₦airaland Forum

Nipeks:
I think you misunderstood. I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23. Just a closer look at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness.".
Passing you for passing sake will not make a difference.
I'm sure the judges have tried their best to be fair. Try to see it as learned lesson, not injustice.
Try to focus on how you can improve on your weak areas.

I get your point, but I respectfully disagree that this is about 'passing for passing sake.'

My argument is about Proportionality. In any competition (or exam), if you make a mistake, you lose marks. You don't get expelled.

The 'sin' here was a visual alignment issue—a UI bug. The penalty applied was Disqualification. That is the equivalent of 'Capital Punishment' for a minor offense.

If the judges deducted 5 points for 'Bad UI Alignment' and I moved to the next stage with a lower score, I would accept that as a 'learned lesson.' But to delete an entry that has valid AI, Physics, and a Save System etc (which are technically harder to develop than aligning a pieces on a designated holes) feels like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

On this "I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23"

Actually, that is exactly my point—the competition does continue.

The organizer explicitly stated regarding the 22 passed entries: 'You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and sweetness.'

This means Stage 0 was just the gatekeeper. The real grading happens next.

I am not asking to 'pass for passing sake.' I am asking to be allowed into the exam hall because I know I have the answers for the difficult questions (Logic & Engineering), even if I messed up the handwriting (UI Alignment) on the cover page.

You will be able to prove yourself in the next challenge. Fear not.

showtechedge:
I get your point, but I respectfully disagree that this is about 'passing for passing sake.'

My argument is about Proportionality. In any competition (or exam), if you make a mistake, you lose marks. You don't get expelled.

The 'sin' here was a visual alignment issue—a UI bug. The penalty applied was Disqualification. That is the equivalent of 'Capital Punishment' for a minor offense.

If the judges deducted 5 points for 'Bad UI Alignment' and I moved to the next stage with a lower score, I would accept that as a 'learned lesson.' But to delete an entry that has valid AI, Physics, and a Save System etc (which are technically harder to develop than aligning a pieces on a designated holes) feels like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

On this "I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23"

Actually, that is exactly my point—the competition does continue.

The organizer explicitly stated regarding the 22 passed entries: 'You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and sweetness.'

This means Stage 0 was just the gatekeeper. The real grading happens next.

I am not asking to 'pass for passing sake.' I am asking to be allowed into the exam hall because I know I have the answers for the difficult questions (Logic & Engineering), even if I messed up the handwriting (UI Alignment) on the cover page.

Last last, the final judgement is at the discretion of the judges. They best know what they are looking for. See the admin entry.
I think the "pieces didn't stay on the designated holes" comment is not the only issue. My guess it that the UI was too chaotic for their taste.
Outlining every issue for everybody may take forever. You can ask for other areas that you can improve on.
I have gone through all the entries myself and I won't be surprised if the final winners are not my ideal winners. It is not my call.

showtechedge:
I get your point, but I respectfully disagree that this is about 'passing for passing sake.'

My argument is about Proportionality. In any competition (or exam), if you make a mistake, you lose marks. You don't get expelled.

The 'sin' here was a visual alignment issue—a UI bug. The penalty applied was Disqualification. That is the equivalent of 'Capital Punishment' for a minor offense.

If the judges deducted 5 points for 'Bad UI Alignment' and I moved to the next stage with a lower score, I would accept that as a 'learned lesson.' But to delete an entry that has valid AI, Physics, and a Save System etc (which are technically harder to develop than aligning a pieces on a designated holes) feels like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

On this "I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23"

Actually, that is exactly my point—the competition does continue.

The organizer explicitly stated regarding the 22 passed entries: 'You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and sweetness.'

This means Stage 0 was just the gatekeeper. The real grading happens next.

I am not asking to 'pass for passing sake.' I am asking to be allowed into the exam hall because I know I have the answers for the difficult questions (Logic & Engineering), even if I messed up the handwriting (UI Alignment) on the cover page.

You're missing the point, this is a 3D Ludo challenge, If your pieces aren't even sitting on the board properly, the 3D implementation is fundamentally broken,
It doesn't matter how advanced your save system or AI is if the basic visual interaction fails the first eye test, stage 0 is a pass/fail filter for the core requirements, not a scoring round where you get partial credit for trying hard
Also there are definitely other disqualified codes that have save system and AI stuffs you claim you have, the board was the priority, and yours didn't meet expectations, move on.

I love coding and tech based challenges, can't wait for the next one 🫡💯

Seun:
You will be able to prove yourself in the next challenge. Fear not.

Happy Sunday to y'all ❤️

showtechedge:
I get your point, but I respectfully disagree that this is about 'passing for passing sake.'

My argument is about Proportionality. In any competition (or exam), if you make a mistake, you lose marks. You don't get expelled.

The 'sin' here was a visual alignment issue—a UI bug. The penalty applied was Disqualification. That is the equivalent of 'Capital Punishment' for a minor offense.

If the judges deducted 5 points for 'Bad UI Alignment' and I moved to the next stage with a lower score, I would accept that as a 'learned lesson.' But to delete an entry that has valid AI, Physics, and a Save System etc (which are technically harder to develop than aligning a pieces on a designated holes) feels like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

On this "I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23"

Actually, that is exactly my point—the competition does continue.

The organizer explicitly stated regarding the 22 passed entries: 'You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and sweetness.'

This means Stage 0 was just the gatekeeper. The real grading happens next.

I am not asking to 'pass for passing sake.' I am asking to be allowed into the exam hall because I know I have the answers for the difficult questions (Logic & Engineering), even if I messed up the handwriting (UI Alignment) on the cover page.

I understand you guy . You are great . Missing this Nairaland’s challenge can not stop your grace and it does not mean you are not talented ; you are indeed talented.

Try and focus on something else and move on .

remi4ever:
Finished this on the 16th but I missed the deadline.

Currently working on a medical imaging AI backend that bridges real radiology vision models (CT & X-ray) with LLMs.

I just tested your Chexnet model with pneumonia chest xray .

If you don’t mind , should I drop my criticism?

doffman:
I just tested your Chexnet model with pneumonia chest xray .

If you don’t mind , should I drop my criticism?

Create and link to a new thread?

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Thank you Mr. Seun for this.

By posting this, I was able to know that my entry made it to the top 34% of submitted entries, and that is a reason for me to celebrate 🎉

I'm so grateful. 🙏

showtechedge:
Dear Seun and the Organizing Team,

I am writing to express my dissatisfaction regarding the disqualification of Entry 03 (showtechedge) at this initial stage. While I respect the need for quality control, disqualifying a fully functional, feature-rich entry solely because "pieces didn't stay on the designated holes" feels incredibly harsh—especially when compared to other decisions made in this same round.

I noticed in the decision log that Entry 37 was passed with the remark: "narrowly passed this round despite pieces not sitting in place."

If Entry 37 was granted a pass despite alignment issues, I strongly appeal that the same standard be applied to Entry 03. My board layout is correct and looks like a Ludo board, the single-file rule was obeyed, and the game features (AI, Save System, Physics) are robust.

The quality of the game’s engineering has not gone unnoticed by the community. @XploraBen specifically testified to the game's strength, stating:

"Not discrediting the effort of others, but among the 3D Ludo games I have tried here, these two wins it for me. I like the implementation of this one better because of its movable Ludo interface, 2 dice, player stats, and nice game play."

Even @TotoIsGud4boy, who correctly pointed out the visual misalignment ("why does the objects not sit on the rounded icons?", still acknowledged the engineering effort, stating: "You packed good features."

The original grading criteria explicitly stated that "Unique Features (very important)" would be a major factor. It seems unfair to prioritize a minor visual alignment issue over engineering effort that the community is already enjoying, especially when precedents for leniency exist with Entry 37.

To demonstrate that this is a trivial fix and not a structural flaw, I have corrected the visual alignment (by removing the confusing hole markers entirely) in under 2 minutes. I have attached the screenshot of the updated look below alongside the old look for comparison.

I kindly ask you to reconsider this decision and allow Entry 03 to proceed to the next stage where gameplay and code quality can be properly assessed.

Thank you.

There’s a reason I stepped back from the contest, a single judge is going to be biased. He who pays the piper dictates the tune. Regardless it’s a fun experience for you. My advice? Get busy with your life and build a product for yourself and the world and add this to your portfolio. Again, your entries was one of the best here so let’s see which entries he picks as the winner lol

babtaima:
Okay thanks for clarity.

I was rooting for you too. just checked the list and saw you got evicted. you’re talented.. check PM

Seun:
You will be able to prove yourself in the next challenge. Fear not.

Fair enough, Seun. I accept the verdict and I’ll definitely be back for the next one. Good luck to the remaining 22! 🚀

Before I bow out, I’d like to drop my '2 cents' as a professional developer—not as a complaint, but as feedback to improve the standard of future competitions here on Nairaland.

1. Define "Disqualification" vs. "Deduction" In professional hackathons, there is a clear line between Compliance Rules and Grading Criteria.

Compliance (Pass/Fail): Breaking the 'Single HTML' rule or using forbidden libraries. This warrants instant disqualification.

Grading (Points): Visual bugs, UI alignment, or glitches. These usually incur heavy point deductions, not expulsion. Blurring these lines at 'Stage 0' makes the judging feel arbitrary rather than systematic.

2. The "Nairaland Standard" Nairaland is the premier tech forum in Nigeria. When we host a coding challenge, the organization should reflect that status. A detailed Rubric published before the deadline (e.g., 'UI = 20 pts, Logic = 40 pts, Zero Tolerance List = X, Y, Z') would prevent ambiguity and 'narrow passes' based on feelings rather than metrics.

I believe establishing these Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) will make future competitions more competitive and transparent, befitting the platform's reputation.

Thanks for the opportunity, and I’ll be cheering from the sidelines this time. Well done to the team.

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.

@hullaman and @Nipeks, I get your points regarding the 'Judge's Discretion' and the 'Pass/Fail' nature of Stage 0. You are right that the decision is final, and I have accepted that.

Just to clarify the intent behind my appeal: It wasn't about desperation or 'missing the point.' I am an experienced developer (Founder of Showtechedge) with a life and business outside this contest. My appeal was triggered purely by the precedent of inconsistency I noticed initially—where another entry with the exact same misalignment was pardoned while mine was disqualified. My stance was simply: 'If grace is shown to A, it should be shown to B.'

However, since the organizer has now clarified that both should have been rejected to maintain the standard, I respect that consistency.

@doffman, thank you for the kind words. You are spot on—talent recognizes talent. 👊

@TotoIsGud4boy, I really appreciate you vetting the code and recognizing it as one of the best. You hit the nail on the head regarding the goal. I didn't join this for the prize money; I joined for the networking, the fun of the challenge, and to see opportunities for future collaboration with talents. It just hurts a bit to have days of heavy engineering blocked at the gate because of a visual offset that I fixed in 2 minutes.

Good luck to the remaining 22! May the best code win. 🚀

TotoIsGud4boy:
There’s a reason I stepped back from the contest, a single judge is going to be biased. He who pays the piper dictates the tune. Regardless it’s a fun experience for you. My advice? Get busy with your life and build a product for yourself and the world and add this to your portfolio. Again, your entries was one of the best here so let’s see which entries he picks as the winner lol

It’s not about bias, it’s about standards. If the pieces don't even sit on the board correctly, then there's an issue, you don't launch a product with a broken UI, even with a perfectly working backend, the user don't care. You can't call an entry "the best" when it can't handle basic alignment. You choose your own best, I also looked at other ones, and there are way better entries than this.
Also who told you the entire thing is being handled by a single judge.

hullaman:
It’s not about bias, it’s about standards. If the pieces don't even sit on the board correctly, then there's an issue, you don't launch a product with a broken UI, even with a perfectly working backend, the user don't care. You can't call an entry "the best" when it can't handle basic alignment. You choose your own best, I also looked at other ones, and there are way better entries than this.
Also who told you the entire thing is being handled by a single judge.

Dude it’s a F-ing game not a sit on a board contest or an alignment contest.. it’s a GAME!!!! is it enjoyable? Is it playable? The irony: look at nairaland UI, outdated and archaic yet it does its job perfectly. That’s the point. But like I said to each its own. You can blab from now tomorrow but everyone has thier own opinions. It’ll be great to setup a judging panel but then again he who pays the piper dictates the tune. Admin is doing a good initiative but you can’t force me to conform to his opinions that’s just hypocrisy.

TyrellObi:
@seun
Please Sir, why wasn't my submission acknowledged?😭

Hello, it appears as if your entry was missed. I'm adding it to the collection. Your Christmas tree touch is very cute.

Issues to look into: The board isn't complete :- not enough rows and columns. The piece selection vibration feels off. So it's a stage0 entry alas.

TotoIsGud4boy:
Dude it’s a F-ing game not a sit on a board contest or an alignment contest.. it’s a GAME!!!! is it enjoyable? Is it playable? The irony: look at nairaland UI, outdated and archaic yet it does its job perfectly. That’s the point. But like I said to each its own. You can blab from now tomorrow but everyone has thier own opinions. It’ll be great to setup a judging panel but then again he who pays the piper dictates the tune. Admin is doing a good initiative but you can’t force me to conform to his opinions that’s just hypocrisy.

Comparing outdated UI to "broken" UI makes no sense, speaking of hypocrisy, you sound like one, also Nairaland’s UI actually works, pieces not sitting on a board is just bad is broken,
You said it's a game to check if it's enjoyable, playable, but how can a game be enjoyable if the UI is broken, think and stop yapping.
this is a 3D challenge, if the 3D positioning is wrong, you failed the most basic part of the task, It’s not about conformity, it’s about competence, you can keep crying about bias and opinions, but in the real world, nobody pays for broken broken UI then the dev blame the user for it. If you can’t handle the baseline requirements, you don't get to move to the next stage. Simple as that.

hullaman:
Comparing outdated UI to "broken" UI makes no sense, speaking of hypocrisy, you sound like one, also Nairaland’s UI actually works, pieces not sitting on a board is just bad is broken,
You said it's a game to check if it's enjoyable, playable, but how can a game be enjoyable if the UI is broken, think and stop yapping.
this is a 3D challenge, if the 3D positioning is wrong, you failed the most basic part of the task, It’s not about conformity, it’s about competence, you can keep crying about bias and opinions, but in the real world, nobody pays for broken broken UI then the dev blame the user for it. If you can’t handle the baseline requirements, you don't get to move to the next stage. Simple as that.

I enjoyed his GAME, how about that? Typical nairalander, can’t respect opinions of others. I enjoyed his game and I’m a user. Kiss the sun

TotoIsGud4boy:
I enjoyed his GAME, how about that? Typical nairalander, can’t respect opinions of others. I enjoyed his game and I’m a user. Kiss the sun

If you actually enjoyed a game where the pieces don't even stay where it's suppose to, then your standards are clearly in the gutter, this is a technical competition, not a fan club.

​If you're happy with what's broken, keep playing it in private, but don't expect the rest of us to celebrate mediocrity just because your feelings are hurt, You’re talking to me about opinions while defending a literal bug, get your head checked or go hug a transformer.

XploraBen:
Not discrediting the effort of others, but among the 3D Ludo games I have tried here, these two wins it for me.


I like the implementation of this one better because of its movable Ludo interface, 2 dice, player stats, and nice game play.

Though it only use 1 dice, I like this one too because of its simple, yet intuitive interface, and nice game play.

@hullaman guess it’s not just me that loved it… 🤡

doffman:
I just tested your Chexnet model with pneumonia chest xray .

If you don’t mind , should I drop my criticism?

Could you shoot me an email instead? Also, I mentioned earlier that that was a demo. It's a fraction of a bigger mainframe. You don't expect me to make a client's project public. Would you??

TotoIsGud4boy:
@hullaman guess it’s not just me that loved it… 🤡

Tagging other comment to support your ignorance doesn't change the fact that what should not be broken in the game is broken, It’s like building a car with a powerful engine but using square wheels, it doesn't matter how strong the engineering is if the basic functions don't work well.

Whoa, easy guys. I appreciate the passion, but let's keep it civil. 🏳️

@hullaman, before we get into the accusations, let me clarify the actual context of my appeal so we are on the same page:

1. Why I Appealed: The only reason I reached out to the organizer was that I spotted another entry that was pardoned despite having the exact same misalignment issue. My appeal wasn't about forcing a 'broken' entry through; it was simply asking for the same grace/treatment that was extended to another contestant, the log says "Entry 37 narrowly passed this stage despite pieces not sitting in place.". It was a request for consistency, nothing more and @Seun addressed that.

2. The 'Burner Account' Accusation: Just to clear the air—I am Showtechedge. I don't use burner accounts to fight my battles or defend my work. @TotoIsGud4boy is entitled to his opinion as a user who enjoyed the gameplay, just as you are entitled to yours regarding strict UI standards. I respect both views.

3. The Engineering vs. The UI: You mentioned that a game with a UI error is like 'a car with square wheels.' I think that characterization suggests the game is unplayable or fundamentally broken, which isn't the case. The misalignment was a visual offset (which I've since fixed), not a logic failure.

Since we are all technical people here, I invite you to actually take the 'car' for a test drive before writing it off completely. I’d value your critique on the actual mechanics:

🎮 Live Demo: https://showtechedge.github.io/3d-ludo-challenge/ (Tip: You don't have to finish it at once. The game features a robust Auto-Save system. Play a few moves against the 3 AIs, close the browser, and come back later. It picks up exactly where you left off.)

🔗 Repository: https://github.com/showtechedge/3d-ludo-challenge.git

My main goal for this competition wasn't just the prize money; it was to get to the stage where peers could look at the Code Architecture, discuss the AI logic, and collaborate. I am here for the culture of code review and learning.

If you check the repo and find the code lacking, I am open to that criticism. Let's keep the energy on building and learning. 🚀

remi4ever:
Could you shoot me an email instead? Also, I mentioned earlier that that was a demo. It's a fraction of a bigger mainframe. You don't expect me to make a client's project public. Would you??

Since it is confidential stuff . No worry again . I wish you best 👍