Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 329 posts

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#141

Post by [deleted] »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #40
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule is to not use "Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files..." They didn't do that. They uploaded the HTML to Github directly.

They quote the rule and link to the full rules. GitHub is explicitly mentioned. They failed on a technicality. https://tsaweb.org/docs/default-source/themes-and-problems-2... She then points out this rule in the Official Rulebook: I. Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files, such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit, are NOT permitted.

[deleted]

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#142

Post by whstl »

satvikpendem wrote: post #5

And the most recent update: https://old.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/119j8o4/part_2_disq... It looks like they simply don't realize that GitHub is not GitHub Pages.

They were using both Github and Github Pages, however it was Github Pages with self-crafted HTML, not with templates.

I think the issue here is that they (EDIT: the teachers, not the participants) don't realize you can use Github pages for things other than template-based pages.

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#144

Post by [deleted] »

kenneth wrote: post #67
bitwize wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Following the rules didn't help them. The rule was no templating tools that generate code. They didn't use that. It simply seems like they had to deal with a school official who was too dumb to know what GitHub was and too egotistical to admit they might be wrong. I actually dealt with something similar back in my high school days. I self-taught myself to program starting around age 10 or so. So by the time I was off…

[deleted]

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#146

Post by mcv »

Goz3rr wrote: post #92
kenneth wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following the rules didn't help them. The rule was no templating tools that generate code. They didn't use that. It simply seems like they had to deal with a school official who was too dumb to know what GitHub was and too egotistical to admit they might be wrong. I actually dealt with something similar back in my high school days. I self-taught myself to program starting around age 10 or so. So by the time I was off…

The rules specifically namedrop Github: > Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files, such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit, are NOT permitted. With Jekyll being there, I can only assume the intention was to mention GitHub Pages as an example, but as it is the rules clearly say using GitHub is NOT permitted. They could've questioned this discrepa…

But they used github just for git. If they hadn't mentioned github, nobody could have known. Or cared.

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#147

Post by cxr »

Dalewyn wrote: post #115
denton-scratch wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule didn't say "No github".

No, in fact the rules specify a "Github" among others as examples of "Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files" that you are "NOT permitted" (their emphasis) to use. Translating that into practical terms, it means "no Github", and also "no Jekyll" and all the other examples named and not named.

Here's what you said:

> The rules don't specify "github.io" or "load .md files", it broadly specifies "Github" the website "that generate[s] HTML from text" in no uncertain terms.

And that's just not true; the no-GitHub-whatsoever interpretation that you're pushing simply can't be described as "no[t] uncertain". In fact, I'd wager that a polling would reveal that most folks in a position to interpret the rules would come away quite certain that it isn't forbidden to use GitHub qua code host.

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#148

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

mcv wrote: post #146
Goz3rr wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rules specifically namedrop Github: > Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files, such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit, are NOT permitted. With Jekyll being there, I can only assume the intention was to mention GitHub Pages as an example, but as it is the rules clearly say using GitHub is NOT permitted. They could've questioned this discrepa…

But they used github just for git. If they hadn't mentioned github, nobody could have known. Or cared.

I'm not a web design professional, but they appear to have used it 3 ways-- 1) hosting and URL; 2) GitHub logo/branding on the footer and 3) back office collaboration tool.

I suspect it was uses #1 and #2 that generated the confusion, and while I am sympathetic to their feelings about the competition and DQ, I too might have been confused about whether they leveraged a "Wix-like" function to generate the page.

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#149

Post by Dalewyn »

cxr wrote: post #147
Dalewyn wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, in fact the rules specify a "Github" among others as examples of "Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files" that you are "NOT permitted" (their emphasis) to use. Translating that into practical terms, it means "no Github", and also "no Jekyll" and all the other examples named and not named.

Here's what you said: > The rules don't specify "github.io" or "load .md files", it broadly specifies "Github" the website "that generate[s] HTML from text" in no uncertain terms. And that's just not true; the no-GitHub-whatsoever interpretation that you're pushing simply can't be described as "no[t] uncertain". In fact, I'd wager that a polling would reveal that most folks in a position to interpret the rules would…

The rule closes off with, their emphasis, "NOT permitted".

If that combined with a specific name drop are "uncertain" to you, you should retake your English classes.

Re: Disqualified from a National Web Design Competition for Using GitHub

#150

Post by brookst »

aurbano wrote: post #116
Dalewyn wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's good that students learn this lesson now than later. Right now they get to learn these lessons with no skin off their backs. They're kids, most of the stuff they do is of no consequence one way or another. Once they enter the real world and the workforce, they get to learn these lessons with prices ranging from reprimands to terminations. Hardly a fun thing to go through.

We should foster a world full of people who use their brains to interpret rules. If we're going to blindly do something because "it's the exact rule written here" then we might as well replace all decision makers with an AI that never interprets anything. Their teacher was wrong for not interpreting the rules correctly - everyone's aware of that. On top of that the people writing those rules were wrong as well for ei…

It’s not that easy. The problem with letting enforcers use judgment is it leads to selective enforcement, where the criteria becomes “who broke the rules” as much as “were rules broken.”

It opens the door to all sorts of bad outcomes. For instance, being a good debater/lawyer becomes at least as important as being a good coder.

I’m not saying judgment has no place, just that it’s not a panacea. It has its own unfairness.

Post reply on HN