Organizer, I have a question about the jam.
Why was the deadline extended by one day without a proper announcement to all participants?
This affects the fairness of the jam quite a lot. Many people, including me, submitted their projects earlier for different reasons. For example, I submitted a pretty rough version because, according to the original deadline, I only had about 4–5 hours out of the last 24 to work on the project. If I had known that the deadline would be extended, I could have finished and polished some important parts.
So the deadline stopped feeling like a fair rule. Some participants rushed, cut ideas, and submitted unfinished versions, and then the deadline was silently moved by another day.
I also have a question about the judging criteria. Right now, they mostly seem to judge how annoying, confusing, painful, or impractical the project is. But they do not really cover some important things, such as:
originality of the idea;
whether the project actually works;
overall completeness;
how well it fits the jam theme;
technical execution;
whether there is actual design behind it, not just random uncomfortable stuff.
I understand that the jam theme is about making an inconvenient color picker, but even in that kind of jam, the criteria should still allow projects to be compared fairly.
Can you explain why the deadline was extended without a proper announcement, and why these judging criteria were chosen?