2020-DEC-01 Info: You can shape the upcoming "Community Scramble" - quite literally. Check out the sample collection thread for SWC041 / January 2021

Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

Ask us a question, give feedback, join surveys, make suggestions
Olli H
Backer
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 16:08 CET

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#131

Post by Olli H »

Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 00:48 CEST
... I was more looking for answers as to why things (apparently) seem to go wrong...
Actually, my main point or guess is that feedback and voting process is the main problem ”why things seem to go wrong.” That’s why I felt it would be ok to open up that discussion. (Perhaps I too hastily started to think about solutions, which would be another topic. Sorry for that).

Hopefully also others could join this thread, so we could discuss how they feel about feedback and voting phase, so we could find out if it is a problem. And only if it is a problem to others, after that we could discuss what can be done.

There's a big difference between these two cases:

- "I didn't win this time". That feeling is probably ok for everyone.

- "I was categorized as a loser". Here's the moment when hard feelings and resentment may start to creep in. And it may expel one from future competitions.

Personally I’m quite a teflon guy when it comes to receiving praise or rant: it doesn’t affect mood nor my voting at all. I have quite often chosen as a winner the guy who just bashed my work. But when it comes to choosing the loser, then I’m a fragile human being. Choosing the losers (quite often with artificial justifications) is always an unjust process which breaks me apart.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#132

Post by Mister Fox »

:arrow: Let us continue to focus on this topic for a minute:
Again, I totally get both of you. But I also have to point out that the topic "giving / receiving feedback" is a two edged blade (or multiple edges, rather).


:arrow: On the one end... if we keep on having the rule in terms of giving/receiving feedback, then we risk users not joining or not coming back after their first game. If we do not have this as mandatory setup, then we risk that people just join, never communicate, hope to win something and then also never come back (basically - take things for granted). If we only limit this to "give feedback to three to five participants", then we might see the more than valid "but why didn't I get feedback?" comments. The latter might actually also happen once we really exceed 20 participants (see Rule Books).

There really is no right way to do this. But maybe we can still change the vectors.


I understand that other games might not have the "mandatory feedback part" and on the surface it seems to be good. But in reality, all I've seen on songwriting communities was the quick "sounds good, moving on". Or "I only want positive feedback", while possible valid criticism (like an annoying frequency in the mix) is being shrugged away. I've seen this especially on KVR Audio's Music Cafe where there are 30-50 submissions on a daily basis, and barely anybody comments. Or if there is somebody that comments, then it's only "sounds good - keep it up". In fact, I've tried to give feedback myself, pointing out possible technical issues. And in some cases, I was barked at like "How dare you? I know what I do, checked your page and mixes, your el-cheapo equipment/studio sucks. How can you give any good feedback anyway". Ouch...

The reason why I thought of setting up this rule, was to get people engaged. The concept was to get involved, learn how to receive feedback, but also how to give this feedback. Turns out that it's not that easy. Looking back at SWC033 especially, where I got some very, very angry mails in the end (and actually also lost a future Song Provider), I think the biggest problem is also the "type" of communication.

The core idea of this is still to be helpful, uplifting, etc. Instead what I saw/still see (and what was also thrown at my head) was yet again "negativity", once more "people don't understand art for the life of them". And I think what it boils down to mainly, is how these posts are written. SWC033 did drift off a bit into personal attacks and bad experience from other platforms (with open written parallels drawn). I did try to step in to enforce a more uplifting and encouraging environment. Everyone has their own set of skills and their own set of tools, also making music is highly subjective.

But one thing clearly shined through: it's how people communicate in general.




:arrow: Which brings me to changing the vectors.

As written in my last post, I already want to change the following (thanks Olli) in the Rules and Guidelines
  • Minor edits to your submission are allowed, but this is not a WIP forum. Your entry is final!
to something like
  • While the SWC is not a WIP forum, minor edits to and re-submissions of your production are allowed. If there is really just one "final piece to the puzzle" missing, feel free to ask for feedback, get people involved, improve on your mix, edit your submission post. Other participants are also encouraged to give feedback of course, even prior to the voting process.
  • your production must the finished and not be further edited by the time of the deadline (24th of the month, 23:59 UTC+1/CET or 23:59 UTC+2/CEST), as all entries will be collected and posted globally after the submission period, to create a foundation for the voting process


Looking at the "Voting and Feedback" process, there is also a lot of stuff that can be improved.
Let's take a look at the current Evaluation Guidelines (status 30-JUL-2020)
General Evaluation Guidelines
  • Feedback of the productions are mandatory. This user/participant interaction has the focus to give constructive criticism, see what can be expanded/improved upon one's creation
  • Give feedback to everyone. If the competition exceeds 20 entries, then only give feedback to your top 20 productions. This is to encourage user interaction and maintains constructive criticism
  • your created Top 20 list shall ideally have the backdrop upon "technical flaws" rather than just personal issues with a certain instrument, genre or (worst case) even participating person. You can also score "Bonus Points" for this (read below)
  • In order to have objectivity with the commentary, your focus should be on the following:
    • Production Feedback (55%): Use of melodic, harmonic and/or rhythmic resources - are they "working"? Arrangement and instrumentation - do they work for the song? Do they support the proposed idea of the composer for the current theme? (please keep in mind, not everyone knows harmony theory)
    • Technical Objectivity (30%): how great was the production as a whole? Is there something that you see problematic in the mix (mix techniques, mastering, etc)? What would you do different (give examples)? If you're skilled in technical analysis, maybe back that up with values (Frequency Range, Loudness Values, Maximum Peak, etc)
    • Neutral to Subjective commentary (15%): Did it fit the monthly theme (can be subjective)? Make a personal comment, maybe mention what stood out to you, what completely didn't work for you, etc. Ask for sharing "setup tips / settings" (adds to interaction)
  • Once you placed your vote, you can not change it. Unless permission has been granted by the challenge staff (response can take up to 48 hours!)
  • Vote Results will usually be posted about 48-72 hours after the voting period has ended - this is not an automated process


While there is technically already a focus on "please give constructive criticism, no personal attacks" and "please try to focus on more technical aspects rather than 'subjective impression'", this does feel a bit off-putting and can maybe be simplified. Keep in mind, this whole lower section has been a result due to very, very angry users (or one user rather) in the "sub-15" Songwriting Competitions. We needed a more clear line, and now it's backfiring.


Let's simplify to maybe:
General Evaluation Guidelines
  • Feedback of the productions are mandatory. While this might feel foreign and uncomfortable to you, this user/participant interaction stems from the idea to encourage user interaction. You can learn how to give and/or receive, not to mention maintain constructive criticism, see what can be expanded/improved upon one's creation. Feedback to own productions is always wanted, but it's often left short on plenty of audio communities.
  • please give feedback to everyone. If the competition exceeds 20 entries, then you are free to only give feedback to your top 20 productions.
  • your created Top 20 list should ideally have the backdrop upon "technical flaws" rather than personal issues with a certain instrument, genre or (worst case) even the participating person.
  • please be objective and encouraging, have a focus on the overall production and technical stuff. For example: "please look out for possible issues in the following frequency ranges", or "while this is a great melody, and unless it was planned this way, some notes might clash with the chord progressions. Maybe shift some notes around a bit on time-stamp 0:00min".
  • It is encouraged to commit to your vote sheet, although you can change it without asking for permission until the voting period has ended (1st of the month, 23:59 UTC+1/CET or 23:59 UTC+2/CEST)
  • Vote Results will usually be posted about 48-72 hours after the voting period has ended - this is not an automated process

While we're still pushing the "feedback is mandatory" theme, this should sound way more inviting. At least I hope it does.




@becsei_gyorgy
I will think about the "PM hidden vote" mechanic. I can indeed set up another user (and mail address) and switch in-between. But I'm not making any promises. We still have a couple of days until the next voting period is happening.

Mere 3 days for handling all of that is a bit short though. Even though I do send out reminder emails now.

BTW - how do you folks like them?
Shall this be a continued thing?

User avatar
Square
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 19:06 CEST
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#133

Post by Square »

Hi there Mr. Fox,

Ive just joined this community a couple weeks ago and have submitted to the mixing contest and have been lookin through the forums, so i thought i would give you my reasons for entering the mix contest and not the songwriting tho i enjoy doing both.

For me personally, I found myself here because of the mixing element of the challenges. There are many many songwriting challenges out there, but a mixing contest is more unique and special. So in my mind, i would have been much more interested in a 'songwriting' challenge that focuses around using a particular technique/limitation/trick (hard side chain, only square synths, vocal as instrument etc) this would allow you to move some interest from the mixing category into the songwriting category and list it as a 'Technique Challenge' with a limited amount of time per song (1 min maybe?) where we come up with ideas based around concepts that could maybe turn into songs later down the road. But this focus on elements of the song would allow people to invest into coming up with interesting and unique ideas without the pressure of completing a full song, maybe there could be a round 2 to finish the song (or not). But i think a focus on something that sparks creativity, without the larger commitemit of a full song would be awesome, and it would let people show off their neat tricks and techniques in practical ways.

Just my quick thoughts, and i dont know the history of here up until this point, so sorry if some thoughts are just redundant or already tried, but ill drop a few more as they come to me anyways lol, hope it helps in some way ^^

Great job here btw, getting a bunch of engineers working nicely together is like trying to herd cats, but its really good to see!

becsei_gyorgy
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 19:55 CET
Location: Szeged, Hungary

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#134

Post by becsei_gyorgy »

Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 19:46 CEST
„learn how to receive feedback, but also how to give this feedback. Turns out that it's not that easy.”
There is the point. At the beginning it is very difficult thing give a real feedback, but there is plenty to learn how to listen to the music of others, how to listen to the details in other music, etc. At the same time, it's a frustrating thing to say so many opinions as a rookie, and even if we're not musically trained ourselves, what should we say?
I think we agree in general that mandatory feedback is basically the right idea and even giving feedback helps a lot in personal development, but I totally understand if there are those who are frustrated by it.
Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 19:46 CEST
"we risk that people just join, never communicate, hope to win something and then also never come back"
If someone join to win something and he won then maybe never come back, that's true.
If he didn't won, maybe will try once, twice more, etc. But if he didn't won AND received a lot of bad feedbacks and he feel themselves "I'm a looser” he never come back, that's 100 %.

In summary: I can accept (and I agree also) that the mandatory feedback is not a bad idea and could help a lot but maybe better if we don’t demand a detailed analysis (especially from and towards newcomers), and its time would be after the end of the voting period (therefore I suggested a shorter voting time and after that a conversation/feedback period).
Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 19:46 CEST
"SWC033"
It can happen anywhere, anytime.
But perhaps it illustrates well what it is like when someone suddenly get unexpected feedbacks from dozens of "not very nice people".

Changing the vectors.
1. "The allowed re-submissions until deadline" - Great idea, thanks to Olli.
It would be really useful if you could already at this station comment on the work of others with the intention of improvement, or ask for help and advice from others even help with correct style interpretation, etc. It would be possible to make corrections...

2. "It is encouraged to commit to your vote sheet, although you can change it without asking for permission until the voting period has ended"
Very bad idea. If the voting mechanism will be hidden then it is unnecessary. (but it can lead to chaos). If the voting mechanism remains open the chaos is guaranteed :smile: (think SWC033)

3. Hidden votes: i think it would be very easy to implement as described. And maybe it would bring back song providers as well.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#135

Post by Mister Fox »

Square wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 21:37 CEST
...So in my mind, i would have been much more interested in a 'songwriting' challenge that focuses around using a particular technique/limitation/trick (hard side chain, only square synths, vocal as instrument etc) this would allow you to move some interest from the mixing category into the songwriting category and list it as a 'Technique Challenge' with a limited amount of time per song (1 min maybe?) where we come up with ideas based around concepts that could maybe turn into songs later down the road.
First and foremost, thank you for the feedback.

We do have the occasional "limited tools" challenge. The last one for example was in April 2020, where people were asked to use "at least two synthesizers" in some shape for form. June 2019 was also quite an interesting game, as people were asked to use an AI "melody generation engine" based upon Ludwig van Beethoven's songwriting, then build their own composition on top of that.

The real true "sound design" games we have so far, run every January in the form of the "Community Scramble". The basic idea here is to only use community created sample content, and turn this into music. Sadly last year, the participation for sample sourcing was a bit low, which is why I will start the sample collection in November already, if not sooner.



Square wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 21:37 CEST
Great job here btw, getting a bunch of engineers working nicely together is like trying to herd cats, but its really good to see!
Maybe I should create a testimonial page. :thinking:
This is one of the best overall feedback I've read so far. Thank you.



becsei_gyorgy wrote:
Thu Jul 30, 2020 21:52 CEST
I think we agree in general that mandatory feedback is basically the right idea and even giving feedback helps a lot in personal development, but I totally understand if there are those who are frustrated by it.
This whole topic honestly doesn't put my mind at ease. So I've reached out to more communities I'm was/still am a part of (mainly the video game soundtrack remixing scene). And I already got some interesting feedback. With hopefully more to come.

I would be lying if I promise you a "hidden vote" system. I just can't do that at the moment. Neither do I want to drop the feedback mechanic (in fact, the communities I've reached out to, also receives feedback to entries! It is written in their rules as "encouraged").

But rest assured, some things will change for SWC036. Hopefully in a more engaging way. It is all down to how the/our rules are written, I guess. I only hope I can get everything re-written by the time the next Mix(ing) Challenge and Songwriting Competition starts. I had a long list of changes/fixes planned for the community by the start of August. But as always, things happen, and resulting delays are in close pursuit.

Oh well.



Thank you all for the feedback so far. Back to maintenance and tests I go.

becsei_gyorgy
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 19:55 CET
Location: Szeged, Hungary

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#136

Post by becsei_gyorgy »

Mister Fox wrote:
Fri Jul 31, 2020 05:56 CEST

I would be lying if I promise you a "hidden vote" system. I just can't do that at the moment.
I clearly see a lack of intention, I could do that in 5 minutes.

Just by writing in the extremely detailed and lowercase rule book that we ask you to articulate the feedback nicely (the rule book is also so long and rigid that newcomers don’t even read it: – as I wrote earlier, nothing changes, and then everyone wonders why things aren’t evolving.

I interpreted the people I asked and my own opinion, I can’t do more and I think I’ll give up.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#137

Post by Mister Fox »

I am honestly starting to not like your current negative tone, becsey_gyorgy.

I do get your point. But I am investing a lot of time into this whole community, trying to cover a lot of ground and trying be as helpful as i can in parallel - as one person. I listen to every feedback - positive and negative alike (although recently, a bit too much negativity for my liking, which does tank my energy levels). I've adapted/changed a lot of things throughout the years, based upon given feedback.

I did state several times what I can do and what not. I also made clear what I am able to do as of this moment and what I am willing to take a closer look at (as in: do further engine tests, try to find a solution to the voting process that will be fair for everyone).

I can do nothing more than that.
And then you still write "I clearly see a lack of intention, I could...".

I don't think that treatment is really fair, in my humble opinion. :thinking:




I am also putting an end to the constant debate on the Rules and Guidelines now - my patience has run out with the constant recurring drama revolving around it. Especially since my original question had a way different focus (TL;DR: am I not reaching out enough? Do I reach out to the wrong people? Is the premise not well written? etc). And I had other questions on top of that as well (e.g. the new reminder email).

We need a common ground for every participant. Every game has this in varying degrees of detail. And the Songwriting Competition is already really way more relaxed (nonchalant) compared to the Mix(ing) Challenges. By joining such a game, or any music related game out there rather, you agree to adhere to the given terms and conditions. So one can't later say "but I didn't know of this". It just doesn't work this way, sorry.


As mentioned (and agreed on) - there will be overhauls and simplifications to the Rule Book by 1st August (see my posts above). It will be a bit of a miracle, considering my current time management. But I will manage to get this out in time!

How we go from there, we will have to wait and see.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#138

Post by Mister Fox »

The following paragraphs are a follow-up to the recent "Rule Book" changes for the Songwriting Competition. The biggest change we have seen in the last three games, has been "work as much on your production as you like, upload, gather feedback, work some more on it". Which was not only taken very positively, but (to my impression) also revived the Songwriting Competition.

We however still have the monthly recurring debates, that the voting system we are using as final evaluation, is offputting, annoying, and sometimes downright unfair. The main problem is - that we can't really use a different way to declare our "Winners Podium" as bonus incentive for participating. How we get there, is an endless debate that I do not want pick up this time around. I am still looking into possible options. But how everything is set up now, things work (in fact - they work for pretty much any other community that uses this system). So please... let us move on.




A different thing that I'd love to address, is the "Bonus Points System".

As of this moment, it works like this:
SWC Rule Book - Rules for Voting wrote:Participants of the Songwriting Competition can score up to four (number: 4) global bonus points on the score sheet for the following situations
  • 1 bonus point for submitting a mix equal or lower than -14 LUFS ILk / -1 dBTP max (Integrated)
  • 1 bonus point for properly naming your files and making them downloadable by the time the deadline has ended, or up until the "submission summary" has been collected and posted (usually happening between 6-12 hours after the submission period has ended)
  • 1 bonus point for properly documenting what equipment was used during the production (you don't have to go into super detail regarding plugins per channel), and what your idea behind the production was
  • 1 bonus point for giving final constructive feedback and ideas how to improve on the production during the voting process
The idea for the "Bonus Point Mechanic" is to not only get a bit more insight of ones production, but to also boost the interaction between songwriters, and to adhere to given rules. Sometimes one extra point can have a drastic influence on the final score sheet.
I think, we can introduce some improvements. In fact, I already hinted at that in the last two Songwriting Competitions, but especially SWC037 / September where I opted to not disqualify one participant, but went the route of deducting points. You might see where this is going now.

:arrow: I want to (ideally) do away from the strict "If you do not give final feedback and/or cast your vote, your entry will be disqualified from the final results" rule, or at least modify it to make the whole game even more engaging.




:arrow: What does that mean?

I've thought about drastically overhauling the Bonus Point Mechanic. Instead of participants managing to grab just four (number: 4) additional bonus points, which can mean a last-minute shift on the score board, I am considering to upgrade the bonus points to something like 30-50. I would like to try to introduce an "inverse logic". Rather than being frustrated to be just disqualified for a small mishap (e.g. completely forgetting deadlines), and therefore being automatically "last", we will alternatively see a hurting-yet-fair "drop" in points. This (hopefully) feels way less punishing as you can still learn from what you did wrong, then improve on it and have an incentive to score as high as possible in a future game. A different twist on the learning factor of our community.


Example:

You start out with 30 bonus points.

However, you slightly messed up by the time the deadline has been reached. Your song can not be associated with your forum account, since the file naming is off: you'll loose 5 points. You didn't give final feedback and/or cast your vote: you'll loose an additional 10 points.

Now let's assume you scored 120 points overall (global feedback), which would have put you on second place. The third place made 115 points, fourth place had 107 points. With the bonus points, you could score up to 150 points. The third place made it to 140 points, since he/she had the track exceeding the loudness limit. And fourth place made it to 137 points. Since you didn't provide final feedback/cast your vote and your file could not be associated with your user account - you only scored up to 135 points. Third place is now moving up to second place, and fourth place is moving up to third, while you are not on 4th place.

This does hurt, but you're not disqualified.

This doesn't mean that we will get rid of all ground rules - we would just "reshape" another one of them from a more negative connotation, to a more neutral one. At least in my opinion.




:arrow: How would the overhauled bonus point mechanic look like?

I thought of something like this:
 ! Bonus Info
Participants of the Songwriting Competition can score up to thirty (number: 30) global bonus points on the score sheet for the following situations
  • 1 bonus point for properly naming your files and making them downloadable by the time the deadline has ended, or up until the "submission summary" has been collected and posted (usually happening between 6-12 hours after the submission period has ended)
  • 2 bonus points each (up to 4 points max) for submitting a mix equal or lower than -14 LUFS ILk (+-0 LU Integrated) and -1 dBTP max -- if you only got 2,5 points, your track either exceeded -14 LUFS ILk or it clipped. Please have an eye on that in the future.
  • 5 bonus points for properly documenting what equipment was used during the production (you don't have to go into super detail regarding plugins per channel), and what your idea behind the production was
  • 10 bonus points for giving final constructive feedback and ideas how to improve on the production during the voting process
  • 10 bonus points for creating your "top 25 entries" during the voting process (part of the "Winners Podium" mechanic to get a chance to win bonus software licenses)


Listing on the score sheet in the future:
  • File Consistency (1 pt)
  • Loudness / dBTP (4 pts in form of 2+2 pts)
  • Documentation (5 pts)
  • Final Feedback (20 pts in form of 10+10 pts)
Total: 30 pts



Change of wording in the rules:

From:
Important: it is mandatory for everyone to participate in the voting process. If you do not give final feedback and/or cast your vote, your entry will be disqualified from the final results

To (draft):
Important: it is mandatory for each participant partake in the so called "voting process". Everyone must provide some final words of encouragement (feedback) and vote for their personal Top 20-25 favorite compositions (unless 25 participants are exceeded). Giving constructive feedback and interacting is an essential part of this particular game. Lack of participation will not disqualify you, but it does put you at a strong disadvantage on the final score sheet.





:arrow: This is where you come in

I would love to introduce this overhauled mechanic with SWC 038 / October already. I know, I'm terribly behind schedules and this is a bit on short notice (I'm being honest with you - I have been pushing this topic in front of me for over two weeks now). But I am fairly positive that this won't cause a huge rift between all Songwriting Competition regulars, but actually encourage even more interaction.

These numbers are not perfect. And this is where I'd love to hear your feedback what you would consider to be "painful" to loose out on, but still fair while looking at the bigger picture.


Thank you for your time :thumbsup:

Double Tap
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2020 12:41 CEST

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#139

Post by Double Tap »

My view as someone new is that the bonus points right now seem only barely relevant, so there's merit in increasing their value.

But I think that voting and giving detailed final feedback should be a prerequisite for taking part.

I'm sure everyone's motivation is quite different, but for me the main attraction is that there's a group of people who will listen to my stuff and tell me what they like and dislike and what can be improved.

If the proposal is that you can enter a song and take a 10 point hit for not bothering to provide feedback, but still have your song in the competition, then why bother voting? It takes a substantial amount of effort to listen to everything and write feedback. I doubt many people would be cynical about it, but it would be tempting on eg October 29 to think, oh, I'll do it later, and never quite get round to doing feedback.

Olli H
Backer
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 16:08 CET

Re: Songwriting Competition - General Gossip Thread

#140

Post by Olli H »

So what do I consider as ”painful”, and in relation to that, what is the ”pleasurable” part of these competitions?


Pleasure

It’s always a pleasure to create music, participate and listen others’ submissions. And to give positive feedback.



Pain

Personally I don’t feel it painful to loose points or to be among losers. But it’s every time extremely painful for me to categorize others as losers and total losers. So, when the voting deadline is approaching (and again I haven’t gathered too many positive votes), if it’s not mandatory to vote, it might begin to feel attractive just to give only the positive comments and skip the voting.



To skip the painful part it could go something like this.

8 particants:
1: 4 pts
2: 3 pts
3: 2 pts
4: 1 pts
5-8: 0 pts

12 particants:
1: 6 pts
2: 5 pts
3: 4 pts
4: 3 pts
5: 2 pts
6: 1 pts
7-12: 0 pts

Post Reply