No all or nothing. It was like crickets in here.
There are TONS of obscure sigs out there that are impossible to "read", so there's lots of potential candidates, plus the guys who sign different ways.
Which would be better (more fun)?
a) 10 sigs like before, but no all or nothing. Winner decided by most correctly submitted.
b) 1 sig at a time. Winner decided by who gets it right first. (This is probably easiest to implement.)
c) ?
Points to each correct answer, so the effort isn't wasted. A is just like before, with the points being all or nothing in this case. All or nothing makes people feel like it's a wasted effort.
I'm not following. How would it work?
Contestant 1 gets 7 right, 7 points.
Contestant 2 gets 1 right, 1 point.
Contestant 3 gets 2 right, 2 points.
Oh, I see what you mean.
But how would that work in practice? X posts answers, Y reads them and modifies his answers.
No, first correct answer wins. There are enough eyeballs around here to prevent edits. Plus, the next person posting an answer could quote the one above, to be sure there aren't any changes.