Submission Validity
For contributions to be considered valid, they need to meet all the criteria listed below:
Submissions must be made during the official duration of the contest.
Valid submissions should provide significant and meaningful contributions to the codebase.
Issues that are minor or trivial, such as minor code style suggestions, will not be eligible for rewards, even if they are accurate or correct.
Submissions should include sufficient details and proof to support the contributions.
Contest-Specific Validity Guidelines
There are two criteria to determine the validity of a contribution within the context of a specific contest:
The official contest specification on the CodeCall contest's page.
The code within the scope.
After a project launch, sponsors have a 48-hour kick-off period to address any ambiguities raised by participants in Discord regarding the project-specific validity guidelines. Once this window has passed, the official contest specification on CodeCall will be updated with answers from the sponsor, becoming the ultimate standard for determining the validity of a contribution within the contest.
Sponsors are strictly prohibited from employing the "Moving The Goalposts" logical fallacy to invalidate submissions after these 48 hours.
reviewers and sponsors may only invalidate a submission if it fails to meet the contest's predefined criteria.
Vague Generalities
Vague generalities are always reviewed as invalid submissions. Examples include:
"This function may be inefficient; optimize the code."
"This variable name may be unclear; rename it for clarity."
Suppose a participant identifies an issue in a function. In that case, they are responsible for demonstrating its impact by providing clear evidence or a proof of concept (PoC) that shows the significant improvement or correction made.
However, if another participant submits an actual improvement with a PoC that proves the vague generality to be accurate, only that participant will be rewarded.
Please refer to the dedicated guide for detailed instructions on what to include and how to submit a contribution.
Validity Guidelines
To determine the validity of a contribution, we provide several issue categories as a guideline. Please note that final determinations will always be at the discretion of the reviewer.
Contributions That May Be Invalid
Minor code style changes
Suggestions for code style that do not significantly impact readability or performance.
Documentation typos
Minor typos or grammatical errors in comments or documentation.
Non-functional changes
Changes that do not affect the functionality or performance of the code.
Personal preferences
Suggestions based on personal coding preferences rather than industry best practices.
Trivial optimizations
Minor optimizations that do not result in measurable performance improvements.
Non-critical bugs
Bugs that do not significantly impact the functionality or security of the code.
High Impact Contributions
Contributions that address significant issues or provide substantial improvements will be considered valid and rewarded appropriately. Examples include:
Critical bug fixes: Addressing vulnerabilities or major functionality issues.
Major feature implementations: Adding significant new features that align with competition requirements.
Performance optimizations: Substantial improvements to code efficiency or speed.
Subjectivity in Classification
While the above guidelines provide a structured approach, there remains a degree of subjectivity in classifying contributions. The reviewers discretion is pivotal in determining a contribution's category. If the competition under audit stipulates particular criteria, then those guidelines should be the benchmark for classifying contributions.
By adhering to these guidelines, you enhance your chances of making valid contributions and earning rewards.
Last updated