loading

To enter the contest you must make a physical object for the prank!

So this topic is about the april fools day project: prank contest.

After seeing some entries I have been wondering. Are some of these entries allright with the contest rules?

I want to start with saying that I don't want to bash on the ibles I'm going to use as examples. For me they have the right to win just as much as the next person.

But the rule of the contest clearly states: The prank can be simple or complex, involve yarn or a supercomputer, but it must involve some physical object that you make for the prank

And the way I see it some of these entries don't live up to that.

Like for example the speed trap prank www.instructables.com/id/Speed-trap-prank/ . It's a great prank but it doesn't involve making anything. He uses a hairdryer and a vest and a car. In my opinion If he would have made a fake speed gun it would count. Ofcourse I can see why using a hairdryer would be easier but that's not really the point.

Another example is "Make anyone smell like chicken prank!" www.instructables.com/id/Make-Anyone-Smell-Like-Chicken-Prank/ . All he does is stick a Chicken Bullion Cube in a showerhead. So that isn't really making a physical object is it?

Other ibles do it according to the rules like the funny www.instructables.com/id/T-Bar-for-the-Car/ or www.instructables.com/id/Simple-Mac-prank-using-Arduino/  . In both these instructables you are making some physical object.

So i just want to get some clearity on what is in line with the rules of the contest and what is not.

Again I don't have anything against the instructables I used as an example nor against the authors who made them. It's just that in my point of view they don't follow the rule. Unless ofcourse I missed something...

sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 14Next »
JohnJY7 years ago
 The question is legit, but other great Instructables don't involve making things, such as bird watching and surveying birds  by Kiteman. Also look at this link for another good Instructable. 
MichelMoermans (author)  JohnJY7 years ago
I'm not really talking about the quality of the ible (although when you just use stockphoto's the quality speaks for itself)

Rather I'm talking about the fact that it's a contest rule and seeing as so many ibles aren't really following this rule I wonderd why they were allowed to enter the contest after moderation.

But yes you are absolutly right, some great ibles don't involve making stuff.
 To me it seems like the contest it self, how many badly made Instructables did you see in the Dead Computer Contest? With a pranking contest, you don't really need to make or do anything, with something like computers, you should, be some what of an expert, so you know what your speaking about, and what your doing. But there is no such thing as an expert prankster, and because of that, your going to continue getting badly made Instructables. The only three I liked so far were the IRritator, "I was cupped!", and the Popsicle Paper Weight.(But not in that order.)   
lemonie JohnJY7 years ago
I think that this year they want people to make more of an effort. Last year was awful, a lot of people just dragged crap off the internet without doing anything original or moving away from they keyboard. I note this year some of the same have already been repeated.

L
MichelMoermans (author)  JohnJY7 years ago
First of all thank you that you liked my instructable (popsicle paperweight) I put some hard thinking into that one so I'm glad it's being appreciated :)

And yes there is no such thing as a pranking expert but I think the fact that you get bad instructables is not the amount of expertise you have in that particular field. I think it's rather the fact that many contestants think "I'll make something quick and easy and perhaps I'll win". Because in the dead computer contest there were alot of louzy ibles as well.

My personal opinion is that not only for contest but for every ible there is made there should be some form of reviewing in case of stockphoto's, ibles with no pics, etc. . Perhaps you should have an extra option with "flag' that says "stockphoto ible" or "no picture ible". Something like that.

This way whenever some bad ible appears with only stockphoto's or no photo's at all (or even worse no photo's and no good explenation) the user get's a warning from one of the staffmembers or from specially chosen members that there ible will deleted within one week if they do not change it.

This way we could avoid all the crappy useless ibles like "how to eat" or ibles that don't even have pictures! And there couldn't be any abuse since every ible remains one week online after the warning and every flag is reviewed by a selected (trusted) team of members.

P.S.: I like the Irritator to! Can't understand why nobody featured it... It's a good ible...
codongolev7 years ago
my instructable got accepted, and it's basically just adding chemicals to a toilet. if that gets accepted, then I'm sure that the chicken one would. I'm not too sure about the speed trap one, though.

I think the reason it was accepted was because the "object" was the loaded toilet.
Technically loading the toilet counts I think. If you like toilet-humour, maybe you could add one to my topic?

L
MichelMoermans (author)  codongolev7 years ago
I don't really know why anymore.

But I think Lemonie and Kiteman are right.

But anyway we'll let the users and jury decide :)
crapflinger7 years ago
couldn't it be argued that in some of these ibles the "object" that you're "making" is the scenario in which the prank is able to take place? it may be a stretch, but it's commonly agreed that a rube goldberg device involves a serious amount of "make", however in most cases you don't actually MAKE any of the components (save stands, or tables that don't exist before you start), what you make is a scenario in which all of the pieces act as you would like them to so as to achieve a desired outcome.
With a Rube machine, you can argue that you are building it just like any other object, the components being the cars, chairs, pulleys, etc. After all, a device's components don't have to be all connected to be considered a device.

Personally, I don't take offense to the ones in the original post as much as to the ones where the author clearly didn't even bother making the prank themselves, like the plastic wrap door prank. It's a bunch of images and a gif pulled off Google.
1-10 of 14Next »