I really like this idea in theory, but I think the particulars may need to be adjusted for next time (if there is a next time).
I like it and agree with the idea, because it supports the reasons that we are all here; interactions with backers about their projects and supporting of projects. Greater interaction with Creators will hopefully drive more projects to engage with BC. Maybe even more projects that peak my interest.
(Since I joined BC I have supported more projects that are not highlighted on BC than those that are. (Ratio 3:1)) For some reason, either it is the type of project that chooses (or chooses not to) work with BC, or the types of projects that the founders choose to work with, but they don't tend to be the projects that interest me.
That said, the possibility of winning BackerBucks will likely give me the incentive to open and read more projects and give comments then I do today, which may inspire me to make more small pledges than I normally do. It would be interesting to know, if the Founders are willing to share the results with us, how much these incentives raise comments overall, how many more backers comment over the next month than do so today, and if and how much it increases the number of backers who pledge and number of overall pledges that are made.
I also like the reward values, which i think are high enough to drive more engagement by Backers. It is a prize worth trying for. I voted for option 3, so that more backers can be rewarded for their contributions. While I love the idea of bigger prizes, if the purpose is more participation by more people, there should also be enough chances to win that everyone feels there is enough chance to win to put in the effort. Otherwise the low chance of winning will negate the additional participation
One particular that I would hope gets adjusted is the number of secret projects that are chosen. I would suggest that if this idea works out well and continues to be used for the lounges, that the number of secret projects be increased to a higher number. I attempted to count all of the projects added to the BC since March 1st, l deleted a few of the emails, but for the 20 days that I still had the emails, I counted 77 projects, which is 3.85 projects per day. assuming the same rate applies for the 35 days of the contest that equals 135 projects. The three secret projects only account for 2% of the expected volume of projects through the end of April. That stat there may be enough to keep some members from raising their engagement in hopes of sharing in the prize pool.
Perhaps the secret projects should be closer to 10 or 20% of the projects added to the BC during the contest time? A higher number of secret projects would also enable the secret projects to cross more interests of BC members and give more members a chance. Based on the comment boards, members, at least active members appear most interested in games, design and tech, and I would wager at least one of the three secret projects will be a game, which makes complete sense, but the chances that I will be backing that secret project are almost nil, because I don't generally back games. And I bet there are many members who don't generally back projects in any of the top categories.
Also, maybe the number of entries for the 1 project and 2 project levels could be adjusted. For the 1, I can see the reasoning on keeping that one low, in case people luck into having commented and pledged 1, but the number of entires for 2 seems low considering the low percentage of all projects those two projects are, 1.48% using my numbers from above.
Finally, IsrealNahsohn great idea to have a list of the projects to reference. Thanks to Tasha for keeping the list and including all of the links.
I think I have rambled on enough for tonight and I guess I should start spending more time in projects and less in the forums!
Rhonda
