My dashboard is currently showing 15 languages (8 complete, 7 incomplete), so unless it for some odd reason collapses when you complete 12, you should be fine.
I did wonder if there should be a #23in23 follow-up challenge at some point this year, as that seems to be what I’m drifting towards in a chaotic, unfocussed way. I’m not sure I’d recommend it.
More seriously, there may be a growing demand for something beyond #12in23 as more people complete it. The monthly challenges like Functional February go a long way towards this, but there are also the usual answers to the “what next?” question.
Pick a few languages you like and explore them in more depth: do more exercises, build an app outside Exercism, do mentoring, contribute to building the track…
If badges really motivate people (they seem to!), add a broader challenge (like #23in23) or a deeper challenge (#10of12in23?) with more exercises per track. If you want to make it a bit easier, score it like reputation points where meduim/hard exercises count extra.
Or, of course, hope for nice weather and get out more (I should).
Dear Jonathan, I’m having a ball with this #12in23 challenge. It’s loads of fun and is bringing me to new languages I wouldn’t otherwise look into!
Unfortunately there may be a bug in the badge counting system. It seems that I’ve been awarded an undeserved badge for I still have only 4 exercises completed in Elixir and I already received a #12in23 Participant badge.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d very much like to earn this badge and I will, but maybe there is something to be amended in the website code.
Hey @EGORIDI, thanks for posting and a warm welcome to you!
It’s really great to hear that you’re having a good time with the #12in23 challenge and I must commend you on your desire to legitimately earn the badge!
I’ve copied in @ErikSchierboom who might be able to take a quick look at the badge counting setup and make sure the accolades are handed out correctly
Is there an issue # already? I’d like to add my +1. I’ve got my Functional February badge already, but I’ve submitted only 3 functional-lang exercises this month so far… and two of them were Hello Worlds! (Elm, OCaml)
Whilst I can’t speak for others, I certainly think that the badges are nice (after all we can have immediate ‘bragging rights’ for them) but not the most important feature of this challenge. Thus, I don’t think more difficult challenges will necessarily move a comparable additional audience into using more of Exercism.
Personally I think that the most interesting feature of this challenge is to provide to me (to us, if I may) a guided, somehow curated yet serendipitous collective adventure within Exercism’s contents that I certainly wouldn’t do alone. This ‘safari’ feeling is certainly determinant to my engagement also.
Very much like visiting a vineyard, it feels like I can taste several interesting concepts (vines, cuts, ageing etc) and paradigms while still not feeling that I’m alone, ‘lost in the woods’ (vines) while doing it.
If Exercism could provide more guided tours like this, horizontal, vertical, diagonal, whatever sorts of tasting adventures, I’d certainly go for it!
No immediate #12in23 badge, so I’m not sure if it’s just slower than for Functional February (quite reasonably), or I confused it with the extra unfinished tracks.
Personally, I don’t really understand the excitement around badges. It’s the dashboard that keeps me pressing on. Hence I’m glad it continues to show extra languages - and you keep launching new tracks to explore.
Vis-a-vis badges, challenges; and about the recommended exercises…
By the time I unlock them, I’ll have already completed (more than) five exercises in the track. At first I thought only published solutions count, so I can pace myself and publish the more interesting exercises.
Earn the Functional February badge for completing and publishing 5 exercises in one of the following languages.
(from the 12in23 page)
But according to the “Your Progress” section I’m 3/5 there. Only one of the 3 (4 with Hello World) is published, so apparently that is not a needed condition. Is this an oversight? A bug?
But not yet…
