NPC Hunt Results
Aug 24th, 2008 |
These results were only announced at 11.30pm yesterday. It was a 9 hours hunt to Penang and both the top 2 teams only needed 5 hours plus to finish the hunt with perfect scores.
Open Category
- 100 - KK Chai, Margaret Sha, Md Razif, Darmataksiah
- 100 - Kok Seng, Dato’ Ramesh, Chong Foo Seong, Kong Yew
- 98 - Anuar Jeffri, Lim Say Chye, CK Loh, Tommy Ng
- 98 - Zahrol and team
- 98 - Pava and team
- 96 -Sin Yoong Leong, Cheok Wye Leong, Yeoh Keat Leong, Chye Jun Lee
- 96 - Lip Yoke Cheong and team
- 93 - Yeap Heng Boon, Ho Mun Yee, Lily Loh, Toh Wei Ming
Meanwhile, in the media category, I was told there were some controversies as a few teams had some points missing from their final scores.
Media Category.
- 94 - Blur Squad
- 93 - MIB
- 90 - Ramlan Said and team
- - Utusan
- -
- - Sons of Sun
nora said:
Fiasco results at NPC hunt……….FYI there was some misleading points being tallied by the COC, points being deducted wrongfully by by the COC, imaging that the coc telling everybody during the answer presentation that the treasure for charity was submitted by every car and at last what i heard that the actual winners points were deducted cos they didnt submit the treasure……it is an easy give away treasure quest and i think that the actual winners would have answered it with their eyes closed.
To the NPC organising committee who are reading this…..
please rectify the mistakes, NPC hunts were suppossed to be one of the best, dont let this fiasco bring down the credit of NPC hunts and to the so call winners be a gentlement and a professional hunters accept the mistakes being done and let the real winners be the winners
saline said:
so npc kena buat sesuatu! jangan sampai org tak percaya lagi ………
lamedia said:
haiyah! mistakes done but not rectify immediately ma. now all malu. the organizer must do the necessary thing. give the winners their loots. what i heard team utusan were the real winners scoring 100 while son of suns second. they got screwed!!!
krollnazib said:
i also heard ‘kereta avanza@utusan-tv3′ score 100%. not bad at all. congrat guys!
SSsshhhh said:
there’s rumour saying that the ‘real winner’ of NPC hunt - media category will NOT get their ‘real hadiah’. don’t know what really happen but someone suggested that the organiser should be responsible for: all the mistakes they made, this definitely will NOT include ‘mistakenly’ CUT 10 points from the ‘real winner’; and, the winner is NOT responsible to return the prizes already presented to them. in previous hunt, the winner has no say when the organiser decided not to give the full ‘hadiah’, today, the winner say, ” you organiser has ‘NO SAY’ “pity…!
kuasamaa said:
apalah ni media, tak habis2 gaduh, kontroversial!
mimi said:
govind, what happen?? pls xplain, let us knowlah…….
phillip said:
I am writing this on behalf of my fellow Sons of Sun team members to put the record straight:
We were in the Media category. As per the answers presentation we got full marks for the Questions (80pts). We got three of the four treasures correct and submitted them (15pts). Unfortunately we submitted 5 Hacks sweets instead of the required 1 and therefore got 1 treasure wrong.
During the prize presentation we were shocked to hear that we had come out 6th with a score of 85 instead of 95. Immediately after the prize presentation we approached Govind. After checking the answer scripts Govind confirmed that he had made mistakes on the scores of 2 teams - Utusan-TV3 (who had been placed 4th) and Sons of Sun with Utusan scoring 99 pts and our score at 95, which meant Utusan should have been 1st and we should have been 2nd.
He apologised for the obvious mistake and informed us he would speak to the NPC and “rectify” the mistake. Both teams left Penang this morning after notifying Govind and officials of the NPC that we hope the mistake will be rectified and that we would get the prizes due us. We were informed by NPC officials that they would look into this matter seriously and would notify us of their decision ASAP.
Phillip, Joehari, Raj Kumar, Geetha Kanny
kok seng said:
Can those teams who gave the answer to Q22 as SUNSHINE please share as to where the sign was ‘found’ by you? And what was the complete name of the signboard please?
I would like to congratulate all teams who ‘found’ this signboard….(to be continued upon receiving replies on the above).
Venka said:
I think the Coc should be more carefull on tallying the points. This kind of mistake especially dropping from number 1 to 4, 2 to 6 is really a pain for the actual winners.
misha_omar said:
so, the `winner’ pls PULANGKAN all the prizes to the `real winner’!
capateee said:
to kok seng,
the correct answer is LITSUN! there are no such SUNSHINE signboard!!!
hacks said:
`Winners” Media Category.
1. 94 - Blur Squad
2. 93 - MIB
3. 90 - Ramlan Said and team
Q1: Will you `return’ all the prizes to the `actual winners’?
papablues said:
mr kok seng,
our team saw the sunshine “sign” at a bakery just b4 that litsun place. tapi itu sign dekat lori so knowing that its a moving “signboard”, surely tak boleh kira. we also surprised when both answers ada kasi point.
anyway the hunt memang bagus. byk free ride so we can relax n stop for makan. Q quite easy but sadly our team not good enough, T1 betol2 killer.
Wah! media category again kacau ka. better not komen la. peace!
nora said:
Guys…….actually the sunshine sign was on the lorry and the bamboo blinds at the shop but sadly the bamboo blinds were folded halfway and only part of the sunshine been seen…….. anyway bck to the fiasco…….we hope that npc will do the necessary to rectify the mistakes….pls dont deprive the real winners of their claims……the amount of effort they put in for the hunt all gone….i agree with hacks that all the said winners pls return bck the prizes be a gentlement and a professional hunters….accept that its not your prize
ckoh said:
Can someone please post the Q and explanation for Q22? Curious to know how both LITSUN and SUNSHINE can fit. Thanks.
KnightsTemplar said:
Kok Seng, the correct answer for Q22 is LITSUN lah Bro coz SUNSHINE was on a lorry at the Bakery and the blinds dont count as a permanent sign and Mr.Govind of all people should know this. As for the screwup in the Media category,i strongly belive that it was unintentional and that NPC will look into the matter and settle it the best way they can.Thanks to the organizers of the hunt and happy hunting guys.
G said:
This is what will happen when you have an “erratic” COC. If this deciscion cost you this time, I know how you feel. We all fall victim to this kind of situation sometime or other and as a COC, you know the judge’s decision is always final. However IMO, SUNSHINE is a better fit as the sun SHINES “naturally” hence aptly fitting the question “the business is bright, naturally” as compared to the sun being LIT, which is not such a naturally process. Anyway, how can you “light” the sun ?
KT, blinds have been used before in other hunts, so this is not the first.
nora said:
would luves to know the comments from the announced winners, what do they have to say about the mistakes being done, so far i know that they are keeping quiet….am sure they are reading this….well…blur squad,MIB, Ramlan Said and team what do u guys want to comment
kok seng said:
Dear all,
Thanks for clarifying on the SUNSHINE. Another hunter told me they drove to Ipoh on the way way from Penang yesterday just to find the SUNSHINE signage in that sector but to no avail…guess the lorry/van has vanished!
The reason I enquired was apparently as the COC mentioned, a few teams had put or tembak the answer (one team in particular swore that there was such sign albeit it was small), and hence he gave the benefit of doubt and accepted this alternate answer. I did enquire if all of those team wrote the same full answer eg. Sunshine Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd or Sunshine Enterprise or Tadika Sunshine? It would be acceptable if all teams who tembak the answer had the same full answer. I wonder if this the was the case here? and certainly “Sunshine @ lorry” certainly would be a no brainer to be accepted as the answer even if all teams put that as the answer right?
My congratulations to the teams who managed to conned the COC. I understand this cost our team the rightful win and cost other teams who’s position would otherwise have been higher placed…
Oh well… just wanted to make a point.
Cheers!
ckoh said:
Ah! How interesting! So, the question was:
Q) The business is bright, naturally
And the “shortlisted” answers were:
A1) SUNSHINE
A2) LITSUN
What was the decision of the CoC? Which one did he accept; or did he accept both?
Let’s here it, Kok Seng.
ckoh said:
Oops! Didn’t know Kok Seng was already in the process of posting that!… hehehe. Sorry.
kok seng said:
ckoh, the question was:
Q22. A BUSINESS ALWAYS BRIGHT, NATURALLY.
Sooo… ‘A business’, that means the answer if its just “Sunshine” by itself cannot and should not have been accepted as there’s no linkage to ‘a business’ eg. Trading, Enterprise, (M) Sdn Bhd etc… right??
Cheers!
ckoh said:
But, Kok Seng, since your team got perfect score, is it safe for me to assume that the CoC accepted both answers? I’m also assuming the champion chose SUNSHINE?
And if the CoC accepted both those answers, how was it that you said the SUNSHINE cost you the “rightful” win? Did you mean that SUNSHINE is inferior when compared to LITSUN (because of the absence of “Trading” etc), and therefore the champion should’ve not been awarded the points for Q22?
close two eyes said:
Will the losers, especially the BAD LOSERS please stop complaining and SHUT UP! Lets get on with our lives,… you do have a life yes?
The decision was made and its final, period. As mentioned ABOVE the real winners (officially announced by the coc and honoured with their fruits of labour in front of the crowd) are not obligated to return anything. They are NOT victims (if they are forced to surrender their prizes) and they do not have to do anything…They won the prizes fair and square and has nothing to do with the development thenafter, understand?
Nobody said anything about returning the prizes, only some bad losers here are asking some good hunters to do the unthinkable…if you are so hard up then get your face to C4 (you know what that is, yes?) and buy yourselves some hampers or electrical products!
When you get home, please keep on telling your selves that you have won the media category (some even claimed to have scored 100%!) perhaps a hundred times and you might believed that you have won, ok? Talk is cheap…
Mistakes, as you people have highlghted above and IF it did happened, do happened time and again, and as the Japs say “shitso happenso!”. Simply, its just too bad lah!
It was a good hunt. Thanks to the NPC.
p.s. nora…please brush up your english…its nauseating and perhaps that was why u didnt win…
sann said:
close 2 eyes,
jangan marah2lah!
geramm said:
close two eyes. you are sick. dont be personal on nora.
btw.. those in 1st, 2nd, 3rd. tak malu ka ambil hadiah you dont deserve.
close two eyes said:
Losers with a capital L should just keep quiet…asking for something which your team didnt get to win fairly and squarely isnt gonna make you winners for you might end up being LOSERS in all capital, and be careful it could end you up as morons, thats being double losers!!
Then again, tak malu ka asking for something which is NOT rightfully yours! Macam budak-budak la…malu la press people like this…some born losers among the press gave the fraternity a bad name…Losers Big Time or Big Time Losers, for which any other way you still end up LOSERS…as if being a sore loser is not good enough, you people are simply Born Losers!!
KnightsTemplar said:
Close 2 eyes , i know who you are and am not surprised at all at your comments …. for you are just being yourself.And please dont make personal attacks on this blog for it is for hunters to discuss the rights and wrongs of what happened during any hunt. The CoC or NPC can get away with the disclaimer , if they choose to do so, but i’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. kok seng , “SUNSHINE on your shoulders might make you happy Bro ! And to the winners
“Aliena nobis, nostra plus aliis placent ” Cheers Guys.
G said:
I do not know about the rest, we spotted “Sunshine” on the roller blinds partially hidden and we qualify ourselves by putting “Sunshine” @ so and so sdn bhd to fulfil the business part. We definitely did not “tembak” the answer and neither was it our intention to “conned” the COC. It’s just our luck that he accepted both. Well, as they say “wise men think alike” or do “fools that seldom differ”, you decide.
Heritage Hunters said:
Yes, SUNSHINE was spotted on the roller…its not on a permanent base but how could the CoC accepted?
Anyway, congrats to KK and Kok Seng for making the hunt looked so easy…
G said:
KT,
Totally agree with you there. The grapes on the other side of the fence is always sweeter or as the Chinese would say, even the burnt rice of our neighbour taste better !
Cheers !
kok seng said:
Cornelius, the full answer was LITSUN MOTOR TRADING. I’ve got not idea what was the full answer for the elusive SUNSHINE.
I’m going to do a question dissection like you always do…
Q. A BUSINESS ALWAYS BRIGHT, NATURALLY.
A. LITSUN MOTOR TRADING
COC’s explanation:
ALWAYS BRIGHT - hence LIT as in its lit up
NATURALLY - to mean the SUN
A BUSINESS - Motor Trading
Notice the comma placed immediately after BRIGHT and before the word NATURALLY? Why? Is it important? Most certainly, given the COC’s official intended answer, the construction of the sentence is then correct.
I would tend to agree if the comma was not there, then SUNSHINE would fit as its “Bright naturally”. A comma hence can change the structure and meaning.
Cheers!
Fair said:
Well “close two eyes”….you sound like one of the winners who was not supposed to be there on the stage that night.
Don’t tembak blindly lah and analise the situation in a more professional manner. Put ourselves in the shoes of the actual winners for the hunt, what would our reaction be….just say its ok and SHUT UP!!! …I doubt that.
We would have done the same thing the actual winners (Utusan and Sun) did or are still trying to do, i.e. raise the issue and hope for the best. Bad Losers you say, are the winners then “GOOD WINNERS” ??….knowing you don’t deserve the win.
Good Hunters, I assume would be a sport and return what is proven not theirs in the first place….it seems they are the one who are HARD UP.
I say proven cause Govind has admitted to both the victimised teams and the so called winners on his error. You know u didn’t win, so is it right for you to still cling on to the prize? To be fair, news has it that the 1st and 3rd prize winners have agreed to return the prize (if its true, my hat’s off to you guys for being a great sport).
It’s easier to comment when we are not the VICTIMS…so too simply say “shitso happenso!” Simply, its just too bad lah….well that’s really not fair either to the actual winners, is it?
Well to the guys from the Actual Winning Team’s, if you are reading this…..DONT GIVE UP GUYS, do the best you can to raise the issue till the very end.
I honestly feel you guys should be compensated…..
All the best.
kok seng said:
Dear G, thanks for sharing on the whereabouts of the elusive SUNSHINE. Guessed it was all rolled up yesterday on a Sunday, as a regular hunter cum COC told me they went up and down that stretch yesterday on the way back to KL as they too were not satisfied with their cocked-eyes and still couldn’t spot it… My apologies for accusing the ‘tembak’ then.
Answers on roller blinds have been used before and generally accepted though it runs the risk that its rolled up at certain time of the day and elude some hunters depending on the time they arrive at that hunt sector and hence may be disadvantaged. COCs wanting to use this signage needs to give due consideration in using it in the first place.
Coming back to the answer then, looks like its SUNSHINE @ XXXX Sdn Bhd. Don’t see this as a tight fit to the question as it becomes a what and where type of question, and does not flow in the answering of the “A BUSINESS …” part of the question. This is a standard treasure hunt type of question that literally means the answer is tagged to a defination of ‘business’ and hence will eliminate it as a what and where type of question.
Cheers!
Rajj said:
Yesterday I went to KK Road, Ipoh on the way back to look for the Sunshine signboard, but didn’t see any. I did 2 rounds and still didn’t find the signboard. I was very curious to know if such signboard was there..
One question still linggering in my mind, how can a hunter be satisfied with an answer from a lorry or moving signboard or blinds?? Common sense will tell you that this is not a permanent signboard and can vanish without the 8th letter!!!!
My team was robbed a place in top 8 with a debatable treasure question. I’m not going into details over this heartache coz its over.
But the CoC accepting Sunshine and Litsun is totally unacceptable!!
This incident has left a bad taste and it’s OVER!!! Nothing done after this is going to rectify the damage.
To the real winners, you know yourselves and we congratulate you… It’s just pure bad luck to be robbed of your title, it was not naturally bright after all for you guys!!!
G said:
“Sunshine” (bread) has been around since our grandfather’s time and as synonymous as “Gardenia” in the bakery business. Just as if it is “Microsoft” one would automatically link to an IT business. Since it was found in a bakery factory, we took it naturally, without hesitation. Perhaps some of you are too young to make the connection, well as they say “salts” matters lah and we were lucky it did not kill us this time
Cheers !
FiCKle said:
I am sure everyone know issues like this crop up whenever large (ca$h) prize monies are involved. Especially so when you combine large ca$h prizes with que$tionable COCs. I understand the reason given by the que$tionable COC for turning up 3 hours late for the answer and prize presentation is that “there was a photo fini$h and wanted to make $ure all que$tions are marked correctly and all $cores tallied correctly”. Obviou$ly a lame excuse!
peter said:
Which ever way you win, be it by default, calculation error or conspiracy, if a winner has been announced in public, then they are the winner.
Subsequent to that, if there suppposed to be an error, it is of no fault of the teams. Hence they should not be penalised for such error.
The organisers and COC must bear full responsibility for such error, as they are the one that caused it. Nobody else but them. And they must be fully responsible - issue an official apology, dig from their own pocket for another first prize or whatever - they must do something.
sann said:
mike, blog u makin panaslah!!!!
sunshiny said:
Rajj,
The SUNSHINE word which was part of the SUNSHINE logo with a “smiling sun” was actually on two of the roller blinds in front of the bakery shop. The roller blinds happened to be rolled up hence concealing part of the SUNSHINE word but the smiling sun was clearly visible as it was quite hugh.
It’s has been an acceptable practice even by renowned CoCs to have answers on roller blinds. So, I think the CoC has been fair in awarding points to SUNSHINE too
nora said:
Well what is said is said now we know who the real losers are…. they maybe loser but sure right enough they r winner without the guilty conscious, at least all the hunters knows who the real winners are…… shame shame shame,
SSsshhhh said:
peter, i really agree with your opinion BUT, as we all aware, whenever a COC proposed a treasure hunt event for any org, they basically promoting: team spirit and those others good spirits. YES, you are right to suggest ‘ they must be fully responsible - issue an official apology, dig from their own pocket for another first prize or whatever - they must do something’, BUT can you list down 3 hunts that actually become a ‘RM generated’ event for a particular org? do you think NPC make RM from the previous hunt? we hunters should try our best to practice those good ‘hunt spirits’…or there’s none actually? not suprise if there will be no more NPC hunt next year…this mess should be solved by we, hunters…
kok seng said:
Hi G, it just baffles me that any regular hunter / master would choose a “what and where” answer knowingly that its not what the Q required wouldn’t you agree? Good try on the “synonymous” approach, but in the context of treasure hunting Qs, am sure you know better right? Answers must be precise and fits the requirements of the Q. Hope you are not out there to fox / con the unsuspecting aspiring young hunters with this approach…
Like I said earlier (that night), congrats on your team’s win.
Cheers!
ckloh said:
Just have one thought. Hope no one shoot me just to voice my thought.
This type of controversy actually can be prohibited in future major hunts or even smaller hunts by intoducing 1-hour “cooling period”.
After result is anounced, an hour time is allowed for teams to make protest. If no teams make protest in the 1-hour “cooling period” or protest period or whatever name you want to call it, then the result will stands and only then the prizes will be issued to the winners. If during this periods, the COCs and the organisers found out that there are ‘mistake’ and ‘cheat’ involved among the winners, they can revert the original anounced winners, and reward it to the rightful winners.
For Klang Valley hunt (non-outstation), the protest period might be shortened to half an hour.
And also for a start, the organisers might includes this 1-hour protest period in the rules and regulations, and if most hunts follow this practice, then it will become common practice, and need not to include in the rules and regulations form.
Have been impressed that in tennis, players are actually allowed to challenge any bad call, and the decision can be corrected if bad call does exist, after monitoring the TV replay.
My thought is, it is time treasure hunts, follow this path. It is alot of money involved for the top 2 prizes, a five figure amount. If COC and organiser need to bare the cost for the mistake, it will further disassociate future COC and organiser to this wonderful game.
krollnazib said:
100% setuju. tapi perlu di had kan kepada perkara-perkara tertentu sahaja, jangan terbuka sepenuhnya. seperti contoh di atas, some prefer SUHSHINE and some others LITSUN. lain coc lain cara of thinking. and must remember, when people answer ’something’, they definitely 100% firm jawapan dia betul, just imagine ada 10 jawapan ‘betul’ untuk satu-satu soalan
G said:
Dear KS,
Unfortunately we all live in an imperfect world where ambiguous question sometimes deserves equally ambiguous answer. The said question is grammatically wrong in the first place in the first place not to mention the intended answer. Honestly, if you were the COC, we would not stoop that to that level to shoot that answer. We learn our lesson from his last hunt not to scrutinise every word or sentence of the question but take it as it is and try to think like him. FYI, in his previous hunt, we interpreted his “gila” homonym question as “Mat” (as in weaving) but he wanted “Vecky” instead, and for that it cost us a couple of positions too. We can only mourn about it and didn’t kick a fuss over his imperfection. There is no need for any of us to get our “knickers” in a twist here.
I think we have taken up a lot space talking about this “Sunshine” while sidetracking the real issue of the hunt here which is in the Media category. With so few teams in the media category and yet this major blooper in tabulations, the COC should be solely responsible and not the Organisers. He’s paid (I pressume) to do the job, and in my opinion, the Organisers can always penalise him by deducting his fees to pay the victims. If you are the COC or Organiser, what would you do ?
Cheers !
ckoh said:
Wow!… been busy this whole afternoon. And now when I come back again, the comments are just overwhelming!! Mike, this active forum will attract the spams very soon now!… hehehe
LITSUN vs SUNSHINE.
Deserves some thorough analysis! Imperfect questions have the tendency to cause this kind of debates. Because of the dubious question, neither LITSUN nor SUNSHINE can fit perfectly in my opinion.
I was given to understand that the CoC’s intended answer was LITSUN. If I were hunting, and if I were able to see both these boards, I would have chosen SUNSHINE without any doubt! But would that be a correct decision?
Need to go for my run now. Will explain later.
KnightsTemplar said:
Cukup lah guys ,enough of Sunshine for the day - sudah malam mahh. Lets make peace and have some Moonshine .
nora said:
Agrees with ck loh……there should be a cooling period in future hunts…..hopes things like this wont happen again….anyway what is done is done, everything have been said, just hope for the best to the real winners
papablues said:
wah panas membara. peace
Rajj said:
Dear Sunshine loving Sunshiny,
I’m sorry but I can’t accept Sunshine as the answer for the question. It doesn’t make sense. “Sunshine” can be another choice, but not the best answer.
Why? Simply for the following reasons:
1. This is not a what and where or spotting question. It was a direct translation and in sequence to the Q.
2. Sunshine did not answer the first part of the question - “a business”. Was it an “Enterprise”, “Sdn Bhd”, “Trading” or “Co”??
Kok Seng has taken the trouble to give a detailed explanation of the answer LITSUN and I would suggest you read it again for a better understanding.
I’m tired of arguing on CoC’s decision to pick on blinds and grafity. Every action and decision comes with unacceptable excuses!! I’ll just pass.
vader said:
What a shame. I couldn’t believe journalists could misbehave as they are. All the while they have been telling people they are wrong on this and that.
Please have some conscience. If they prizes are not yours and you are not the rightful winners, please hand them over to the rightful owners.
Please keep your counsel.
honor said:
I agree completely with Vader. Let’s not get into whether the COC should compensate or NPC should cough up additional prizes.
The solution is simple - the “wrong winners” should simply return the prizes to the organisers and collect the prizes they actually won.
That’s the correct, honorable and sportsman-like thing to do. I would not hesitate for even a second to do it if I were in their shoes!
I can’t imagine them accepting the prizes after knowing they don’t deserve it - how can they possibly face their fellow hunters at the next Hunt?
Sigh, I may be wrong - given what Close 2 Eyes has posted above (and we all know obviously he’s one of the “false winners”) maybe some people just don’t bother about truth and honor.
Ramesh said:
Dear Fellow Hunters
I normally don’t read the blog postings but couldn’t help myself when I saw the last one about “truth and honour” or “truth and justice”.
I want to share this quote from Marlon Bando ( Judge ) to Donald Sutherland ( Justice seeking Teacher ) in the movie, “A Dry White Season”:
“Truth and Justice, Sir, are at best cousins. But in South Africa, they are not even on talking terms”
Those were such powerful words to describe Justice in a land where it was unknown. I have remembered that phrase since I first saw the film in 1989.
I guess the debates going on here should make all of us ask, is Justice unknown in the treasure hunting land too ?
Rgds
Ramesh ( for more insight on ‘truth’, check out: http://www.boloji.com/opinion/0214.htm )
papablues said:
litsun should be the answer! the only answer.
btw for close two eyes, since you r proud of your engrish, please read what honor just wrote. be a true engrishman then. hahaha peace.
adrian said:
Hi all,
An interesting read i must say. (regarding the above comments)
My 2 cents only, COC(s) should just be firm on their decisions / answer.
1) if signboard drop, everyone gets the points (no alternative answers should be accepted)
2) if other answer/s given to the question (and though given by more than one hunting team), just mark all answer/s wrong as it was not ur intended answer. HOWEVER, make sure this is applied to all hunts clerked by the COC and not to his/her whim and fancy.
Cheers and let this be a sport played by sporting people.
hacks said:
to all the` fake and false winners,’
misha_omar ask u to PULANGKAN all the prizes to the `real winners!!!!’
2 Romans & 1 Impostor said:
Onus should be on the CoC to ensure the Q is tight, leaving no opportunity for other possibilities. If the Q is vague, it will open up a myriad of opportunities within a sector, and hunters should be allowed to plead their case.
In this case both are imperfect answers to an imperfect question. While one is grammatically wrong, the other is arguable on whether it is a ‘business’ (more like a brandname to me).
Claire said:
Agree with Ckoh and 2R&1I that both Sun answers don’t fit well. IMHO, neither answer is better than the other.
It is the CoC’s decision to accept both answers, or only 1. Best of course is to have the Questions water-tight, leaving no room for arguments on 2 answers which don’t even fit in the first place.
sunshiny said:
Dear hunters,
A. A business always bright, naturally.
Q. SUNSHINE @ SRI LOCOA FOODS SDN BHD.
I may be not be that good in treasure hunting, so tell me, where did I go wrong?
My questions are:
1. Do we always need a “What & Where” prompter to provide this type of answer?
2. Why can’t SRI LOCOA FOODS SDN BHD be accepted as the “A business” of the question? Is it because SUNSHINE & SRI LOCOA FOODS SDN BHD are 2 separate signs (although at the same place)? If I’m not mistaken, this has been done many times before, why not now?
If I have to choose between LITSUN TRADING SDN BHD & SUNSHINE @ SRI LOCOA FOODS SDN BHD, isn’t SUNSHINE the better choice in answering the business as always bright, naturally?
ckoh said:
sunshiny,
It is a good habit to indicate where you found your answer, whether or not there’s a “what and where” in the question. However, generally speaking, the “what and where” is commonly found in questions when the intended answer forms a small part, perhaps one word or brandname, of a signboard containing many other words.
For example, the name of the shop is RESTORAN RASA SAYANG, and on that signboard, you can also find other words, e.g. PEPSI, 100 PLUS, COKE etc. So if, for example, you have a question like this:
Q) Twisted PIPES. What and where?
Then your answer would be like this:
A) PEPSI @ RESTORAN RASA SAYANG.
The PEPSI answers the “what”; the RESTORAN RASA SAYANG answers the “where”.
As for the debate of LITSUN vs SUNSHINE, check out my blog and see what you think of it.
sunshiny said:
Dear CKoh,
Wow! Thank you so much for all that bright and detailed analysis on the 2 options. To me, you have certainly cleared the controversies of the “sun”.
Naturally, I remain SUNSHINE-loving and beaming too!
kok seng said:
English lesson 101 - here, SUNSHINE is a brand not the BUSINESS.
Oh, just to dig at it further, ALWAYS means all the time. We don’t get SUNSHINE 24/7 do we? But you can have something LIT (as in lighted up) all the time.
A flawed question? Not in the context as a treasure hunt question given the official answer LITSUN MOTOR TRADING, it fitted perfectly. You will notice that COCs, well good ones, when the construction of a sentence of the question don’t seem right, it will prompt you to rethink and you will be picking more clues as to what the COC is trying to mask and fit as the answer. Do not doubt Govind’s command of English and BM unlike some other substandard COCs, he has “consumed more salt” in the area of language proficiency than a majority of us.
If the COC intended it to be ‘a what and where’ type of question, there is no need for the ‘A BUSINESS’ part for the question. For example Q3 where the answer was PLUS 11 @ KRAFTANGAN (this was where the UTUSAN-TV3 team lost 1 point as they did not write down the ‘where’ though the question did not specifically state so. The COC had placed this emphasis during the briefing that the answers need to be written in full and state where you saw it if one was paying attention during the briefing). So stop the COC bashing on this matter that the question was flawed or imperfect. Again, to emphasise that the comma was brilliantly inserted in the correct place in order to fit the answer.
Frankly, if one finds a COC to be not up to your mark, just stay away from his/her hunts in future no matter how tempting the rewards may be.
Oh, on the ‘gila’ homonym question which appeared in the PERTAMA Hunt, his question was on ‘gila-gila’ which its meaning is different from ‘gila’ if you check the KAMUS and a good KAMUS DWIBAHASA. Can’t comprehend the continued harping on the ‘MAT’ as ‘MAD’ as your analysis was in the first place already off tangent. ‘GILA-GILA- = Loony, whacky, silly, demented, crazy, etc.
Mike, my apologies for stirring up a hornets nest here and contributed in making this the longest commented thread in your blog to date.
Cheers with ‘Pocket Full of Sunshine’
ckoh said:
“ALWAYS” means “all the time”. And in this particular question, one can take this meaning to approach this question. However, the word ALWAYS may also be used in a different context.
I know someone who has a serious time-management problem. He is NEVER on time for his meetings. He is ALWAYS late, no matter how many times you remind him of the meeting. However, we don’t have meetings “all the time”. Just that when we do have the meeting, he is ALWAYS late.
The SUNSHINE, when we do see it, is ALWAYS bright.
Arghhh!!… I’m itching to comment more, but work!!… hahaha! Later!
kok seng said:
Dear all,
On the issue of LITSUN vs SUNSHINE, let’s just all agree to disagree on this matter and move on.
Cheers! X-P
kereta lembu said:
ini pasal media categori ni, heboh heboh sangat apa hal! yang top 3 yang tak deserve the prise pulangkan lah hadiah tu kepada npc. i ingat lagi masa pertama hunt media categori..semasa ramlan and wife dua orang sahaja hunting yang bising sangat mib team kan , npc hunt mib hunting pun dua orang ,ntah lah kenapa team member you yang lama hunting ngan orang lain.laki bini sama macam team ramlan.orang tak komplain pun dua orang hunting boleh menang dapat nombor 2. dan nombor dua pun bukan you yang punya.prinsip lah sikit kawan oi ,pada yang ambil hadiah bukan yang you punya ,pulangkan lah.kita sama sama hunting selalu ,tengok muka sesama selalu,jangan sampai frateniti hunting malu sebab perkara begini.walau pun team i tak ada placing ,yang penting nya happy bila hunting .
skian
Rajj said:
It amazes me how some experienced hunters are still arguing over the choice of the answer from different sources. Tell me honestly… U have 2 choices between Sunshine on a blind and Litsun on a permanent main signboard of a business, where both choices answered the question.. Which one will you go for?? A blind or a signboard?? Guess I don’t have to go far with any justification on this… Your experience should lit the bulb…
Also, the excuse of stooping down to the level of the CoC?? How lame and foolish can this be?? Your level of intelligence and achievements are very well appreciated, honored and looked upon. So, you don’t have to stoop down or twist your knickers!!
KnightsTemplar said:
Guys , i’m getting an overdose of Sun Burn here,LITerally speaking.
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it
- Omar Khayyam
so can you guys please move on.
and Mike , you just crossed the 68 comment line, congrats.
teoh said:
MIB, Blur Squad, Close one Eye,
The fact that you refused to hand over your prizes although you were not the legitimate winners, reduces you to common pariahs and CHEATS!
SHAME ON YOU!
ckoh said:
Rajj,
Am not going to debate further on whether LITSUN or SUNSHINE is a better fit (Am done doing that). But just out of curiosity, which answer would you have chosen IF the LITSUN was found on the blind, and SUNSHINE found on the signboard? Would you have been happier with SUNSHINE then?
G said:
I must apologise if some of my poor choice of words sounded offending, but let me assure you guys that what was written was without prejudice. Being malicious is never my nature and my sincere apology to those who think I have been one.
Cheers.
Rajj said:
ckoh,
Guess you caught me there.. Let me check if all the blinds are rolled down before I brightly and naturally answer your Q..
Priority will be for a signboard instead of on a blind.. Even signs on shutters or graffiti on walls should not and will not be accepted. When you give in once to this then it becomes a precedence to have signs at this places as the answers. We have time and again argued with CoCs on this and have given up as it seems as if we are barking at the walls!!!!
Like I said before, with both signs PRESENT AT THE SAME SECTOR AND ANSWERING THE QUESTION, the next criteria would be to see where it is on. Of coz a signboard will take precedent over a blind. This is not a rule or requirements, but a tool for common sense..
Mike said:
Hi everyone,
Please keep the discussion, debate etc. healthy and civil.
Thanks
papablues said:
cool guys…listen to this song by john denver…peace
Sunshine on my shoulders makes me happy
Sunshine in my eyes can make me cry
Sunshine on the water looks so lovely
Sunshine almost always makes me high
If I had a day that I could give you
Id give to you a day just like today
If I had a song that I could sing for you
Id sing a song to make you feel this way
Sunshine on my shoulders makes me happy
Sunshine in my eyes can make me cry
Sunshine on the water looks so lovely
Sunshine almost always makes me high
If I had a tale that I could tell you
Id tell a tale sure to make you smile
If I had a wish that I could wish for you
Id make a wish for sunshine all the while
Sunshine on my shoulders makes me happy
Sunshine in my eyes can make me cry
Sunshine on the water looks so lovely
Sunshine almost always makes me high
Sunshine almost all the time makes me high
Sunshine almost always
C. T. Teoh said:
Wow, This is hotter than Anwar vs S. Chik or LGE vs KSK.
Anyone know somebody in Agenda Malaysia?
hunters etc said:
Dear Mike…I was one of the participants of the recently concluded NPC treasure hunt. Here is an unbiased opinion of the whole event. Overall, the accomodation was good and so was the food. There was also freeflow of beer for those who wanted to drink and there were numerous prizes for lucky draws. The only setback was that the results were announced considerably late.
As for the results, I have been following this thread and from the start, I noticed that the three teams who were announced as the winners have been called all kinds of names and worst of all very unethically, by this person named “Teoh” been labelled as “Pariahs”.
Being a news editor myself, I wish to convey my sincere apologies to all those reading this website for the horrible behaviour of these journalists. I am pretty sure this person named “Teoh” is from the team Kereta Buruk which represents a local Malay broadsheet daily. Being journalists, you should know better than to call your colleagues such names.
Furthermore, why is everyone attackin the three winning teams and not doing what is right in contacting the organisers to do what is rightful. Unless any of these teams cheated in any way, I cannot understand what wrong they did. They took part ethically and were announced the winners. They did not declare themselves as the winners!
You journalists who have resorted to name calling and using a blog to hit out at other journalists are really going overboard and disgracing the profession. Sad to say some of those who have written here also used to hold high positions in a daily tabloid. Be professional about the whole matter and contact who you are supposed to.
To the three teams who were declared the winners - you guys have done the rightful thing and have stayed out of this otherwise wasteful discussion. You dont need to answer these allegations nor return anything. It is up to the organisers and the onus is on them.
Thank you all.
Purwaiz Alam said:
Dear fellow treasure hunters, your comments (good and bad) have been noted. I am just sad that it has come to this.
Mr Phillip of Sons of Sun, in his comment, already mentioned that a complaint was made, Govind apologised and promised to rectify the matter. Mr Phillip also mentioned that he was informd NPC officials would look into the matter seriously. Wouldn’t giving the officials some time to sort out the matter be the right thing to do?
Why resort to all these nasty words and condemnation towards us? Why shove up our KUSAM all this stuff about moral responsibility, being gentleman, etc. and not to mention other non-mentionable words?
Initially, I decided to just keep quiet because the matter is in the hands of the organisers. But then someone decided to call us pariah. Why lah brother/sister? I hurt you that bad, is it? Kesian you.
No matter what some of you said, we are still friends (I hope) because we share a common bond.
Happy treasure hunting. I only wish the best for all of you and hope to see you at future hunts. Peace.
P.S. This comment is my personal view, not my team’s. Tq.
Mike said:
Free flow of beer!
Agreed, the onus is on NPC/Govind. I was told the majority of NPC committee members are in Permatang Pauh and Govind is on assigment in Langkawi. Thus the silence. They are expected to be back only on Thursday.
Phillip said:
As a representative of one of the affected teams, Sons of Sun, I would like to inform all parties that we have officially written to NPC to rectify the matter.
We were notified today that NPC officials and the COC have “had discussions” and would get back to the affected teams this Thursday.
When we got back home after the Hunt on Sunday, we noticed that comments had already been posted on this blog. My team members and I then decided that it would be best for us to post an entry that would state the facts of the matter, ie to set the record straight. This was to ensure that others would not post comments based on rumors and unfounded allegations.
As Alam mentions in his post, we went on to say that the NPC officials informed us they would get back with a decision in due course.
The Sons of Sun team is waiting for a formal decision from NPC. We will post that decision on this blog as soon as we receive it.
Thank you
Sons of Sun - Phillip, Joehari, Raj Kumar & Geetha Kanny
Purwaiz Alam said:
This was sent to yahoo groups a couple of days ago:
“If, hypothetically, a mistake were to be made by a COC and the wrong teams were awarded the prizes, how should the mistake be rectified?
*****What is the responsibility of the teams that were wrongly adjudged winners and given the prizes?”*****
All i have to say is: If u are waiting for a formal decision, why even question the responsbility of the teams that were wrongly adjudged winners? Aren’t you jumping the gun?
Anyway, I will let this go because I respect you as a friend and someone who has been very civil about the whole issue compared to others. Let’s end this here. We are friends and i wish to keep it this way.
If winning and getting an extra couple of thousand ringgit is so important, I will make sure that it doesn’t come between our friendship. You have my word on that.
kereta buruk said:
Dear all,
Sad to say that all of this are due to the mistakes of the coc, a genuine mistakes, i am sure that govind have never done this mistakes in the past. We don’t blame him ( although we are a bit sad and Frustrated ) we dont blame anybody. we are just a bit frustrated thats all.
Everything have been blown out of propotion even to labeling us as using the name ” teoh ” sorry to say that it not us and we don’t resort to calling unethical names to other people like what hunters etc have accused us of being that.
Lets just leaves everything as it is and let the organiser and coc decide.
Adios
Phillip said:
Hi Alam
Yes, I made that post in the Yahoo News Group. Why did I do it? Not because I was “jumping the gun” as you very unfortunately put it but because I knew that incidents like these have happened before and are bound to recur.
I wanted to use the Hunt News Group on Yahoo to get the opinions of the hunters. I was looking for a civil discussion on what should be the responsibility of the organisers, the COCs AND the “teams that were wrongly adjudged the winners”.
In addition to being a hunter, as you know, I also have been organising public hunts for my company. I just wanted the views and opinions of hunters as to what my responsibility would be as a hunter (if I was wrongly adjudged a winner) and my company’s responsibility as an organiser if an incident like this occured.
I know I did the right thing. More importantly, I did not hide behind a pseudonym. I openly sent that post in my name!
I also respectfully disagree with your comment “if winning and getting an extra couple of thousand ringgit is so important” - honestly, that’s not the point. It’s the principle that I’m more concerned with.
Despite all the unnecessary name calling and unfair choice of words in some of the postings, I do believe something good has come out of this discussion.
I have noted some good ideas such as instituting a “cooling-off period” after results are announced to rectify any mistakes. I have decided to incorporate that idea into the LexisNexis-KL Bar Hunt next year and Joehari tells me he is seriously considering it for the upcoming Sun Motor Hunt. We intend to do this ONLY for errors in adding the marks and NOT disputes on the answers given by the COC.
So you see Alam, this discussion has brought in some good ideas that will benefit ALL concerned parties - hunters, organisers and COCs.
My conscience is clear - my postings - openly and in my name - were designed to help bring about changes that would benefit the treasure hunting fraternity in general and definitely not for the “personal gain of a few thousand dollars” as you so unfairly put it!
Cheers mate. As far as I’m concerned we are still friends!!!
Phillip
Purwaiz Alam said:
Point taken. Cheers, Phillip.
Fair said:
Hi All,
If I may suggest….can we leave this issue to rest. All that needs to be said has been said and guess whatever needs to be done has been done.
Since the actual winners have taken the necessary steps to bring up the issue to the relevant parties, lets just give the organizers / COC time to resolve the matter and I’m sure they will, as it’s their reputation at stake here.
Govind was professional enough to admit his mistake immediately when it was brought up to his attention. Give him and the organizers the benefit of doubt to resolve the matter amicably.
As Phillip correctly said, this recent events has brought some good insights to ensure the same fiasco is not repeated, something for future hunt organizers and COC’s to consider.
Phillip, please do post once you have the final outcome. It would be interesting to see what direction was taken to resolve the matter.
As I have mentioned earlier, I honestly feel you guys should be compensated…..
Till then, be patience guys.
ckoh said:
May I express my respect and admiration to both these gentlemen, Philip and Alam.
KnightsTemplar said:
So, it seems that everyone has said his or her piece here. In future if anyone wants to go down to the level of a weasel and start name calling, I suggest you use your name and not hide behind a nick. To all those who were name called here, you have my sincere apologies that some of my fellow journalists have resorted to this. To “hunters etc”, a big NO to you Sir, the “kereta burok” boys would not use a nick and post those kind of unjust statements for i know them well. And to Alam and your Squad of Blurries, You Guys have my Utmost Respect In and Out of the Field of Hunting.
Shalom
Raj Kumar- SoS
P.S. This comment is my personal view, not my team’s. Tq.
Patrick - Blurr Squad said:
Phew…now that the dust has settled and my team-mate, Mr Purwaiz Alam has said what is necessary, I sincerely hope this matter will be amicably resolved with the organisers of the hunt. I also hope that this leaves no bad blood between any one of us considering some of us have been friends for years.
Also, Mike, since your blog seems to be on fire for now, may I also take the opportunity to publicise another hunt called the I-KWAN Zoom hunt from Seremban - Port Dickson on Oct 18.
This is being organised by the Negeri Sembilan Media Club, of which I am a member and the prizes are pretty attractive. There will several good lucky draw prizes to ensure that everyone walks away with something.
The COC is Dominic Roche of Time Out Solutions and for further info, kindly check out his website. The hunt is after Raya and we, the media in Negeri Sembilan sincerely hope to get the support from all you guys.
There will be two categories - Open and Media. Thanks and all the best. Happy Hunting Bros!!
c.h.chong said:
I think it’s time for a Rules and Regulations for all serious COCs to endorse in their hunts. Those who are in the business of setting questions, marking answers, etc should agree on a set of standards and this must be made clear to all hunters who sign up for the events. This will ensure that all are clear about the rules of engagement and abide by them.
The LexisNexis-KL Bar hunt is a good starting point as I’m sure the KL Bar is suitably qualified to come up with some fair and simple rules and regulations.
I think it’s wise to fix a cooling-off or objection period so that disputes on marking can be resolved satisfactorily. Otherwise, apart from a COC, there should be another COC (clerk of conflicts).
cheers
Purwaiz Alam said:
hello chong,
didn’t see u at the hunt? but i agree with your suggestions, you always being the wise and level-headed one.
Clerk of Conflicts, haha. Good one.
Mike said:
The idea of introducing a cooling-off period may solve one problem but it may also cause other new problems.
The difference between the teams and the coc’s scores is not always due to wrong tabulations. The difference could be, teams are not aware that they may have spelled an answer wrongly, late penalty etc. In fact, in a recent hunt my team lost 5 points because we didn’t write the answer for a treasure on the answer paper. (i know we ought to be shot but that is a different story) We didn’t realize it until after the hunt when we checked with the CoC. We agreed with the coc’s decision. If we have this cooling-off period, I can imagine the coc having to check and answer a myriad of questions during the cooling off period.
The other thing is, I feel that it kills the spontaneity and excitement of the prize giving ceremony.
I’m not completely against the idea, I just feels that some further thoughts are needed.
Rajj said:
I have to agree with Mike. The cooling-off period will only promote and encourage unnecessary protests and unhealthy conflicts. Imagine 50 teams logging the protest and the time needed for the CoC to go through each protest to satisfy all the teams. Disagreements and conflicts are normal in every hunt. The participants may have a different idea and ways to break the question, while the CoC might have a different approach.
For example, imagine Q7 was protested during the cooling-off period in the NPC-Celcom Media Hunt. Even till now, this blog is divided into 2 groups, justifying between Sunshine and Litsun for 5 days. I don’t think any CoC will be able to control the protest and argument for the best answer in a short frame of time during the prize presentation. To make it worse, the protest discussion might turn ugly when emotion starts tickling… And imagine if the answer presentation was at 11pm, guess the protest will carry on till sunrise…
Also, it’s unfair to announce a winner and later to be retracted due to tabulation error. Such approach will only kill the excitement and discourage the sportsmanship values. We need to find ways to promote this sport to the next level, not discourage and demotivate the participation and interest. At the same time, we shouldn’t deprive the real winners from the podium. Their achievements and talents should be highly appreciated and recognised.
So, what’s the solution if similar incident happens again? I strongly believe it’s the CoC responsibility to put more concentration and effort for an error free tabulation. The CoC should uphold and satisfy the trust, respect and expectations put on their shoulder by the organizers and participants. I’m happy to say that most CoCs have done an excellent job, if not perfect. We need to put ourselves in their shoes to think for a moment before shooting them down with uncalled for remarks and personal suggestions.
Let’s support, learn and improve together, rather than any baseless assumptions.
Mike said:
Rajj,
The idea mentioned for the cooling-off period is only for total scores dispute, not Answer variations. But still, I agree it can open the door for a very chaotic situation.
ckloh said:
Mike,
My thought is, the cooling-off period is
1) only for the top 3 finishers (where the big prizes and conflicts are) to highlight wrongly marked question, if any
So, other problem that is not due to wrong tabulations for lower ranked teams (not top 3) will not be entertained. Or it will be entertained only after the official result is anounced.
Just handling 3 teams, and if have 2 categories, then 6 teams to handle wrongly marked questions only. Not too much effort, right? This teams usually don’t make alot of mistakes.
And also, on my opinion, it don’t kill the excitement on the prizes giving ceremony when the unofficial results are given. It will be rare that the unofficial result is not same as official result, I am sure most COC will ensure this to happen.
This is just a precautious step, as I don’t think it is a good idea COCs and organisers to bare the extra cost due to human mistake, if any.
Just my thought again.
ckoh said:
ckloh,
Once the floodgates for possible disputes are opened, it would be extremely difficult to limit the scope of who can dispute. That term, “cooling-off” might even change into “heating up” period. I agree with Mike, it can give rise to chaotic situation.
Why should the dispute (s) be limited to ony the top 3 positions? Isn’t it clear from this hunt that a team which is in 6th position might rightfully belong in the 2nd position; and 4th to 1st? In the recent LexisNexis we had so many ties up to 8 - 10 positions. A difference of a few points might have pushed up the 10th position to the top 3. Are you suggesting not to bother with the team in the 10th position; or even beyond that?
krollnazib said:
the whole ‘chaotic ‘ situation at NPC hunt was due to ‘missing treasures’. i ‘heard’ that the 10 points that ‘mistakenly’ deducted from the ‘two teams’ ‘adalah si sebab kan’ during ‘re-checking’ process, for the final-final tabulation, the organiser found that the 2 ‘charity’ treasures ’submitted’ by the ‘two teams’ were missing. then i also ‘heard’ that the 2 ‘charity treasure’ were actually being sent to the ‘rumah kebajikan’ as sample to them to let them know that the organiser will send more of those pencils and exercise books. that’s what i ‘heard’. by analysing the situation, i believe the ’simplest’ solution is; COC must ‘jaga’ all treasures submitted by hunters in a very-very ’safe’ place, do not re-pack, do not eat, do not drink and etc, before the prizes giving ceremony is actually really-really ENDED. about SUNSHINE vs LITSUN, MAT vs WECKY, PENTEL vs PILOT, it’s really ‘bergantung’ to the organiser, nothing much we, the ‘participants’ can do. but i believe, before any COC accepted the ‘alternative’ answer/s, HE/ SHE definitely already make some ‘due diligence’ analysis/ search and satisfied that the ‘alternatve’ answer is also FIT the question. ahhh! what am i thinking
Phillip said:
Hi All
I am writing this on behalf of the Sons of Sun:
I received a call from Govind this afternoon. He offered to rectify the mistake by compensating us the full value of the second prize due us.
The team has accepted his offer and we thank him for his graciousness and sense of professionalism.
Sons of Sun - Phillip, Joehari, Raj Kumar and Geetha Kanny
ckloh said:
ckoh,
forget my point of top 3 positions.
ahhh! what am i thinking.
Rajj said:
Trust me on this. Total score dispute will lead to arguments on answer variations. Don’t forget that the root cause of any score dispute is the tabulation of answers, which includes missing treasures…
kereta buruk said:
kereta buruk have also been contacted by Govind and and he offered to rectify his mistake by compensating us the same value.
kereta buruk has accepted his offer and we are proud to say thank you govind…..you are a gentlement, a real gentlement attitude which seems to have been a lacking among the hunters.
THANK YOU GOVIND
adrian said:
hi all,
On the argument of variations of answers if there is a cooling period, am going to refer to my earlier comment.
1) If signboard drops, everyone gets the point/s
2) No alternative answer except the COC’s intended (this is to eliminate argument/s on whose answer is tighter as well as whether the alternative answer was actually in the route esp outstation hunts or just fiction)
So, only tabulation of scores will be entertained.
Cheers.
krollnazib said:
one example of ‘fiction’ answer in the recent hunt
: Tadika Sunshine … the right answer: Kedai Bunga Sunshine … cute … opps! it is a different SUNSHINE
ckloh said:
Sorry to revisited the cooling off period issue again.
Some are pros and positive with the cooling off period especially hunt organisers like Philip, with obvious reason.
Some do raise a concern, as in the point of view of COC, it will be very difficult to control the situation once the floodgate is opened.
I happen to have discussion with my hunt team mates today on the issue, and one of them suggest that for those hunt that open for cooling period, for any protest on points recount will need RM 50 deposit, for example. If the case is not valid, then the RM 50 deposit will be forfeited, and of course if mistakes really do happen from the COC, adjustment of result plus the full refund of RM 50 will be done. Sounds fair to me.
This is to prohibit unecessary protest from participants, as each protest need RM 50 for deposit.
Thought this is an idea that can be further explored, thus bring this up.
Thanks for the space.
Faizal said:
Hi all,
My suggestion for the cooling off period would be not to protest for right/wrong questions. It is merely for calculations purposes, missing treasure’s, etc. Not for you to debate whether the answers are right or wrong. GET MY IDEA GUYS/GALS?
Regards,
Faizal
ckoh said:
ckloh,
That sounds like placing a bet at the blackjack table in Genting.
Now imagine that after you’re given all the answers by the CoC during the presentation, according to your calculation, your team got perfect score of 100 points. But the CoC announced your score of 98 points only. Your team arrived at the finish control with 15 minutes to spare, so it’s impossible to lose that 2 points through time penalty.
Your team is tied with another team for the first place, but because the other team took a shorter time to finish the hunt, they won the tie.
Since your own record shows that you should get perfect score, doesn’t it make sense to take the chance with the RM50 deposit to investigate where’ve that 2 points gone to? If it turns out that you are correct, you can get RM2,000 more in prize money. If not, then you’ll lose that RM50. Sounds like a fair bet, you say?
OK, so you place that RM50 deposit, and so the CoC checks your answer script again…
Oops! Sorry, my friend, look at your answer for Q35; you submitted the answer as:
COURTS MAMOTH
The “official” (correct) answer is:
COURTS MAMMOTH
The lesson to be learned here is to make sure you write down the answer with the correct spelling. And if the spelling on the signboard is wrong, write down that wrong spelling too!
So now, after kicking your teammate’s back side for missing the letter “M” in the answer, the CoC tells you that your RM50 is forfeited.
To think a further step, imagine that a similar situation arises in the fight for the 10th and 11th positions. But this time the difference in prize money is only RM50. Would you still place that RM50 bet to investigate that 2 points?
Oh! By the way, the above scenario is not a fiction. It really happened that way in one of my past hunts. That team was so sure that I made a mistake. But I showed them that they somehow wrote the answer as COURTS MAMOTH. However, if they had placed the deposit, I could use that RM50.
krollnazib said:
like that one ahhh, can laahhh
ckloh said:
ckoh,
1. There is pros and cons to have cooling off period, no matter how you plan it, you will able to find some cons of it. I suggest this is not on the shoe of hunters, rather on the shoes of COC and the organizing committees. For COC and the organizing committees, is it better to do with the some cons of the cooling off period or to avoid to top up prizes for any mistake, which might goes as high as 10k, is it their choice. I am not a COC anyway.
2. The suggested RM 50 deposit is for charity purpose. Thus, you won’t use it anyway, if teams decided to place RM 50 deposit and forfeited.
3. Teams have choices whether to object before the 0.5 hours cooling off period or after 0.5 hours cooling off period. If they decided to object before the 0.5 hours cooling off period, they might have chances to revert the positioning if mistakes did occur, with a deposit of RM 50, of course. If they are not too sure with the mistakes made and the prizes not worth for objection, and decided to object after 0.5 hours cooling off peiod, they still get their answers as usual.
4. This is not like placing a bet in a black jack table in Genting, but rather a standard procedure for objection in some of the highest level sports or events organised.
ckoh said:
ckloh,
Don’t get me wrong; I am not totally against the idea of the so-called “cooling period”. Like Mike, I think we should really think about this idea a bit more before implementing it in actual hunts.
If indeed it is possible to control the scope of dispute as that suggested by adrian above, I am actually in favour of the idea. However, there are many other issues which must be taken into consideration. For example, whether 1 hr is enough time to attend to the possible disputes, especially in big hunts where the number of participants is beyond 100 teams.
Secondly, we need to come up with a plan on how to go around handling the disputes before the announcement of the winners. I am inclined to think that the winners, once announced, should be final. There is little meaning to announce the winners and then attach a proviso that that announcement is subject to further disputes.
Thirdly, this latest idea on the RM50 deposit must be treated with caution. What is the purpose of it? I don’t really mind giving RM50 for charity, but being “forced” to do charity like that is quite a different matter. If that RM50 is imposed as a deterrent for the would-be complainants, I don’t think that it will be a very popular idea. If we want to allow this buffer period to finalise the winners, the teams should not be made to pay for the right to challenge the accuracy of the CoC’s score tally.
ckloh said:
Thirdly, this latest idea on the RM50 deposit must be treated with caution. What is the purpose of it?
ckoh,
The purpose is to ensure only genuine case is raised to the COC during the cooling-off period.
As mentioned before, during the cooling-off period, they might be 100 teams raised that their team points are counted wrongly. If no additional costs needed, even if my team happy with the team score for example, we might still object to the COC, just to try our luck for recount. Thus, it serves no purpose for the score anounced earlier on, as it subjects to recount later on.
If there is certain cost (monetary or non-monetary) needed for the objection / complaint, I will expects only teams that very sure they are the victims of wrong points tabulation, will raise it, as they know they will surely get the RM 50 back. Just take example of the recently concluded NPC hunts, the winners scored a perfect score but end up the points given are 15 or 16 points of the marks. Surely if anyone in their shoes, they will raise an objection, even with a RM 50 deposit.
I am aware of the COURTS MAMMONTH example given, well the team might have to pay due to the mistake make and they will learn from there that plus or minus two points might be due to spelling mistakes. Or better still, if the COC believe that the team that make objection does not have intention to make life difficult to the COC, just an unexpected wrong spelling mistake, the COC have the prerogative not to forfeit the RM 50 deposit.
The objective is not to gain the RM 50, but to ensure everyone is happy with the final result with objection allowed in the cooling-off period. However, to prohibit abuse on the flexibility given, certain cost need to be incurred.
I am not saying this is a good idea, as mentioned it might not a popular idea as money is involved here. However, some cost is needed for the COC to recount the tally, or else, everyone might abuse it and ask the COC to recount their team scores. In some of the highest level sports or events organised, a deposit is required for the above mentioned reason.
Just thought of whether the same can applied to treasure hunt.
ckoh said:
“If no additional costs needed, even if my team happy with the team score for example, we might still object to the COC, just to try our luck for recount.”
—ckloh, in support of his idea for a RM50 deposit for the right to challenge a CoC’s point-tally accuracy.
SORRY, I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. That is a red herring, employed as a veil to support the idea of a RM50 deposit, which is liable to cause more complications instead of reducing them.
Maybe it’s me, but I can tell you that if I find no reason to challenge the results announced by the CoC, I will not challenge it just for the sake of “try out my luck”. Some of us do have a certain degree of pride in good sportsmanship.
And then now you’re saying that the CoC has the prerogative not to forfeit. Yet another avenue to cause possible disputes. Lay down the rules, will the RM50 be forfeited or not?
ckloh said:
ckoh,
I think we should agree to disagree.
Anyway, I don’t lay down the rules. I just suggest what I think the possible pros and cons points, and it is up to the COC or hunt organisers whether they want to apply it and even enhance it on future hunts, if they think it is worth to be explored.
An idea is brought up, I think I have done with my comments, does not intend to make this the longest thread.
Bookmarks about Npc said:
[…] - bookmarked by 5 members originally found by dankomuenzel on 2008-12-07 NPC Hunt Results http://michaelpang.com.my/2008/08/24/npc-hunt-results-3/ - bookmarked by 6 members originally […]