a good improvement. I spoke to Rishi before and suggested having them both side-by-side as two columns too, that would shorten the journey even further.
Yeah, he was hyping it on twitter too
I think your assertion that everyone shares the same goal is a little misplaced - having been a participant in Pioneer for 30 weeks, and having spoken to hundreds of fellow competitors, I can tell you that isn't the case (though I appreciate that it seems like it is at first!). I know of people who don't want the prize and are explicitly participating for the community aspect (yes, I found that at bit baffling), I know some people who participate in Pioneer because it keeps them accountable, I even spoke with one guy you just told me he only cares about Pioneer because it generates leads for his business (not sure if he's even in the top 50, I don't see him in the top 30).
As we've heard now from Rishi - Pioneer ignores past winners when applying their 'top 50 being reviewed for the Pioneer prize', a much needed clarification . It does also align with my analogy somewhat - you can 'win' that bigger Pioneer prize (like winning Wimbledon), but the leaderboard represents an ongoing ranking based on winning the validation and votes of your peers on a regular basis (which is like the ATP tour non-grand slam events). If you've joined Pioneer exclusively for the headline prize then I agree that analogy doesn't work! I just know that many people see a series of wins, big and small, from performing well in the Pioneer tournament. It took quite a while for me to discover their were people genuinely involved for a whole host of wins outside of the headline prize, and it definitely changed my perception of Pioneer - and frankly convinced made me stick around long enough to become a Pioneer.
I'm interested as to why you feel that Pioneers are more advanced than other players, or at least exactly what you mean by the word 'advanced'? I do like the different leagues idea by the way, it's something we're thinking about for HackerStash funnily enough, though post-MVP launch - I find the tournament dynamics coupled with community super interesting really, very hard to strike the right balance.
These threads have gotten pretty long and Rishi has helped with the clarification so I don't want to add to the noise - but I'd be happy to carry on chatting (and debating :P ) it if you like - you can email me via email@example.com :)
Yeah I agree it's not very clear, I think they will try and make it clearer soon to remove any confusion - like I said, I had the same thought as munlyleong in the past :) I was just making a case for why it's not that weird to keep previous winners on the board if you compare the way many sports rankings work. Pioneer want as many talented teams with awesome projects to win as possible, so I don't think you need to worry about whether they're accidentally losing visibility of good projects - it's in their interest not too. I'm sure they will clarify how they interpret the top 50 projects after seeing this thread :) (also why I thanked munlyleong for writing the post).
We've had the same thought as you at times (having only become pioneer winners only a few weeks ago), but ultimately it's like plenty of other competitions. Take tennis for example - if you've won a grand slam during the season, and finish ranked #2 in the world, that doesn't mean you retire to a winners league the following season. It sometimes seems unfair that there are people trying to come up in the rankings but still can't defeat Federer, Djokovic and Nadal, but really it makes a reasonable amount of sense.
Not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea. Like we put more energy into providing meaningful feedback to our peers, really reviewing the projects thoroughly etc because we wanted to keep ourselves firmly in the top 50 to be in with a shot of winning (now we've continued to do so because we value the feedback we receive, want to help other competitors out, and the leaderboard keeps us on our toes). If it hadn't been for past winners taking up space at the top there would have been less incentive for us - less competition or risk of falling down - which would likely reduce the overall quality of conversation between participants across the tournament. Less than half the top 30 (13/30) have won from what I can see, let alone the top 50, so there's still plenty of space.
I imagine it's something the Pioneer team are/do think about though, and perhaps one middle ground might be to have a filter or hide/show functionality on the leaderboard so you can at least see a top 50 without past winners, even if that doesn't effect the outcomes. Ultimately, if you're in the top 50 it doesn't matter if you're 1st or 45th, being in that bracket at the time of reviews is what counts I think.
I'm interested to hear other people's thoughts on this, I'll share the link, thanks for posting!
Awesome, super useful!